Efficacy of prayer

Measuring the efficacy of prayer has been attempted in various studies since Francis Galton first addressed the subject (partly as satire) in 1872.Francis Galton, [http://www.abelard.org/galton/galton.htm Statistical Inquiries into the Efficacy of Prayer] , "The Fortnightly Review", August 1, 1872 (from abelard.org)] Some studies have demonstrated benefit, some have demonstrated harm, and some have found no benefit from prayer. Others suggest that the topic is outside the realm of science altogether. According to the Washington Post "...prayer is the most common complement to mainstream medicine, far outpacing acupuncture, herbs, vitamins and other alternative remedies." [Rob Stein, [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/23/AR2006032302177.html Researchers Look at Prayer and Healing] , "Washington Post", March 24, 2006] .

Overview

To date, scientific, religious and philosophical views on the efficacy of prayer have not converged towards an agreement, and a good deal of controversy surrounds the subject [ [http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,660053,00.html Questioning Healing Prayer - TIME ] ] . The medical studies have at times provided conflicting conclusions, and debate about the confounding variables in some studies continues. Religious groups have objected to the very measurement of the efficacy of prayer, and complained that what the studies measure is mechanical rather than real prayer.

The philosophical controversy on this topic even involves the basic issues of statistical inference and falsifiability as to what it may mean to "prove" or "disprove" something, and the problem of demarcation, as to whether this topic is within the realm of science at all. Following his "systematic review of healing as a therapy for human disease", in 2000, Neil C. Abbot of the Department of Medicine, University of Dundee, wrote: [Neil C. Abbot, [http://www.rccm.org.uk/static/Review_healing.aspx Healing as a therapy for human disease: a systematic review] ]

:"No firm conclusions about the efficacy or inefficacy of healing can be drawn."

It should, however, be noted that in comparison to other fields of science, the handful of carefully monitored scientific studies on the efficacy of prayer that Neil C. Abbot's review and this article can point to are relatively small. If and when more studies on prayer are performed, the issue of the efficacy of prayer may be further clarified.

Studies on the efficacy of prayer

A number of studies have been performed to scientifically measure the impact of prayer, often within a medical setting. The studies performed have used different structural methods and measured both hard data (such as blood pressure variations) and soft data such as anxiety levels and number of doctor visits. They have measured "first person effects" (where the beneficiary performs the prayer) "second person effects" (where someone with a personal connection to the beneficiary performs the prayer) and "third party effects" where a group of unknown people pray for the beneficiary.

What can be measured?

Almost all second and third party studies have focused on "petition based" prayers, while first person studies have measured "meditative" prayers as well. In general, the requested outcome for a "prayer as petition" may be either an event in the physical world, e.g. the recovery of a person from an ailment, or an event in the spiritual world, e.g. the repose of a soul via a prayer for the dead. There are, of course, also certain types of prayer whose efficacy can not (by definition) be measured in the physical world, e.g. Roman Catholic tradition includes specific prayers and devotions as "acts of reparation" which do not involve a petition for a living or deceased beneficiary, but aim to "repair the sins of others", e.g. for the repair of the sin of blasphemy. [Catholic Encyclopedia http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12775a.htm] All medical studies mentioned below relate to events in the physical world, typically in terms of human effects, rather than inanimate effects such as "prayer for rain".

First person studies

An example of a study on "meditative prayer" was the Bernardi study in the British Medical Journal in 2001. [L. Bernardi et. al "Effect of rosary prayer and yoga mantras on autonomic cardiovascular rhythms" "British Medical Journal, December 2003" http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/323/7327/1446] It reported that by praying the rosary or reciting yoga mantras at specific rates, baroreflex sensitivity increased significantly in cardiovascular patients.

A study published in 2008 used Eysenck's dimensional model of personality based on neuroticism and psychoticism to assess the mental health of high school students based on their frequency of prayer. For students both in Catholic and Protestant schools, higher levels of prayer were associated with better mental health as measured by lower psychoticism scores. However, among pupils attending Catholic schools, higher levels of prayer were also associated with higher neuroticism scores. [Leslie J. Francis et. al " [http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a788555195~db=all Prayer and psychological health] " in "Mental Health, Religion & Culture, Volume 11, Issue 1 January 2008"]

Many accept that prayer can aid in recovery, not due to divine influence but due to psychological and physical benefits. It has also been suggested that if a person knows that he or she is being prayed for it can be uplifting and increase morale, thus aiding recovery. (See Subject-expectancy effect.) Many studies have suggested that prayer can reduce physical stress, regardless of the god or gods a person prays to, and this may be true for many worldly reasons. According to a study by Centra State Hospital, "the psychological benefits of prayer may help reduce stress and anxiety, promote a more positive outlook, and strengthen the will to live." [ [http://www.centrastate.com/body.cfm?id=520&action=detail&articlepath=/Atoz/dc/cen/canc/gen/mindspirit.html#7 Mind and Spirit] . "from the Health Library section of" [http://www.centrastate.com CentraState Healthcare System] . Accessed May 18, 2006.] Other practices such as Yoga, Tai Chi, and Meditation may also have a positive impact on physical and psychological health.

