Interesting JE Hits....

[RC]

I challenge that idea, RC.

Hmm, now I'm going to have to start watching the show again. I truly am surprised that we (you, me, Clancie) aren't in sync on this. I could very well be wrong.

 

[RC]

Hi Clancie, yes, you have distinguished HIV and AIDS pretty well. HIV is a virus transmitted via bodily fluids. AIDS is sort of a global term used to describe a condition someone with HIV has entered when either having a particular opportunistic infection or when their immune system has reached a certain low point (such as a low number of T-cells). I'm sure someone out there will have a better way of distinguishing between the two.

True, what's the big deal when it comes to mediumship, but it's important to me that people understand the distinction. Yes, if JE's symbol for someone dying from complications of HIV/AIDS is the same as his symbol for leukemia, hepatitis, overdose, then so be it, it's his symbol. Maybe I'm just in a particulary anti-JE mood tonight, lol, but why wouldn't spirit give him special symbols? Why wouldn't he feel something in his liver to denote hepatitis? He feels pain in his head, heart, and lungs, so why not the liver? Why doesn't he see a bottle of pills to denote overdose? Just seems weird that he can get other causes of death more accurately (impact to the chest) but then has this totally vague, all-encompassing "blood" thingamajig.

 

[neofight]

Clancie,

I really mean it when I'm surprised that you and Neo haven't seen JE talk about how he gets names. I have watched the show a million times and always hear him talk about "seeing" the letters and I've even heard him say that he doesn't "hear" spirits talk. Perhaps I'll have to start watching again, but for now I stand behind my comments.

RC, I've heard him talk about how he gets names many, many, many times, and he gets them clairaudiently. Trust me on this one. Here, I'll type an excerpt from "OLT" relating to names.....

("One Last Time" by John Edward)

Besides those of people, I have heard all kinds of names -- of places, songs, movies. I also hear phrases. But the clarity varies wildly. Very few things come in loud and clear, as if they've been handed to me in lightning bolts on a tablet and I can just read it: This just in from the Other Side. Clairaudience means "clear hearing,' but in reality it is far from that.

With names, for instance, sometimes I get the whole thing, other times just an initial or a sound. Sometimes it's analogous to a radio with very heavy static. You hear a voice, but it's not clear and you try to catch a word here or there. Other times the messages are very faint, like a whisper, or come and go incredibly fast. You catch it for a split second as it rushes by, like a train. And still other times it's like a voice that keeps breaking up. If a spirit were to try to give me the name James, I might just get the "J" sound or a "J-S" sound. "Ellen" might come through with the "L" sound strongest, or "L-N." By experience, I would probably know that the spirit is not giving an "L" initial, indicating it's a name that begins with that letter, but that it's the dominant sound. So I would give that as Ellen or Ellie or some variation......

It goes on, but you get the idea. I hope that clears that up for you, RC. On the other hand, I definitely do remember that "T" that JE was "seeing" in that particular reading. But as I said before, that is the exception, and not the rule. ......neo

 

[RC]

I do stand corrected, Neo, and thanks for posting that. Although I keep thinking of an answer he gave once when someone asked what he means by a spirit getting louder and he said that he just sees the letter getting bigger and bigger. This was different than the "T" reading you and I are both referring to. I could have sworn that in his answer he said that he doesn't hear letters but "sees" them. However, since I don't have exact quotes, and you do to back up your point, I will yield to you.

 

[CFLarsen]

There is no contradiction, Claus. You're right. For the most part, I think JE is the least vocal and the most cautious about what he says concerning what it might be like on the other side.

He does acknowledge that he gets little glimpses and quick impressions of what it might be like in that dimension, but he is also sensible enough to say that he, and we, are here in the physical realm, and not over there. That's why he is reluctant to say too much about it because after all, he really cannot "know" for certain, since he is here, and not there.

OK, then: He doesn't know what goes on Over There. Other mediums claim to know. OK.

