How would you set up a test for the efficacy of prayer, or its opposite, ill will?

Question

Is this something that can be empirically proven?

Has anyone done any testing? Would the testing for the results of positive thoughts be different for than for the results of negative thoughts?

Answer 1

That's a great question. This has actually been done. The basic idea is that you want a control group and a study group. The control group receives no prayers for or against, while the study group does. At the end of the experiment, the results are compared and minimally a t-test to determine if there really is a difference between the two populations is done.

Wushu above brought up some good points. The results wouldn't be "proof" of efficacy of prayer, and with any experiment you can always come up with ad hoc reasons why you didn't get the results you might have expected. In addition, there is some ambiguity in putting a hard number on patient improvement so there is some uncertainty in the results because of that. Also, ideally you want very similar control and study groups, each of which on average have equal likelihood of improving or not improving, and that's awful hard to put a number on as well.

That's just a real simple review. I added a couple links with more info.

Answer 2

The problem with the dice method seems to me to be that it doesn't give the diety much time to answer the prayers and it doesn't give the praying folk much time to do any serious praying.

.........................................

Here's a test offering some safeguards with a broad statistical potential:  

The petri dish:

Every day most states sponsor a form of gambling that used to be called 'the numbers racket' when it was done by private enterprise.  One of the games is called Pick 3.  Some states do them twice a day, some only once.

The odds are one in 56 of any two of three numbers picked hitting in order.

The draws are held under high-security, tightly controlled conditions, the results for all the nationwide draws are immediately available to anyone.

.........................................

The test:

Group one prays until the draw that no two of numbers, say, 1-2-3 hit anywhere in the US in that order.

Group two prays until the draw that two of the numbers 4-5-6 hit as many places as possible in that sequence.

Control numbers are 7-8-9 with nobody praying for them.

With so many draws held each day it would provide a fairly sound statistical base for the test and a wide variety of comparisons.

It might also offer hints, if any anomalies such as the proximity of the praying folk to the locations of the draws, of other paranormal influences.

.........................................

In case you're unfamiliar with what I'm describing here's a list of all the most recent daily game drawings held:

Arizona Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 2-4-8

California Daily 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 6-4-2

Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 4-8-8

Connecticut Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 7-3-9

Play 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 2-6-3

Delaware Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 4-4-2

Play 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 5-2-0

Florida Cash 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-9-5

Georgia Cash 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 5-6-3

Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 0-3-8

Idaho Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 9-7-3

Illinois Daily 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 6-1-8

Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 4-1-5

Indiana Daily 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 1-7-6

Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 8-7-0

Iowa Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 4-1-5

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 6-1-8

Kansas Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 3-1-9

Kentucky Midday Pick 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 2-0-7

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 4-3-2

Louisiana Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 2-5-5

Maine Tri-State Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-6-4

Tri-State Pick 3 Midday Sat, Feb 2, 2008 9-0-9

Maryland Midday Pick 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 0-9-1

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 0-3-2

Michigan Daily 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 2-0-7

Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 3-7-3

Minnesota Daily 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-8-1

Missouri Midday Pick 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 3-5-1

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 7-5-3

Multi-State Tri-State Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-6-4

Tri-State Pick 3 Midday Sat, Feb 2, 2008 9-0-9

Nebraska Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 3-1-1

New Hampshire Tri-State Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-6-4

Tri-State Pick 3 Midday Sat, Feb 2, 2008 9-0-9

New Jersey Midday Pick 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 5-9-7

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 6-6-8

New Mexico Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 4-0-2

New York Midday Numbers Sat, Feb 2, 2008 8-3-4, Lucky Sum: 15

Numbers Fri, Feb 1, 2008 4-6-5, Lucky Sum: 15

North Carolina Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 3-5-2

Ohio Midday Pick 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 0-3-2

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 7-7-8

Oklahoma Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 6-1-0

Ontario Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 1-8-1

Pennsylvania Daily Number Fri, Feb 1, 2008 0-7-9

Midday Daily Number Sat, Feb 2, 2008 6-0-5

Puerto Rico Pega 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 9-0-0

Quebec La Quotidienne 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 5-6-6

