3 students die after principal hypnotizes them

[The Norseman]

That's because we agree.

The discussion arose because there are hypnosis deniers that always chime in when anyone says there is evidence hypnosis is a real phenomena.

Ah, okay, my bad.

Wow, you mean it looks as if there were nobody in here even making such a claim at all? What could possibly have made it look that way?!

Tell it to an actual proponent of that link, as soon as you find one.

Gee, thanks for your help in clarifying. Not.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, the aim of that particular tangent was much more narrow. I brought up the assessment to illustrate a specific point: that of individuals, who are presumably experts in the field of hypnosis (at the very least seen as such by others in that field), using the word "suggestion" to describe things which are clearly instructions or commands and not simply "suggestions". It supports my main argument of a few posts ago, that the issue is confused partly by a tendency of proponents to misuse or twist words into new, special meanings, something that is not uncommon in unscientific or pseudoscientific fields of study.

Whatever.

But if you are going to call us "proponents" you need to be clear we are not all proponents of all the things you are lumping together.

My position is merely that I've observed two people in an hypnotic trance that were not faking it.

And, there is empirical neurological evidence that indeed a hypnotic trance is an altered state of consciousness.

And what separates that state is not merely suggestibility, but induced hallucinations.​

One of the citations I recently posted noted not everyone who was hypnotized could be induced to hallucinate. That's the first I heard that and I don't have a current opinion about what those non-hallucinating persons' state of consciousness actually is.

 

[Senex]

Kreskin's credibility was lost when he used a contract technicality to get out of paying the reward.

The judge never ruled on the hypnosis issue so Kreskin never lost any credibility.

So why ask me if I used hypnotherapy in my infectious disease practice?

I didn't even know you had an infectious disease practice.

There's a logic fail in saying because one cannot retrieve past memories ergo it is not an altered state of consciousness.

Who said ergo? Many proponents of an altered state believe in recovered memories. You only seem to buy into some of the baloney I guess.

Since when did retrieving past memories define an altered state? I think induced hallucinations (which has been documented in empirical brain studies) is a better definition of an altered state of consciousness than whether or not one can recover memories.

How about negative hallucinations like not seeing someone lifting an item so the item seems to float? (A common Kreskin maneuver).

Apparently hallucinations are not induced in everyone who is hypnotized. Perhaps this is where the discrepancy is coming between people who don't believe the hypnotized state of consciousness exists. Maybe everyone who appears hypnotized or believes they are hypnotized aren't really under.

Is being "under" being in a unique state of consciousness. Did your brother put your friend in another state of consciousness?

You know perfectly well that what I was talking about was neither a "sleep story" nor intended "to prove it {hypnosis} is an altered state of consciousness". Resorting to lies about one's opposition's claims is usually a sign of knowing that one doesn't have a case to make for one's own.

You seemed firmly in the altered state of consciousness camp to me.

What other options does that leave? (Hopefully you can make it through an explanation of your own position without lying about it as you do about your opposition's.)

Hypnosis is not an altered state of consciousness and is not a tool to make people commit suicide or homicide. It is a situation where someone is in a heightened position to receive suggestion.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

My position is merely that I've observed two people in an hypnotic trance that were not faking it.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The judge never ruled on the hypnosis issue so Kreskin never lost any credibility.

In your mind, but it was the tactic Kreskin's lawyer took and in my mind that says weasel.

I didn't even know you had an infectious disease practice.

I thought you'd asked if I would ever use hypnosis on a patient. I re-read it now that you were asking if I ever used it on myself. But that's not relevant. How many times do I have to say, stop conflating every argument ever made about hypnosis with my single solitary claim it is a real phenomena.

Who said ergo? Many proponents of an altered state believe in recovered memories. You only seem to buy into some of the baloney I guess.

Then why quote me and post like I'm arguing these positions?

How about negative hallucinations like not seeing someone lifting an item so the item seems to float? (A common Kreskin maneuver).

How is this relevant to anything I've posted?

Is being "under" being in a unique state of consciousness. Did your brother put your friend in another state of consciousness?

Definitely.

You seemed firmly in the altered state of consciousness camp to me.

I am. I've seen it and there is empirical evidence supporting the conclusion I drew from my observation.