Anything he might be shown of the afterlife would always be subject to his own interpretation anyhow, so I think he is wise not to give the impression that he knows it all. I fail to see the great big contradiction you mention, Claus......neo

I don't see a contradiction either, actually. I was responding to what Clancie had to say about it.

Well, call me crazy, Claus, but my guess would be that Clancie would want you to reference whatever part of RA's book that would make your case, you know? Prove your point. Demonstrate your claim. Of course, that's just a wild guess on my part.

Well, call me crazy, neo, but haven't we seen Clancie dismiss evidence, even when it is put before her? She just did, when I proved she never looked at the Graham Bishop sound clip before today.

Of course, that's not just a wild guess on my part.

Hmmm! Now this is interesting. Are you sure that you are not getting your "Gorgons" as well as your alibis mixed up here, Claus? lol Is that what you told us about that weekend? That you were away? I mean, it's possible, but I don't really have a clear memory of that. I do remember you saying something about getting some sunshine because it was such a nice day, but that's all I remember at this moment.

Instead of relying on your incredibly faulty memory, you should check the threads. Like I do.

You did, however, tell me about being away those couple of days back when I had posted one of JE's transcripts. You remember, the thread I started over at tvtalkshows that you made only one post on, demanding me to show you how that transcript differed from cold-reading.

That was the time that you said you were away for a couple of days. Hmmm. As much as I hate doing searches, I might just have to go check the tvtalkshow archives to refresh my memory of what you claimed at the time we were discussing your lack of knowledge concerning JE's books. The ones you claimed to have read. Were you away that weekend as well?

I think you are messing up the posts. But sure, do something you rarely do: Check!

Clancie, do you have any recollection of Claus ever saying that he was away that particular weekend? I mean, it's entirely possible. Anybody? I may have to go ask Rain to find that thread for me. Maybe she'll join us here, and we can have a "Gorgon" reunion. .....neo

"Recollections" won't serve as evidence of anything else than an utter inability to trust them.

No, I do not claim that all validations are 100% accurate and consistent across any timespan. However, I do not buy into the idea that sitters cannot be trusted to know whether or not certain things have occurred to them in their lives, which is what Claus is suggesting.

Say, for instance, that a woman had a miscarriage, and JE mentions that fact. According to Claus, she would have to go find someone else to verify that she did, indeed, have a miscarriage. The whole idea is ludicrous. Unless I'm not understanding your question, Darat.

Why? Why is it ludicrous? It is a pretty easy claim to verify, so why not do it? Why are you so against independent verification, when we know that memory is faulty?

Again, I would concede that memories can be unreliable, but I saw both Tim's original "Milk from a cow" reading, (more than once) AND the followup reading that he did some time later on. Nothing in the followup segment contradicted the original reading that was aired in any significant way whatsoever.

No?? I'll be...

In the followup segment, Tim merely explained the incident in even more depth than in the original segment. He clarified one or two things, but he didn't change his story at all. If Claus had seen these shows, he would know this......neo

Well, since you are now relying on your memory again (which is notoriously faulty, but seemingly always to the benefit of JE), we cannot really take your claim seriously.

 

[CFLarsen]

Well, my memory of the thread is that he spent a week or more seemingly unable to discuss any information from JE's books (while still claiming to have read them). Then he disappeared for a weekend (a rare occurrence) and reemerged on Monday or Tuesday eager to show that he was indeed now acquainted with the books, even being able to quote one of them for us!

That's how I remember his "lost weekend" anyway,--that, and that it was pretty funny when he returned.

And, yes, he claimed he had not been reading JE books that weekend, just was "busy" elsewhere. It could be true...of course....all true....

Why not, Clancie? Do you know what happens in my life? Why is it impossible that I go away for a weekend? I read fast, but not that fast. Reading two books during a weekend? Ahh....that is a bit over my head.

Well, that reunion would be fun, neo! I wish Rain would come on board, and atmytv, too.

Yeah, why not? The more, the merrier...

