5 ms·

"Ignore the self-proclaimed "skeptics" with knee-jerk reactions to the decorum, and to Joe Dispenza's credentials. He strikes me as sincere and the testimonials

"Ignore the self-proclaimed "skeptics" with knee-jerk reactions to the decorum, and to Joe Dispenza's credentials. He strikes me as sincere and the testimonials are definitely legit" Why should we ignore the "skeptics" but not the unattributed "testimonials". Joe Dispenza is a quack, voodoo conspiracy theorist, who seems to border line lie about his credentials. "The placebo has had profound healing effects on many people. But, do we really need the pill if the healing power is within us? Dr. Joe Dispenza delves into the depths of the mind to reveal the connection between belief, perception, energy fields and the mystery of the placebo." Ok.. energy fields.. got it.. I will file that right next to perpetual motion machines.

lambdaba 5y ago
Yeah, you're illustrating the example perfectly. You're triggered by the terms used, whereas I was drawing attention to the actual lived experience of thousands of people. Here's a playlist of 580 video testimonials: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD4EAA8F8C9148A1B https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD4EAA8F8C9148A1B Are they all actors? Yes, this is an understudied / ignored field. You can't expect the people in it to present themselves exactly how your cliché "scientist" does.
- mrintegrity 5y ago
  I didn't suggest that anyone involved was an actor, I'm quite sure they are not in fact. I do believe that these people are easily manipulated however and that people like Joe Dispenza take advantage of this to earn fame and fortune. For every 100 people that we see who appear to benefit from the lifestyle changes they implement because of this guys "science" (and those changes may well be benefitial!), there may be another 1000 who don't get real treatment and suffer unnecessarily due to believing this quackery. It is an understudied / ignored field for the same reason prayer isn't studied for it's ability to cure disease. A quote from one of the testimonial videos you linked me to: "It's really hard to talk about because not a lot of people can relate to quantum healing ... " This makes sense. If you believe in this, and it helps you, good for you. You should not try to present it as something deserving of scientific backing however.
  - lambdaba 5y ago
    But BELIEF is EXACTLY the point. Joe Dispenza just uses (or, in your view, abuses) scientific terms to explain the HOW to his audience. You can't teach belief to people if you prefix everything with hesitancy or overly qualify everything, that would go counter to the effect you're trying to have. Again, in summary the "teaching" of Joe Dispenza is that belief creates emotion, emotion modulates biochemistry, biochemistry can be harmonized (placebo) or disharmonized (nocebo). The scientific wording is just a wrapper, if that's distasteful to you, fine, but it's nothing more than a superficial reaction, one that's very common in the "skeptic" community.
    - mrintegrity 5y ago
      I would love to review Joe's material to be able to provide a more thorough response, but I can't afford the 100s dollars he charges.
      - lambdaba 5y ago
        You can find most of it for free online. And I'm not talking about pirating stuff, just tons and tons of free content, not to mention community content.
    - tsimionescu 5y ago
      The problem is that this "teaching" is demonstrably false for all but a handful of conditions. Whether he coats it in misapplied sciencey-sounding gobbledygook ('quantum healing' lol), it doesn't change the fact that it won't "cure" anything other than pain, anxiety, nausea, stress and a handful of other symptoms. And we have actual medicine that helps much more for all of these.
      - lambdaba 5y ago
        That is not true at all and you don't really understand the full spectrum of the placebo effect. It's not about having the subjective illusion of healing, it's about modulating biochemistry to affect healing. There are cases where, for instance, placebo branch participants in a study for antidepressants had measurable brainwave pattern changes after "treatment". What you're describing is an outdated / misunderstanding of placebo.

lambdaba 5y ago

Yeah, you're illustrating the example perfectly. You're triggered by the terms used, whereas I was drawing attention to the actual lived experience of thousands of people. Here's a playlist of 580 video testimonials: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD4EAA8F8C9148A1B https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD4EAA8F8C9148A1B Are they all actors? Yes, this is an understudied / ignored field. You can't expect the people in it to present themselves exactly how your cliché "scientist" does.

mrintegrity 5y ago
I didn't suggest that anyone involved was an actor, I'm quite sure they are not in fact. I do believe that these people are easily manipulated however and that people like Joe Dispenza take advantage of this to earn fame and fortune. For every 100 people that we see who appear to benefit from the lifestyle changes they implement because of this guys "science" (and those changes may well be benefitial!), there may be another 1000 who don't get real treatment and suffer unnecessarily due to believing this quackery. It is an understudied / ignored field for the same reason prayer isn't studied for it's ability to cure disease. A quote from one of the testimonial videos you linked me to: "It's really hard to talk about because not a lot of people can relate to quantum healing ... " This makes sense. If you believe in this, and it helps you, good for you. You should not try to present it as something deserving of scientific backing however.
- lambdaba 5y ago
  But BELIEF is EXACTLY the point. Joe Dispenza just uses (or, in your view, abuses) scientific terms to explain the HOW to his audience. You can't teach belief to people if you prefix everything with hesitancy or overly qualify everything, that would go counter to the effect you're trying to have. Again, in summary the "teaching" of Joe Dispenza is that belief creates emotion, emotion modulates biochemistry, biochemistry can be harmonized (placebo) or disharmonized (nocebo). The scientific wording is just a wrapper, if that's distasteful to you, fine, but it's nothing more than a superficial reaction, one that's very common in the "skeptic" community.
  - mrintegrity 5y ago
    I would love to review Joe's material to be able to provide a more thorough response, but I can't afford the 100s dollars he charges.
    - lambdaba 5y ago
      You can find most of it for free online. And I'm not talking about pirating stuff, just tons and tons of free content, not to mention community content.
  - tsimionescu 5y ago
    The problem is that this "teaching" is demonstrably false for all but a handful of conditions. Whether he coats it in misapplied sciencey-sounding gobbledygook ('quantum healing' lol), it doesn't change the fact that it won't "cure" anything other than pain, anxiety, nausea, stress and a handful of other symptoms. And we have actual medicine that helps much more for all of these.
    - lambdaba 5y ago
      That is not true at all and you don't really understand the full spectrum of the placebo effect. It's not about having the subjective illusion of healing, it's about modulating biochemistry to affect healing. There are cases where, for instance, placebo branch participants in a study for antidepressants had measurable brainwave pattern changes after "treatment". What you're describing is an outdated / misunderstanding of placebo.