Hypnosis is not an altered state of consciousness and is not a tool to make people commit suicide or homicide. It is a situation where someone is in a heightened position to receive suggestion.

What does that bolded part mean if not an altered state? And you have side stepped the induced hallucinations. How is that not an altered state of consciousness?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Have you ever even once posted any supporting evidence for your position in this forum?

No, I don't believe you ever have. 50,000+ posts and not a single one ever cited any evidence of anything.

 

[Delvo]

You seemed firmly in the altered state of consciousness camp to me.

Yes. But that doesn't justify you pretending that everything I've said must have been intended to "prove" that conclusion, especially something that I had already pointed out more than once was intended for something else (countering someone else's attempted disproof). Presenting something your opposition said as if it were meant to prove something it obviously can't, and wasn't meant to in the first place, is essentially claiming that your opposition ever said it did prove it, just because that would have been an easy assertion to knock down. In other words, it's another scarecrow... another classic behavior of people on the side of a debate that does not have rational support for it.

Hypnosis is not an altered state of consciousness... It is a situation where someone is in a heightened position to receive suggestion.

How is "heightened" not "altered"?

 

[Senex]

Good question. I have a sneaking suspicion that nothing could win Kreskin's $100,000.

From what I read in the publication abstract, it seems that they found a correlation between depth of trance and vagal tone/sinus arrhythmia. Kreskin does not accept the notion of a trance at all, so to him the variation in measured vagal tone could mean just about anything. Hypnotic analgesia is a good demonstration of suggestion, but no trance is necessary. For me, a person's honest reaction to visual hallucinations is pretty good evidence of a trance.

The article is from 1992, quite a while after my involvement with the project and long after I had been involved in hypnosis.

If the gizmo could tell someone who is a motivated, knowledgeable non-hypnotized subject from a someone who is "hypnotized" I would become a believer. I fear the gizmo falls short of that ability.

 

[Senex]

In your mind, but it was the tactic Kreskin's lawyer took and in my mind that says weasel.

In the grand scheme of things Kreskin's court case does not make it more likely hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness. I asked you if a negative hallucination (not seeing something that is there) was equal to a hallucination because stage hypnotists use negative hallucinations regularly and I was wondering if that means they succeed in causing altered states with audience members.

How is "heightened" not "altered"?

You sit in a chair and someone you believe can hypnotize you gives you suggestions you either decide to accept or reject. There is no such thing as subliminal hypnosis. Some people choose to accept suggestions, there is no altered state.

 

[Senex]

Yes. But that doesn't justify you pretending that everything I've said must have been intended to "prove" that conclusion, especially something that I had already pointed out more than once was intended for something else (countering someone else's attempted disproof). Presenting something your opposition said as if it were meant to prove something it obviously can't, and wasn't meant to in the first place, is essentially claiming that your opposition ever said it did prove it, just because that would have been an easy assertion to knock down. In other words, it's another scarecrow... another classic behavior of people on the side of a debate that does not have rational support for it.

I'm guilty of another scarecrow argument? You're guilty of the scarecrow arguent I'm on the side of reason and rationality. You are on the side of believing someone says the mumbo-jumbo words and you are now in an alternate state of consciousness.

How is "heightened" not "altered"?

It has to do with expectation but the burden isn't on me to prove what hypnosis is it is on those who believe it puts you in a state equal to REM sleep.

 

[Olowkow]

If the gizmo could tell someone who is a motivated, knowledgeable non-hypnotized subject from a someone who is "hypnotized" I would become a believer. I fear the gizmo falls short of that ability.

I'm not sure how you can be so certain of your uninformed opinions. No one is trying to convince anyone to become a "believer". If you have an argument for your apparent position that everyone is faking hypnosis, it would be welcomed.

What would be your metric or standard of reference for determining that the "gizmo" had proven trance or no trance? Another opinion? Peer reviewed research? I helped design and build these devices, and I don't know whether a VTM (vagal tone monitor) could distinguish between a non-hypnotized subject and one in a trance. The problem is that everyone has his own baseline for sympathetic sinus arrhythmia (vagal tone). There is no number as with body temperature, for example, which is normal for all individuals. The changes in VT are what is significant for medical purposes. I don't have enough information to say whether VT could determine trance or no trance.