Just imagine how happy Claus would be with the three of us all here! I'm sure it would really make his day!

Sure, go ahead.

I've never thought it was too off-base for JE to associate leukemia, AIDS and hepatitis as diseases that are blood-related. Do you think that seems like an unreasonable connection for him to make?

But that gives JE a huge range of diseases to choose from. Or rather, the sitter. Do you acknowledge that - should JE be a cold reader - this would give him a much better chance of a hit?

 

[Darat]

RC, I honestly do not know whether or not you are correct on this. I'd have to go back and read a George Anderson or JVP book to see if I could find any of their quotes that refer to a frame of reference. In any case, the personal frame of reference concept makes eminent sense to me....snip...

Might make sense to you but is in direct contradiction of other very succesful mediums.

Doris says "The bedroom door flew open so sharply I thought it was my mother bursting in, and there stood my father. My mouth dropped open. He looked as real and solid as he did when he was alive... "Dad?" I whispered " I never lied to you, did I Doll? he asked. "I don't think so". I said. " I'm not lying to you now. John is not with us and on Christmas day you will have proof of this." Then as I watched, he vanished."

JE says "But I don't see them the way I'm seeing you, because they're not of the physical world. They're vibrating at a higher frequency. It's kind of like taking a helicopter blade, you know, when it's not airborne, you can look and see there's four or five blades. Once it takes off and those blades are moving at an accelerated rate, at a higher frequency, you can't really see it, yet we know it's still there.
It's kind of like that. And I will see images in my mind. I will hear things, thoughts in my mind. And I will get clear sentient feelings. "

So here we have too very different accounts of how a "medium" accounts for what they do and how the communication works.

How do you reconcile the two into one process?

 

[Darat]

...snip...

As far as AIDS, I posted earlier that I think JE groups it with hepatitis, leukemia, etc. as being what he gets as "blood related" to distinguish it from illness related to "head", "heart", "chest" etc.

Do you think that's so totally off-base? I mean, AIDS and forms of hepatitis can be transmitted through the blood and the Red Cross will reject someone as a blood donor if they have even the potential to have contracted either of them and could possibly pass on the virus through their blood.

I've never thought it was too off-base for JE to associate leukemia, AIDS and hepatitis as diseases that are blood-related. Do you think that seems like an unreasonable connection for him to make?

Then you'd have to accept that "blood disease" is any disease that can be transmitted by blood - in otherwords nearly every single disease can be called a "blood disease"....

Using the “Red Cross” argument as a standard you'd have to say the human form of mad cow disease is a "blood disease", after all the USA wont accept blood from anyone in the UK because of the risk of it being transmitted via a transfusion.

I would suggest that if you are willing to give JE this latitude with blood disease then it ceases to be meaningful at all, it can be made to fit nearly any disease.

 

[CFLarsen]

Heavens (!) to Betsy, let's look at the whole glossary. These are all terms that JE uses.

"Above - Older than the guest being read, in some way: parents, grandparents, older friend or relative. (general terms but not specific to guest)"

So, anyone "older". That should give us a few to choose from.

"To The Side - Refers to a spirit or person who is the same age as the guest who is being read. A sibling, friend or cousin. (general terms but not specific to guest) "

Question is, how wide a range should we accept? 1 year older, 5 years younger, 10 years older? A "sibling" is not a "cousin"? "Friend" is a very wide-ranging term - who is your "friend"? Your colleagues? This will be dependent on what the sitter says, and we know that we cannot trust the sitters for validation. We certainly don't know when we can trust them.

"Below - Younger than the guest being read. A child or younger sibling or friend. (general terms but not specific to guest) "

Same as with "To The Side".

"White Rose - A sign of congratulations. Celebratory. (Happy Birthday) "

Any positive event covers this: A birth, graduation, birthday, wedding day (heck, even divorce day!), your kid brings home a sports prize, you find a wallet with a 1000 dollars.....

"Pink Rose - An expression of love. "

Could be anything: Love of a dog, wife, husband, kid, relative, car...