South Carolina Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 2-5-1

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 3-7-5

Tennessee Cash 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 2-2-6

Midday Cash 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 5-1-3

Texas Pick 3 Day Sat, Feb 2, 2008 1-3-1, Sum It Up: 5

Pick 3 Night Fri, Feb 1, 2008 5-9-3, Sum It Up: 17

Vermont Tri-State Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-6-4

Tri-State Pick 3 Midday Sat, Feb 2, 2008 9-0-9

Virginia Midday 3 Sat, Feb 2, 2008 8-9-9

Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 3-8-3

Washington Daily Fri, Feb 1, 2008 8-7-5

Washington, D.C. Lucky Numbers Fri, Feb 1, 2008 2-2-9

Midday Lucky Numbers Sat, Feb 2, 2008 1-5-8

West Virginia Daily 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 7-7-2

Western Canada Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 0-1-1

Wisconsin Daily Pick 3 Fri, Feb 1, 2008 6-7-3

.........................................

Edit:  TR - I'd be tickled pea-green to participate in a solitary test on terminally ill patients of almost any infectuous condition for distance energy healing if someone knew how to set up such a test and wanted to do it.    

Terminally patients only whom the medicos have sent home to die.  The odds aren't 50/50 on that by a long shot.  And I'd be willing to repeat the test as many times as anyone wanted to do it on as many patients until everyone got tired of it.

I specify infectuous conditions because, unless there's been too much tissue damage it wouldn't take too long in each instance to run the test.  If the liver's almost all scar tissue naturally it would take longer to run the test.

Edit 2:  As for the negative side testing I'd be unwilling to have anything to do with it.

Answer 3

The answer is.Studies have been done.Here's two articles about Columbia University studies.

Answer 4

There have been many studies on this. Larry Dossey, M.D. has pioneered and advocates some of this work.

The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine ( part of the National Institutes of Health) also supports and conducts research in this area.

Outside of perhaps something like slowing down the healing process of flesh wounds on mice, ethical considerations in the medical and scientific community would make testing of negative prayer next to impossible to both get funding for or get accepted for publication.

Psi

Answer 5

All interesting stuff, but I think it does come down to positive & negative energy. 'Testing' the Deity (whatever one's perceptions of him/her/it/them may be) seems like it would be a bit unpredictable - it all comes down to a matter of faith, which is difficult to quantify. The work on water & ice crystals by Dr Masaru Emoto makes a very good case for the influence of positive & negative energies, however; well worth reading. Anyone who has seen the movie "What The Bleep Do We Know!?" will remember the references to his work.

Answer 6

I have actually thought about this recently and came to this conclusion.

First, its not entirely testable, because one could say, the person praying didnt have enough faith, or that God has other plans....etc.

The implication behind the praying is that God will step in and influence events in the favor of the person praying. If God influences events, then we can assume the laws of physics as we know them are bent, and that prayer would be able to create statistical anomolies.

Here is the test I came up with, and am going to try to get a minister to help me with next week.

We take a 6 sided die and roll it 100 times, marking the results on a scratch pad. Now each number should hit around 16. Between 12 and 20 hits on each side would be within the range of randomness.

Next we pray for the die to hit 6s, and hopefully God will answer said prayers. My goal would be to get more than 22 hits for 6 out of 100. Of course one time could just by an outlyer, however, If I could do that, the experiement would be worth repeating.

Of course, this could only prove the power of prayer, and not disprove it, by asking God to bend the laws of physics.

There are always ways to justify why a prayer wasnt answered. I guess only God could tell  you for sure.

Edit: TR,  I actually have seen the studies on medical patients you are talking about. Although I have to point out that the same technique was used in the 80s in a cuban hospital to prove that Shark Cartilage was a cure for cancer, which as it turned out, shark carilage had no medical properties at all.

Answer 7

Are you talking about prayer..like when you ask God for help etc.? Are you talking about "testing" God??? Shudder Shudder!! Especially the way you're talking about doing it. I had tons of prayers answered..during a 10 year period. Not ALL my prayers..and sometimes not the more important ones. I guess I did my share of "testing" too...but it still doesn't seem right. Maybe prayers should be saved for when you really need them..lest God is thinking you're "crying wolf"..or just "testing" him again.

You're probably not even talking about God..but I've said this just in case. If it's not God you're praying to...then I don't call it prayer. You can ask saints and spirits to "intercede" for you..but I don't know if that's prayer.

I 've got a feeling I'm way off track from what you are talking about.

PS..I don't get that many prayers answered anymore.

Edit..Maybe you're just talking about positive and negative "energy".

Definitions of prayer:http://www.answers.com/topic/prayer?cat=...