Therapeutic Touch ~ evidence for effectiveness?

[Pyrrho]

And it already has as is your own bias in considering this matter.

I now recuse myself from any further involvement in this discussion, and from any further moderating activities regarding this thread, and from any further moderating activities regarding Steve Grenard.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Yes folks. There you have it. Nobody wants dissent or controversy or dissenting opinion on this board. In order to do that, Mr. Ed is already weasling the rules to suit some preconceived notions of how references are given and Mr. Pyrrho, who is also biased, has decided it is okay to libel people by saying they can be found in the DSM. By the way, IV is out Yatzi.
And by the way Hoyt, Sagan wrote Demon Haunted World, not Gould.

These are the inelligent leaders you follow so blindly while allowing them to violate the board's own rules against harassment.

I see no one has seen fit to speak up on this matter. So I know you are all a bunch of cowards and are afraid of the same treatment received by myself. It was as I predicted. This behavior is designed to quell dialogue and debate. This board has quickly deteriorated into a useless rubbish heap of medoccrity.

So keep on preaching to your own choir. It should get real boring real quickly.

If the offending posts by Larsen and Yahzi are not removed, and they have been preserved privately (Larsen thinks he is the only one that could do this), I will drape them all over the internet demonstrating how uncivilized, biased and rude you bunch really are.

 

[Jeff Corey]

They already have. It's called the DSM-III.

No makin fun of the Delusional Personality Disorder, type 5, section 1, Sector D.
I understand that the DSM IV will define " woo woo" as, "being. like, out of it? Out to brunch? "

 

[Jeff Corey]

a useless rubbish heap of medoccrity....

... I will drape them all over the internet demonstrating how uncivilized, biased and rude you bunch really are.]

Sacre bleu, Shirley, you must be joking!
People were overly kind to you here.

 

[Ed]

Yes folks. There you have it. Nobody wants dissent or controversy or dissenting opinion on this board. In order to do that, Mr. Ed is already weasling the rules to suit some preconceived notions of how references are given

Please. I hardly think that asking people to explain what they post or take a position on same is reducing debate or controversy. And it is not weaseling anything, it is a statement of my dissatisfaction with certain types of posts. And yes, I have an opinion on what works best. So?

 

[BTox]

We are back to the same you said-she said-they said argument we had over homeopathy. There are both pro and con studies.

But you once again fail to acknowledge that the con studies out-weigh the pro, especially when quality of the clinical trials are accounted for. Plus you again dismiss the fact that there is no plausible mode of action for homeopathy, or therapeutic touch.

 

[BTox]

We already have non-invasive technologies that measure oxygen saturations (in the blood but without blood), CO2 levels in the blood (but without blood) and even cutaneous electrodes that measure blood pH but without blood).

We do? I'd like to see information on this claim.

 

[SteveGrenard]

LOL. I and thousands of other people in critical care medicine have been employing such technologies for years.

Here's some key words for you since I am told people don't like me cutting and pasting:

1. Transcutaneous CO2
2. Transcutaneous O2
3. Transcutaneous pH

all aka TcPCO2, TCPO2, etc. mfg: Radiometer (Sweden)

4. Pulse Oximetry - mfg: many companies

gives arterial Oxygen Saturation non-invasively.

5. Capnometry (Capnography)=ETCo2 which at point max is equiv to alveolar CO2 which is equiv to arterial PCO2
Mfg: Oridion (Jersalem, Israel)

 

[SteveGrenard]

Btox: But you once again fail to acknowledge that the con studies out-weigh the pro, especially when quality of the clinical trials are accounted for. Plus you again dismiss the fact that there is no plausible mode of action for homeopathy, or therapeutic touch.

Although there are scientists seeking and developing plausible modes of action, here are more than a few biased people here who think this is a waste of time, including I believe, you.

The fact is there are pro and con studies, and tens of thousands of anecdotal accounts, more than enough to stir the pot for more and better research. This is the same tired argument used for any pro studies that do not conform to the biases of one side or, for that matter, the other. Fifty thousand registered nurses in the U.S. are estimated to practice some form of TT in hospital settings. That alone is a big enough number to make one, if they are interested, take a hard look at both the pro and con studies and if they are into this, develop a protocol and design (not like the silly Rosa science fair project) with a statiscally significant number of trials to make some definitive findings.

I thought we already agreed that studies up to FDA protocols would settle the matter for homeopathy.

I am personally not interested in either but I am interested in making such information known so that those who are could benefit from knowing both sides of the argument. Apparently there are efforts here to quell the dissenting side and to stifle debate by using pretty low ad hominems and character assasination.

Yahzi now enjoys the distinction with Claus Larsen, Bill Hoyt and no doubt a few others who are not above employing such tactics. They discredit themselves. by doing so.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Grenard.
What about your claim that only medical scientists or nurses could evaluate TT?