I'm not a medical professional, nor am I a professional hypnotist, however, I believe the authors of the paper cited in my post, one of whom holds the patent on the VTM algorithm and a personal friend, when they conclude that that there is a correlation between vagal tone and the depth of hypnosis. In order for them to come to this conclusion, they had to have evidence to accept the reality of the hypnotic trance in the first place.

 

[Senex]

I'm not sure how you can be so certain of your uninformed opinions. No one is trying to convince anyone to become a "believer". If you have an argument for your apparent position that everyone is faking hypnosis, it would be welcomed.

Maybe I can seem certain of my opinions because my opinions are informed. I never said anyone was "faking."

What would be your metric or standard of reference for determining that the "gizmo" had proven trance or no trance? Another opinion? Peer reviewed research?

I would settle for the old double blind study.

I helped design and build these devices, and I don't know whether a VTM (vagal tone monitor) could distinguish between a non-hypnotized subject and one in a trance. The problem is that everyone has his own baseline for sympathetic sinus arrhythmia (vagal tone). There is no number as with body temperature, for example, which is normal for all individuals. The changes in VT are what is significant for medical purposes. I don't have enough information to say whether VT could determine trance or no trance.

No need to apologize. I knew it would be something or another.

I'm not a medical professional, nor am I a professional hypnotist, however, I believe the authors of the paper cited in my post, one of whom holds the patent on the VTM algorithm and a personal friend, when they conclude that that there is a correlation between vagal tone and the depth of hypnosis. In order for them to come to this conclusion, they had to have evidence to accept the reality of the hypnotic trance in the first place.

Why can't they do double blind testing against non-hypnotized volunteers and see how it turns out?

There is no shame on you the gizmo may not work this way.

 

[Delvo]

You are on the side of believing someone says the mumbo-jumbo words and you are now in an alternate state of consciousness.

Another scarecrow... what is it about what people other than you are actually saying that you keep straining to hard to run away from?

It has to do with expectation but the burden isn't on me to prove what hypnosis is...

I wasn't asking for proof. I was asking what you meant. (And you know it.)

 

[Senex]

Another scarecrow... what is it about what people other than you are actually saying that you keep straining to hard to run away from?

I'm the king of the scarecrow argument evidently. I'm not running away from anything, I'm just a little embarrassed some of my fellow posters believe that hypnosis is an altered state.

I wasn't asking for proof. I was asking what you meant. (And you know it.)

I told you what I meant, you know that. Hypnosis is not an alternate state of consciousness.

 

[Checkmite]

There is no shame on you the gizmo may not work this way.

Absolutely not.

Look, "ghost hunters" use gadgets like laser thermometers and EMF meters to supposedly detect the presence and environmental effects of ghosts; this doesn't reflect badly on the people who invented laser thermometers and EMF meters or use these instruments in the course of their normal scientific work.

 

[Olowkow]

Maybe I can seem certain of my opinions because my opinions are informed. I never said anyone was "faking."

I would settle for the old double blind study.

No need to apologize. I knew it would be something or another.

Why can't they do double blind testing against non-hypnotized volunteers and see how it turns out?

There is no shame on you the gizmo may not work this way.

Well, you do insist that hypnosis does not entail any sort of "altered state" of consciousness for some reason. For someone who has been helped by hypnosis and who has experienced that state, it would sound just a bit like an inept accusation that they must be "faking" the trance state. But, fair enough, if you don't believe they are faking it, just what do you think is going on? Voluntary compliance with instructions?

I don't understand how my post came through to you as any sort of "apology" or how it calls for you to absolve me of "shame". That my coherent explanation of a vagal tone monitor came across to you as a "gizmo" is telling. That's quite a bizarre interpretation of a post that merely states the facts. I'm attempting to deal in good faith with your objections, and I assure you that I have no ax to grind either with the so-called "non-believers" nor with practitioners in the hypnosis profession. I did hypnosis as a college student and later designed and built various devices (VTM, EEG, GSR) that had relevance for hypnosis professionals.