"Pink Rose with Thorns - Indicates that a person had a hard time expressing their love when they were here. "

Hey, don't we all feel that at times? If this isn't a general term, then I don't know what is.

"Parallel Line - A parallel between the spirit and the guest; same name, similar interests or physical appearance. (or related dates) "

This includes so many options that it is mind-blowing! Where to start? How many are called John/Johan/Jonie/Jon? Is an interest in the Civil War "parallel" to an interest in history? Do brunettes validate this?

"Black Spots - Indicates the spirit had cancer. (or severe health issues in that area) "

Cancer or "severe health issues" will account for just about anything that can kill you - and not even that. Arthritis is serious, but so is lung cancer.

"Flowing Blood - Indicates the cause of death was some type of blood disorder. (leukemia, hepatitis, AIDS, and/or drug overdose) "

Already covered. Way too many options.

"Numbers - Usually symbolizes an important date such as a birth or death, or another significant date. "

As we have seen, the "7 of the month or 7th month" will apply to just about anyone. Funny JE doesn't get "13th of the month" quite as often as he gets those under 13...

"Names - The spirit either gives a clearly recognizable name, an initial or a sound to convey its message. "

When have we a confirmed occurrence of a "clearly recognizable name"? Are we playing the "sound-alike" game here? If initials or sound are used to convey messages, then anything can be fitted.

"Clairaudience (clear hearing) - Ability to hear sounds physically. Sometimes the thoughts are clearer than others. "

Since these following are in the glossary, we have to assume that JE gets information this way.

Note that the term "physically" is used. Not in JE's mind, but he actually hears sounds.

"Clairvoyance (clear seeing) - Ability to interpret objects, symbols and scenes from the spirit. The images can be both literal and symbolic. This is also a way for the spirit to convey what they looked like in their physical body. "

Do we assume here that, when you croak, you change your physical appearance?

"Clairsentience (clear sensing) - The way in which a spirit conveys emotion. This can be how they feel now as well as the way they felt at the time of their death. This is often in the form of "sympathetic pain," in which the spirit makes John "feel" what they feel. "

Covered elsewhere, but worthy of repeating: I bet most felt pretty bad about dying! "Hey, kids, I'm gonna croak! Yipeekayeh!"

"Clairalience (clear smelling)/Clairambience (clear tasting) - Receiving smells and tastes to convey in John's reading. This can be a scent or a taste closely related to the spirit. "

Whoa, just a second! So, spirits are able to convey something that is not within JE's "frame of reference"? Can he get the scent of say, some local Indian spice and still recognize it?

I think we have a very long debate ahead of us....!

 

[SteveGrenard]

Blood borne diseases are blood borne diseases. Not every disease is blood borne. Some can be transmited by aerosol contact, some by direct contact and others by other body fluids;
many are transmitted by insects into the blood (e.g. malaria, WNV, etc) and others by ingestion. ALL diseases are not blood borne diseases nor do all diseases affect the blood. Pathologic organisms such as viruses, bacteria, fungi and larger parasites can find their way into humans and larger animal hosts by a variety of means. Many diseases are also genetic, or hereditary,
congenital or the results of various insults not related to the blood in any way. The blood circulation is certainly a river used by infectious diseases to distribute themselves and when infectious organisms ride this they certainly can be blood borne.

AIDS and HIV can very much be considered "blood diseases" not only because they are blood (and yes other fluid) borne but also because their principal pathology involve alterations in white blood cells of the blood known as CD4+ T-lymphocyteswhich help confer immunity.

The T-lymphocyte count even in the absence of a specific ELISA or western blot to determine HIV, may alert health care workers that a patient CAN have HIV or its consequence: AIDS.


More pointedly: it really interests me why skeptics such as Third Twin (or others..didnt mean to single third out) who is very knowledegable about medicine never seems to correct statements made by fellow skeptics or involve themselves in clarifications of such arguments. There is a pathology here borne of bias and that's why I have decided not to post as frequently as I have in the past. This forum is at risk of disintegrating into a playground for opposing biases rather than truth.