Second person studies

One condition that may affect the efficacy of intercessory prayer is whether the person praying has a personal connection to the person prayed for. A 2005 study found strong evidence that healers in a variety of modalities were able to remotely influence the MRI-measurable brain activity in partners who were physically and electrically isolated. [Achterberg, Jeanne "et al" [http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/acm.2005.11.965 Evidence for Correlations Between Distant Intentionality and Brain Function in Recipients: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis] The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 2005, 11(6): 965-971.]

Third party studies

The oldest statistical analysis of the effects of third party prayer was performed in 1872 by Francis Galton, perhaps as a form of satire as well as an experiment. Galton hypothesized that if prayer was effective, members of the British Royal family would live longer, given that thousands prayed for their wellbeing every Sunday. He therefore compared longevity in the British Royal family with that of the general population, and found no difference. However, Galton’s experiment suffered from a number of confounding variables.

A number of studies have claimed that patients who are being prayed for recover more quickly or more frequently. One such study, with a double-blind design and about 500 subjects per group, suggested that intercessory prayer by born again Christians had a statistically significant positive effect on a coronary care unit population. [Byrd RC. Positive therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer in a coronary care unit population. "South Med J" 1988;81:826-9. PMID 3393937.] Another such study was reported by Harris "et al". [Harris WS, Gowda M, Kolb JW, Strychacz CP, Vacek JL, Jones PG, Forker A, O'Keefe JH, McCallister BD. "A randomized, controlled trial of the effects of remote, intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients admitted to the coronary care unit." Arch Intern Med 1999;159:2273-8. PMID 10547166.] Critics claim Byrd's 1988 study was not fully double-blinded, and that in the Harris study, patients actually had a longer hospital stay in the prayer group, if one discounts the patients in both groups who left before prayers began, [Tessman I and Tessman J "Efficacy of Prayer: A Critical Examination of Claims," Skeptical Inquirer, March/April 2000,] although the Harris study did demonstrate the prayed for patients on average received lower course scores (indicating better recovery).One of the largest randomized, blind clinical trials was a remote "retroactive" intercessory prayer study conducted in Israel by Leibovici. This study used 3393 patient records from 1990-96, and blindly assigned some of these to an intercessory prayer group. The prayer group had shorter hospital stays and duration of fever. [Leibovici L. Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomized controlled trial. "BMJ" 2001;323:1450-1. PMID 11751349.]

Some studies of prayer effectiveness have yielded null results. [O'Laoire S. An experimental study of the effects of distant, intercessory prayer on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. "Altern Ther Health Med" 1997;3:38-53. PMID 9375429.] A 2001 double-blind study of the Mayo Clinic found no significant difference in the recovery rates between people who were (unbeknownst to them) assigned to a group that prayed for them and those who were not. [Aviles JM, Whelan SE, Hernke DA, Williams BA, Kenny KE, O'Fallon WM, Kopecky SL. Intercessory prayer and cardiovascular disease progression in a coronary care unit population: a randomized controlled trial. "Mayo Clin Proc" 2001;76:1192-8. PMID 11761499.] Similarly, the MANTRA study conducted by Duke University found no differences in outcome of cardiac procedures as a result of prayer. [Krucoff MW, Crater SW, Gallup D, Blankenship JC, Cuffe M, Guarneri M, Krieger RA, Kshettry VR, Morris K, Oz M, Pichard A, Sketch MH Jr, Koenig HG, Mark D, Lee KL. Music, imagery, touch, and prayer as adjuncts to interventional cardiac care: the Monitoring and Actualisation of Noetic Trainings (MANTRA) II randomised study. "Lancet" 2005;366:211-7. PMID 16023511.] In another similar study published in the American Heart Journal in 2006 [Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients: A multicenter randomized trial of uncertainty and certainty of receiving intercessory prayer [http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870305006496/abstract] ] , Christian intercessory prayer when reading a scripted prayer was found to have no effect on the recovery of heart surgery patients; however, the study found patients who had knowledge of receiving prayer had slightly higher instances of complications than those who did not know if they were being prayed for or those who did not receive prayer.cite journal |author=Benson H, Dusek JA, Sherwood JB, "et al" |title=Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients: a multicenter randomized trial of uncertainty and certainty of receiving intercessory prayer |journal=Am. Heart J. |volume=151 |issue=4 |pages=934–42 |year=2006 |pmid=16569567 |doi=10.1016/j.ahj.2005.05.028 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002-8703(05)00649-6]

Most studies above have not to date directly measured the belief level of the beneficiary, leaving a possible confounding variable for the experiments.