You are welcome to your "informed opinions". I just ask again that you support them with some sort of argument or evidence in the form of publications from sources other than people who are guessing about the nature of hypnosis. I have no idea what informs this opinion. Are you a medical professional? It sounds like you have simply dug in your heels in order to reinforce a pre-existing idea about the subject with no real basis for your belief.

As for the experimental data, there is no lack of evidence for the positive benefits of hypnosis. The nature of the state has been documented in many ways, including the use of some of the same instruments in polygraphy. I would imagine that by now even FMRI researchers have found evidence for the hypnotic state. One meta analysis I found looked at success rates of hypnotherapy. I'd be inclined to say "who cares whether hypnosis is an altered state or not?" when confronted with data like these.

The authors considered a total of 444 studies on hypnotherapy published prior to 2002. By selecting the best quality and most suitable research designs for meta-analysis they narrowed their focus down to 57 controlled trials. These showed that on average hypnotherapy achieved at least 64% success compared to 37% improvement among untreated control groups. (Based on the figures produced by binomial effect size display or BESD.)

According to the authors this was an intentional underestimation. Their professed aim was to discover whether, even under the most skeptical weighing of the evidence, hypnotherapy was still proven effective. They showed conclusively that it was.

Opinion of the British Medical Association:

For the past hundred years there has been an abundance of evidence that psychological and physiological changes could be produced by hypnotism which were worth study on their own account, and also that such changes might be of great service in the treatment of patients.

American Medical Association report:

"That the use of hypnosis has a recognized place in the medical armamentarium and is a useful technique in the treatment of certain illnesses when employed by qualified medical and dental personnel."

Again, the AMA council approved this report rendering hypnotherapy an orthodox treatment.

The Reference Committee on Hygiene, Public Health, and Industrial Health approved the report and commended the Council on Mental Health for its work. The House of Delegates adopted the Reference Committee report...

I am satisfied that hypnosis amounts to significantly more than someone sitting around offering "suggestions" for a patient suffering excruciating pain that he just forget about it.

Here is a rather good article from the University of Maryland Medical Center that outlines the use of hypnotherapy with an extensive bibliography for those interested in more information.

https://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/treatment/hypnotherapy
Hypnotherapy regained popularity in the mid-1900s due to Milton H. Erickson (1901 - 1980), a successful psychiatrist who used hypnosis in his practice. In 1958, both the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association recognized hypnotherapy as a valid medical procedure. Since 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has recommended hypnotherapy as a treatment for chronic pain.

Other conditions for which hypnotherapy is frequently used include anxiety and addiction.

 

[Senex]

Well, you do insist that hypnosis does not entail any sort of "altered state" of consciousness for some reason.

It's the logical reason to take on this issue.

For someone who has been helped by hypnosis and who has experienced that state, it would sound just a bit like an inept accusation that they must be "faking" the trance state. But, fair enough, if you don't believe they are faking it, just what do you think is going on? Voluntary compliance with instructions?

To be clear, I have never been helped by hypnosis nor experienced that state. It wasn't clear in your post whether I was helped or yourself. Some faking occurs during stage hypnosis but not everyone is.

Of course voluntary compliance with instructions is important but other factors are at play as well such as expectations.

I don't understand how my post came through to you as any sort of "apology" or how it calls for you to absolve me of "shame". That my coherent explanation of a vagal tone monitor came across to you as a "gizmo" is telling.

I'm certain it is a fine contraption of some sort but it can't tell a hypnotized person from a motivated impostor because there is no difference to detect. No need to apologize for the thingamajig not to be able to tell the difference nor be shamed it can't work for this application.

That's quite a bizarre interpretation of a post that merely states the facts. I'm attempting to deal in good faith with your objections, and I assure you that I have no ax to grind either with the so-called "non-believers" nor with practitioners in the hypnosis profession. I did hypnosis as a college student and later designed and built various devices (VTM, EEG, GSR) that had relevance for hypnosis professionals.

Well, you look to me to be invested in the topic.

You are welcome to your "informed opinions". I just ask again that you support them with some sort of argument or evidence in the form of publications from sources other than people who are guessing about the nature of hypnosis. I have no idea what informs this opinion. Are you a medical professional? It sounds like you have simply dug in your heels in order to reinforce a pre-existing idea about the subject with no real basis for your belief.

My best argument is hypnotists are not running the world or even university psychology departments.