 

[CFLarsen]

Steve,

Do you agree that "blood related" gives JE a very wide range of diseases to let the sitter choose from?

You can PM ThirdTwin if you want him to answer.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Do you agree that "blood related" gives JE a very wide range of diseases to let the sitter choose from?

We all have to physically die of something. Blood diseases or blood borne diseases are not on the top of the list: heart disease and cancer is. When a medium sees or hears an impact that is not a blood borne or blood disease either. When a medium gets overdose of drugs this is not a blood disease. Sure grouping diseases or causes of deaths within larger categories, e.g. blood, widens the net. So? If a medium says blood related and then the victim died of a heart attack, I'd say the medium was wrong. Someone will stretch to make the lipids in the blood and the plaques narrowing the coronary arteries into "blood related." I would disagree. There needs to be and there is specificity in the information mediums get. I do not speak here of JE necessarily although I have seen him get specific diagnoses right off. JE got three cause of death as suciidie by gunshot for a single sitter.These were not blood diseases. JE got a son of a man who was found hanged from a tree in the back of the house. This was not a blood disease. JE got the death of a son of a man who was impacted in the chest. This was not a blood disease.

Are Hepatitis B & C and HIV/AIDS blood related diseases? Yes.
There is a high degree of association between the blood and these diseases in the minds of almost everyone.

 

[CFLarsen]

Steve,

Is it impossible for you to answer a simple question with a simple answer? I didn't ask you to list all the possible causes of death, I just asked if it gave JE a very wide range of diseases to let the sitter choose from.

I see, however, that you do agree. Do we really say that JE is "accurate", when he "nails" a "blood-related" disease (or rather, let the sitter do it for him)?

You point to heart disease. That's "blood related" as well. Also, cancer can be "blood related" (leukemia).

You speak very generally of mediums, when you talk about "impact". Do you have any comparative analysis to point to, or is this just another blanket statement of yours?

You forget that it is entirely up to the sitter to decide what constitutes a hit. Therefore, it is irrelevant what you think other people think are hits. If they validate it, it is validated.

The problem is, of course, just because people think a disease is blood-related doesn't make it so.

 

[neofight]

Might make sense to you but is in direct contradiction of other very succesful mediums.

I don't know that "contradiction" would be the correct word to use, Darat. JE is probably more aware than any of us concerning the various types of mediumship there are. He is describing his own experiences, not that of other mediums. Their abilities vary.

Doris says "The bedroom door flew open so sharply I thought it was my mother bursting in, and there stood my father. My mouth dropped open. He looked as real and solid as he did when he was alive... "Dad?" I whispered " I never lied to you, did I Doll? he asked. "I don't think so". I said. " I'm not lying to you now. John is not with us and on Christmas day you will have proof of this." Then as I watched, he vanished."

JE says "But I don't see them the way I'm seeing you, because they're not of the physical world. They're vibrating at a higher frequency. It's kind of like taking a helicopter blade, you know, when it's not airborne, you can look and see there's four or five blades. Once it takes off and those blades are moving at an accelerated rate, at a higher frequency, you can't really see it, yet we know it's still there.
It's kind of like that. And I will see images in my mind. I will hear things, thoughts in my mind. And I will get clear sentient feelings. "

So here we have too very different accounts of how a "medium" accounts for what they do and how the communication works.

Again, I think I've already mentioned this, but I'll repeat. This sounds more like a vision that Doris Stokes had. This is not DS doing readings. I read a portion of a transcript of DS readings, and it was not exceptional at all. Randi had it on this very site a while back.

Furthermore, when JE was very young, he, too, was able to actkually see spirits. At the age of five or six, he used to see a little old man sitting at the table next to his grandmother, and he often dreamed of this man as well. Once, when he was older, JE looked up from where he was doing homework, on his bed, and he saw him standing in the doorway, smiling. He asked him grandmother about it, and she told him not to worry, that it was his grandpa lieting him know he was around. His grandpa had dies about seven years before JE was born.