 

[SteveGrenard]

What about plumbers practicing psychology? Or psychologists performing procotologic exams?

How about brain surgeons doing cardiac bypasses? The people trained and experienced in any field are logically the most competent to test it. This is a no brainer.

 

[Denise]

As this thread has been reported, and reported again, I feel I should post a response. Only Hal can deal with this matter now, especially now that legal action has been threatened. Hal is quite busy right now. I am sure that when he is able to, he will respond. I'm sure that Mr. Grenard would also consider me biased as well, so I also recuse myself from taking action on this matter. Thank you.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Excuse me Denise but I did not threaten legal action. I politely asked the harassing, libelous and insulting post to be removed. I asked moderator Pyrrho to do so. Moderator Pyrrho agreed it was a base insult, etc. but felt that it was not a violation of the rules against harassment and rudeness. Do you feel likewise?

Recuse yourselves all you want. I am still demanding the removal of both Larsen's and Yatzhi's offensive posts. The only threat I made regarding this is to take this public over the net as yet another example of how dissent is quelled at JREF through character assasination and ad hominem attacks... ad hominems attacks Mr. Larsen has agreed to stop but apparently is finding it impossible to control imself with respect to these.

I have never once accused Mr. or Ms. Yahzi of being mentally ill and I have never suggested he look himself up in the DSM. The fact that he thought it was necessary to do so to me is not at all funny.

 

[Denise]

Steve, mayhaps I assumed too much. You called the post libelous and said you may have to take other action. I assumed that you meant legal action. If I assumed wrong I apologize.

The only person who can deal with this type of issue is Hal. And, as you may know, his wife is hospitalized fighting cancer that the doctors have said is terminal. She has undergone renal failure and a series of small strokes. Hal posted about this in the flame war section so it is forum knowledge. He also recently lost his father.

I'm sure that when he has a chance he will address your grievances.

 

[SteveGrenard]

I am fully aware of Hal's problems and do not expect him to suspend his problems to deal with anything as trivial as this by comparison.

Steve

 

[Dragon]

So Steve, back to the topic -

Have you found a decent pro-TT study yet?

 

[Martin]

Of course not. Why do you think he's whining so much?

 

[SteveGrenard]

Reprinted here to preserve:

Dragon
Critical Thinker

Registered: Mar 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 495


So Steve, back to the topic -

Have you found a decent pro-TT study yet?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
10-06-2003 02:46 AM



Martinm
Sceptic

Registered: Feb 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2651


Of course not. Why do you think he's whining so much?

------------------------------------------------

If you read this thread up to and including the place where Yahzi and Larsen began to get scared I would make good on my promise and they proceeded to insult, libel and slander me, you would have known (wake up Mr Dragon and Mr MartinM, A.H.) , I said above it would take 1-week+ to go through 454 citations. At that time I will post both pro and con studies on the subject. So Dragon, you are now a part of Larsen and Yotzso's little game and MartinM is also a member of the pee-nut gallery also? Welcome to the club. See you in a week with the results. In the meantime badgering and harassment by you will be ignored so you can stop wasting your time.

This little story of Larsen, Yahzo now will include harassment by Dragon and Martin. Stop the harassment. The biased moderators here do not know it is against forum rules but it is.

You discredit yourselves and just prove how intolerant, bigotted and scared you are of dissenting evidence. What yellow bellied cowards you all turn out to be. I expected this of Larsen but now ....

I would have thought you would have waited for the results and argue on the merits instead of continuiing to launch ad hominem attacks and character assasinations. How absolutely dissapointing.

 

[Marc]

If I recall correctly didn't Steve before threaten legal action and never followed through with it despite people inviting it?

Maybe this is a way of implying it without having to be taken to task when it does not materialize?

Say Claus, you probably have enough information to write up the Debate Modes of Steve G. You have 'flooding with links that may or may not pertain to the subject', 'whiney victem', 'evil anti-paranormal conspiracy theory', 'I know everything even when I wasn't there', and 'threatening legal action' modes.

 

[Martin]

If you read this thread up to and including the place where Yahzi and Larsen began to get scared I would make good on my promise and they proceeded to insult, libel and slander me, you would have known (wake up Mr Dragon and Mr MartinM, A.H.) , I said above it would take 1-week+ to go through 454 citations

Yes, indeed. I missed that, and for that I apologise. I also know you said

On these pages you will find serious pro and con articles on TT

Presumably, you would not have said this if you had not already identified at least one serious pro article. You also said

So far I have found studies which falsify TT as well as validate it

So, you ought to be in a position to answer Dragon's query quite easily. This:

You discredit yourselves and just prove how intolerant, bigotted and scared you are of dissenting evidence. What yellow bellied cowards you all turn out to be. I expected this of Larsen but now ....

I would have thought you would have waited for the results and argue on the merits instead of continuiing to launch ad hominem attacks and character assasinations. How absolutely dissapointing.

is simply absurd.