As for the experimental data, there is no lack of evidence for the positive benefits of hypnosis. The nature of the state has been documented in many ways, including the use of some of the same instruments in polygraphy. I would imagine that by now even FMRI researchers have found evidence for the hypnotic state. One meta analysis I found looked at success rates of hypnotherapy. I'd be inclined to say "who cares whether hypnosis is an altered state or not?" when confronted with data like these.

I seem to care when looking at data like this. Hypnosis is not an altered state of consciousness.

 

[stanfr]

It's the logical reason to take on this issue.

To be clear, I have never been helped by hypnosis nor experienced that state. It wasn't clear in your post whether I was helped or yourself. Some faking occurs during stage hypnosis but not everyone is. Of course voluntary compliance with instructions is important but other factors are at play as well such as expectations.


I'm certain it is a fine contraption of some sort but it can't tell a hypnotized person from a motivated impostor because there is no difference to detect. No need to apologize for the thingamajig not to be able to tell the difference nor be shamed it can't work for this application.

Well, you look to me to be invested in the topic.

My best argument is hypnotists are not running the world or even university psychology departments.


I seem to care when looking at data like this. Hypnosis is not an altered state of consciousness.

I think if you're going to be convincing you have to elaborate on that. If the hypnotized person is not 'faking it'--then what are they doing? So far, all you've said is that they have a 'willingness to follow instructions' whatever that means. Is that all there is to it to you? Have you seen people who have been hypnotized? Clearly you haven't experienced it yourself. Apparently those of us who have are all confused and really we were just more willing to follow instructions.
I do have one qualm about the subject. If hallucinations can be induced under hypnosis (and I believe they can be), that suggests that people might do things under hypnosis that they might not do otherwise (since their senses can be tricked). Yet, most hypnotism proponents I've heard say that one could not do something under hypnosis that they wouldn't otherwise do (like the case in point). I find that problematic. In this case, while I think the educator can't be held responsible for suicides, if hypnosis is a real phenomena he could be responsible for altering the psyche of those he hypnotized, and so indirectly could have had a negative impact on those students.

 

[Senex]

I think if you're going to be convincing you have to elaborate on that. If the hypnotized person is not 'faking it'--then what are they doing? So far, all you've said is that they have a 'willingness to follow instructions' whatever that means. Is that all there is to it to you? Have you seen people who have been hypnotized? Clearly you haven't experienced it yourself. Apparently those of us who have are all confused and really we were just more willing to follow instructions.

I can appreciate your confusion, you wish hypnosis is something magical you just need to tie into to become a better person but it won't happen. I haven't experienced it myself but I have given it to others.

I do have one qualm about the subject. If hallucinations can be induced under hypnosis (and I believe they can be), that suggests that people might do things under hypnosis that they might not do otherwise (since their senses can be tricked).

Like what? What's your worst exploitation by hypnotist story.

Yet, most hypnotism proponents I've heard say that one could not do something under hypnosis that they wouldn't otherwise do (like the case in point). I find that problematic. In this case, while I think the educator can't be held responsible for suicides, if hypnosis is a real phenomena he could be responsible for altering the psyche of those he hypnotized, and so indirectly could have had a negative impact on those students.

We all directly and indirectly influence others but not through hypnotic trance.

 

[stanfr]

I can appreciate your confusion, you wish hypnosis is something magical you just need to tie into to become a better person but it won't happen. I haven't experienced it myself but I have given it to others.

?? are you trying to be funny or are you just making things up here?

Like what? What's your worst exploitation by hypnotist story.

There's no need to come up with a 'worst case' story. Use the topic posted here (amazing, I know, to actually stay on topic in the ISF) Here's what the students in this case said:

“I was in this trance,” according to one unnamed student in a written deposition. “I was told I wouldn’t be able to find my room because all the room numbers would be changed to Chinese. I was lost for about 20 to 25 minutes walking around. I was seeing the Chinese lettering, the weird lines and all.”

He added: “He made a couple of the guys put lipstick on. Everybody thought it was funny because it was, you know, teenagers putting lipstick on.”

Now, I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't do such things if I were merely 'following instructions'. Why do you think they had these experiences? Or are you saying they are lying?