So there is really nothing to reconcile, Darat. Mediums doing readings is one thing, these visions or ability to actually see spirits is something else entirely.

This type of thing happens only very rarely to JE these days, but JVP and GA claim to see spirits all the time when they are doing readings. I'm sure others do as well. That means that their clairvoyance is very strong. JE's is not. He's often said that clairaudience is his stronger ability. ....neo

 

[CFLarsen]

neo,

What's the difference between a "vision" and "getting flashes of information from the spirit world"?

 

[SteveGrenard]

C: Is it impossible for you to answer a simple question with a simple answer?

Reply: Not on a subject like this. I am not in the witness chair,
answering yes or no. It is necessary to explicate my answers.

C: I see, however, that you do agree. Do we really say that JE is "accurate", when he "nails" a "blood-related" disease (or rather, let the sitter do it for him)?

You point to heart disease. That's "blood related" as well. Also, cancer can be "blood related" (leukemia).

Reply: Leukemia is blood related and is treated by hematological oncologists. Heart disease, I said specifically, is not blood related and it is a stretch I would not accept myself.

C: You speak very generally of mediums, when you talk about "impact". Do you have any comparative analysis to point to, or is this just another blanket statement of yours?

Reply: An impact means bang bang, hit by a bullet. Whack, whack hit by something or smashed in someway. Not a blood
disease. When JE said he got impacts for people, the family confirms their loved one died by bullet or other type of impact.
You dont need to be an expert to know this category of cause of death. No, I have not done a survey on JE's hit rate when it comes to cause of death. Have you done one? If not, you can't make any claims either, especially ones that serve to confirm your bias. I was not being general, I was being specific and pointed to specific instances of JE getting hits that were not blood related. He gets them.


C: You forget that it is entirely up to the sitter to decide what constitutes a hit. Therefore, it is irrelevant what you think other people think are hits. If they validate it, it is validated.


Reply: I agree sitters are not always in full posession of medical details concerning a passing. JE described for one a burning around the heart. The deceased had breast cancer. A heart on
fire or burning is not a symptom of breast cancer. JE did not give the breast cancer as a cause of death or even get it.

The sitter, in this case astute, said yes. The radiation treatment had burned or scarred the heart causing death. This is an extremely rare complication of radiation treatment (radiation cardiomyopthay) to the chest for breast and lung cancer. It was followed up and found to be correct. Another case involved the medium seeing a person with two hearts. Any medical expert would know they had a piggy back transplant which is also extremely rare (7 to 10 done a year in the U.S.) Family might know this as well.

C: The problem is, of course, just because people think a disease is blood-related doesn't make it so.

Reply: An expert medical opinion is required. You are not in a posession to judge this either. I agree also this is one slim area of a mediumistic reading where external expertise should be used when necessary to render the information valid or not. Is this what you mean by indpendent verification? If so, I agree with you. We finally get a definition of a term from Larsen.

The other 99% of the reading, besides cause of death, may involve things that only family and people close to the deceased would know. This makes them experts on this.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by Darat

Then you'd have to accept that "blood disease" is any disease that can be transmitted by blood - in otherwords nearly every single disease can be called a "blood disease"....

Hi Darat.

A couple of problems with that idea, Darat. The most important is that, no, the way JE uses this it would not be fair to say that he leaves the door wide open to almost every disease that shows up in the blood.

JE gets a pressure in his chest for heart attack, sees blackness in the lungs for emphysema or lung cancer. When he sees or feels strong awareness of the circulatory system throughout the entire body, that is his personal symbol for someone having "AIDS, hepatitis, or leukemia". *

He doesn't leave it open for "everything that is possibly blood related, take your pick."

