|
|
Updated February 24, 2000
In a recently published paper, David Krinsley** and I reported on experiments whereby we reliably taught non-believing volunteers to cure mammary adenocarcinoma in experimental mice by the laying-on of hands.1 Savely Savva has asked me to comment upon the implications of our work for the concept of a biofield, and also the phenomenon of deliberately caused bodily damage (DCBD), both of which have been prominently discussed in MISAHA Newsletter. There may be some interesting parallels between our results and the concept of the biofield. And, the transmissibility of DCBD from one subject to another through touch may also harbor a parallel to the transmissibility of healing ability from one person to another. At the outset I would like to clearly state that I am not an expert in either of these two fields of research, and so all comments must be seen as preliminary and speculative.
First, a brief summary of our research. In response to witnessing numerous healings by a New York based healer, I trained in techniques alleged by the healer to reproduce the healing effect. These techniques were fairly mechanical, and did not involve belief of any sort. Nor did they require any meditative practices, or deliberate attempts to enter into an altered state of consciousness. Rather, initial techniques involved a series of routine visualization exercises that were to be performed simultaneously with any emotional experience. The visualization techniques required the rapid shifting of unrelated visual images. The healer taught that the emotions were, in fact, a form of energy, and could be channeled through sequential mastery of these visualization techniques. Upon mastery of the visualization, laying-on of hands techniques were taught whereby an “energy” was alleged to flow from the person. The laying-on of hands techniques required that the person not concentrate on healing. These were to be performed simultaneously with the mental techniques, and all the while normal activities could be carried out. That meant, in effect, that ordinary conversation, reading a book, watching television, and the like, could be done simultaneous to the mental techniques and laying-on of hands. All that an outside observer watching the treatments might see would be what appeared to be a disinterested healer carrying out normal patterns of behavior.
In watching the New York healer treat hundreds of patients, we had observed that not all ailments responded the same. Long term diabetes, for example, responded only minimally. Cancer, on the other hand, responded immediately and dramatically. And so we designed an experiment which we thought both empirically foolproof and designed play to the strengths of our observations of healing. Krinsley arranged for a disinterested biologist to choose a “standard” cancer for laboratory mice. That biologist chose mammary adenocarcinoma, obtained from Jackson Laboratories (code H2712; host strain C3H/HeJ; strain of origin C3H/HeHu), which had a predicted 100% fatality between 14 and 27 days subsequent to injection.
Originally, it was our intent to have the New York healer treat the mice, but at the last moment he decided against it, and so, by default, I became the first experimental subject. I received a standard laboratory cage with five mice, three days after they had been injected. I placed my hands around the outside of the cage for one hour per day, practicing the techniques I had been taught. At no time were the mice directly touched. Six control mice were housed in a separate lab.
Our results were far beyond any of our expectations. Tumors appeared in the mice within a few days, and then approximately two weeks subsequent to injection they developed a “blackened area” on them. This blackened area appeared to ulcerate, and then the tumor imploded to full remission and the mice lived their normal life span of two years. The process is illustrated in the accompanying photos. In the photo labeled A6, day 14, the alphanumeric refers to a particular mouse, and day 14 measures the number of days subsequent to injection. In this photo, a tumor with blackened area is visible. In the second photo, A6 day 22, the blackened area has ulcerated. Six days later, A6 day 28 shows the same mouse after the tumor has imploded. By the final photo, A6 day 35, it appears as if the mouse never had the mammary adenocarcinoma, and indeed autopsies indicated that at this stage there were no remnants of the cancer. The photos are those of a mouse with a smaller than average tumor. Mice with larger tumors took longer to go through the remission pattern. In all stages up to the total disappearance of the tumor, viable cancer cells were present.
Since the mice lived their normal life span, it is more accurate to say that they were cured. Selected mice were reinjected with the cancer, but these did not take, suggesting that the mice had developed immunity to the cancer.
In two separate laboratories, we performed three replications of the original experiment using skeptical volunteers as subjects. Overall, we obtained 87.9% total cure in 33 experimental mice (more details can be found in the original paper 1).
The control mice confounded us. In the first experiment, I went to the lab to view the control mice after four of the six had died. Soon after, the remaining two developed the blackened area, ulcerated, and were cured. I was astonished, as I had not made any attempt to treat them. In subsequent experiments, whenever someone trained in the techniques visited the control mice, many of them also remissed. In fact, in our third and fourth experiments we had to send a second control group to another city in order for all of them to die within the predicted 27 day maximum. More on this later.
For the rest
of this article and/or references contact MISAHA@aol.com
Thank you.
Published in MISAHA
Newsletter #30-31, 2001.
Mail
donation and/or subscription to:
Monterey Institute for
the Study of
Alternative Healing Arts
3855 Via Nona Marie, Ste 102-c
Carmel, CA 93923
Phone/Fax: (831) 625-9617
E-Mail MISAHA@aol.com
|
|