Belief and skepticism

Medical views

Medical skepticism

An article in the Medical Journal of Australia complained that "One common criticism of prayer research is that prayer has become a popular therapeutic method for which there is no known plausible mechanism."cite web |url=http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/186_10_210507/jan11101_fm.html |title=eMJA: Prayer as medicine: how much have we learned? |accessdate=2007-12-21 |format= |work=]

Some medical professionals are skeptical of new claims by studies until they have been given the test of time, and further scrutiny. For instance, a 2001 study associated with Columbia University has been associated with controversy, following claims of success in the popular media. [" [http://csicop.org/si/2004-09/miracle-study.html Skeptical Inquirer] ", Sept/Oct 2004] [ [http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/toc/auto_abstract.php?id=21868 Reproductive Medicine] Nov 2004]

Medical hopes

In the early 20th century, Florence Nightingale, a pioneer of modern nursing, was a believer in the effects of prayer. She wrote, "Often when people seem unconscious, a word of prayer reaches them" ["The collected works of Florence Nightingale" http://www.sociology.uoguelph.ca/fnightingale] .

Today, the fact that different medical studies have been at odds with each other has not stopped physicians from studying or recommending prayer. According to Larry Dossey M.D.: "In 1993, only three U.S. medical schools had courses devoted to exploring the role of religious practice and prayer in health; currently, nearly 80 medical schools have instituted such courses".cite web |url=http://www.dosseydossey.com/larry/default.html |title=Dr. Larry Dossey's Official Website |accessdate=2007-12-21 |format= |work=] cite book |author=VandeCreek, Larry; Dossey, Larry |title=Scientific and pastoral perspectives on intercessory prayer: an exchange between Larry Dossey, M. D. and health care chaplains |publisher=Haworth Pastoral Press |location=New York |year=1998 |pages= |isbn=1-56023-113-0 |oclc= |doi=]

Different approaches to medicine

In his book Reinventing Medicine [Larry Dossey Reinventing Medicine ISBN 978-0062516442 ] Larry Dossey claims that there will be three eras of medicine, the first dealing with "physical medicine" (where patients take pills), the second with "mind-body medicine" (where the body treats itself through psychosomatic methods) and the third with "eternity medicine" in which patients are affected from a distance via intercessory prayer. As evidence, the book refers mostly to the same third party studies mentioned above, but suggests that they will be further strengthened by future studies.

General skepticism

In a debate/interview in Newsweek with Christian evangelical Rick Warren, atheist Sam Harris commented that most lay perceptions of the efficacy of prayer (personal impressions as opposed to empirical studies) were related to sampling error because "we know that humans have a terrible sense of probability." That is, humans are inclined to recognize the few confirmations of their beliefs while discounting or ignoring the significantly larger number of disconfirmations.

Harris also criticized existing empirical studies for limiting themselves to prayers for relatively unmiraculous events, like recovery from heart surgery. He suggested a simple experiment to settle the issue:

Get a billion Christians to pray for a single amputee. Get them to pray that God regrow that missing limb. This happens to salamanders every day, presumably without prayer; this is within the capacity of God. I find it interesting that people of faith only tend to pray for conditions that are self-limiting. [ [http://richarddawkins.net/article,825,The-God-Debate,Sam-Harris-Rick-Warren-Newsweek 'The God Debate' by Sam Harris, Rick Warren, Newsweek - RichardDawkins.net ] ]

No such study has yet been conducted.

Religious and philosophical objections

Religious and philosophical objections to the very study of the efficacy of prayer exist, given that nasb|Deuteronomy|6:16|Deuteronomy 6:16 states, "You shall not test the Lord thy God", [ [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%206:16;&version=49; Deuteronomy 6:16] ] reflecting the notion of some that prayer cannot, or should not, be tested.

The religious viewpoint objects to the claim that prayer is susceptible to experimental designs or statistical analysis, and other assumptions in many experiments, e.g. that a thousand prayers are statistically different from one. The objections also include the complaint that religion generally deals with unique, uncontrollable events; statistics, and science in general, deal with recurring phenomena which are possible to sample or control and are susceptible to general laws.

Religious objections also include the complaint that as prayer starts to be measured, it is no longer real prayer once it gets involved in an experiment and that the concept of conducting prayer experiments reflects a misunderstanding of the purpose of prayer. The previously mentioned 2006 study published in the American Heart Journal indicated that some of the intercessors who took part in it complained about the scripted nature of the prayers that were imposed to them, saying that this is not the way they usually conduct prayer: quote|Prior to the start of this study, intercessors reported that they usually receive information about the patient’s age, gender and progress reports on their medical condition; converse with family members or the patient (not by fax from a third party); use individualized prayers of their own choosing; and pray for a variable time period based on patient or family request.

From a philosophical point of view, atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell viewed religious activity such as prayer outside the scope of science altogether [A. J. Ayer, Russell: ISBN 0-00-632965-9] . The opposite view is held by Richard Dawkins who says "the alleged power of intercessory prayer is at least in principle within the reach of science". [Richard Dawkins, "The God Delusion": ISBN 0-618-68000-4]

See also

* Faith healing
* Intercessory prayer

References