*edited to add...and overdose, per below.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Again, I think I've already mentioned this, but I'll repeat. This sounds more like a vision that Doris Stokes had. This is not DS doing readings. I read a portion of a transcript of DS readings, and it was not exceptional at all. Randi had it on this very site a while back.

That's your explanation however DS was always clear that she saw and heard the spirits as clear as she did the living. I am sure DS knew more about how her mediumship worked then you or I do.

…snip…

So there is really nothing to reconcile, Darat. Mediums doing readings is one thing, these visions or ability to actually see spirits is something else entirely.

What there is to reconcile is your claim that there is a distinct "process" of mediumship - yet I and others have been able to show you many examples of where JE and other mediums are at odds with each other and even say that there isn't just "a process".

Do you concede your claim was incorrect, that there is no established "process" that mediums use?

 

[RC]

Don't forget overdose. It's AIDS, hepatitis, leukemia, and overdose.

But that's all........

Anyone have stats on deaths from above diseases? I imagine a lot of people have died from one of the 4 categories.

I also think that you'd find that many younger people die from one of these conditions, so if JE is "bringing through" a younger male, I'll bet it's a safe guess for him to do his "blood disorder" validation.

 

[CFLarsen]

Reply: Not on a subject like this. I am not in the witness chair, answering yes or no. It is necessary to explicate my answers.

Steve, stop the drama queen act. It's just a simple question.

Reply: Leukemia is blood related and is treated by hematological oncologists. Heart disease, I said specifically, is not blood related and it is a stretch I would not accept myself.

It doesn't matter what you would do. It all depends on the sitter.

Reply: An impact means bang bang, hit by a bulletin. Whack, whack hit by something or smashed in someway. Not a blood disease. When JE said he got impacts for poeple, the family confirms their loved one died by bulletin or other type of impact. You dont need to be an expert to know this category of cause of death.

Yadda, yadda, yadda...

No, I have not done a survey on JE's hit rate when it comes to cause of death. Have you done one? If not, you can't make any claims either, especially ones that serve to confirm your bias. I was not being general, I was being specific and pointed to specific instances of JE getting hits that were not blood related. He gets them.

No, you were not being "specific" and you were not speaking of JE:

When a medium sees or hears an impact that is not a blood borne or blood disease either. When a medium gets overdose of drugs this is not a blood disease. Sure grouping diseases or causes of deaths within larger categories, e.g. blood, widens the net. So? If a medium says blood related and then the victim died of a heart attack, I'd say the medium was wrong. Someone will stretch to make the lipids in the blood and the plaques narrowing the coronary arteries into "blood related." I would disagree. There needs to be and there is specificity in the information mediums get. I do not speak here of JE necessarily although I have seen him get specific diagnoses right off.

No survey, then. Just another blanket statement from you.

Reply: I agree sitters are not always in full posession of medical details concerning a passing. JE described for one a burning around the heart. The deceased had breast cancer. A heart on fire or burning is not a symptom of breast cancer. JE did not give the breast cancer as a cause of death or even get it.

The sitter, in this case astute, said yes. The radiation treatment had burned or scarred the heart causing death. This is an extremely rare complication of radiation treatment (radiation cardiomyopthay) to the chest for breast and lung cancer. It was followed up and found to be correct. Another case involved the medium seeing a person with two hearts. Any medical expert would know they had a piggy back transplant which is also extremely rare (7 to 10 done a year in the U.S.) Family might know this as well.

Good! So you agree that we cannot rely on the sitters.

Reply: An expert medical opinion is required. You are not in a posession to judge this either.

I didn't say I was, nor was I implying that you were.

I agree also this is one slim area of a mediumistic reading where external expertise should be used when necessary to render the information valid or not. Is this what you mean by indpendent verification? If so, I agree with you. We finally get a definition of a term from Larsen.

"Slim area"? Mediums - JE included - use these broad medical terms all the time, Steve.

The other 99% of the reading, besides cause of death, may involve things that only family and people close to the deceased would know. This makes them experts on this.

Perhaps you have some statistical analysis??