The scientific effects of saying ALLAH

  • Thread starter Thread starter 00:00
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 75
  • Views Views 16K
Status
Not open for further replies.
yes a 10% improvement in the outcome of those receiving prayer and didn't know they were being prayed for-- if you want the actual article then you can log into lancet, there is a small fee, but I think you may be able to log in as a guest!
peace!
 
Premium Content
The red diamond symbol indicates premium content on thelancet.com. We offer a number of ways to access this content:


Subscriptions
As a subscriber you will receive complete access to all articles, early online publications and available backissues for your chosen Lancet title. Choose from print and online or online only options. We also offer institutional subscriptions for libraries and employers.
Subscribe

Pay-per-view
Access to an individual article may be purchased for $30.To purchase simply click on the Full Text link for the article you wish to read.
 
yes a 10% improvement in the outcome of those receiving prayer and didn't know they were being prayed for-- if you want the actual article then you can log into lancet, there is a small fee, but I think you may be able to log in as a guest!
peace!

Thanks, I wonder if you perform a clinical trial scientifically. Does that trial need to be repeated and if so should the result mirror the original trial. I think it's called a theory being "testable".

I also note with interest your article dated 2005. Here is such an experiment several years later and shows the opposite results.....

Praying for someone might give you hope, but it won't help them recover from heart surgery. It may even harm them. That's the surprising result from a multi-year clinical trial on the therapeutic effects of prayer.

Herbert Benson and Jeffery Dusek of the Mind/Body Medical Institute at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, and their colleagues followed the fates of 1802 patients undergoing coronary bypass operations. Several Christian prayer groups prayed for one set of patients, while another did not receive any prayers. Although all these patients knew they were in the trial, neither they nor their doctors knew which of the groups they were in.

The prayers made no detectable difference. In the first month after surgery, 52 per cent of prayed-for patients and 51 per cent of non-prayed-for patients suffered one or more complications, the researchers found

A third group of patients received the same prayers as the first group, but were told they were being prayed for. Of these, 59 per cent suffered complications - significantly more than the patients left unsure of whether they were receiving prayers.

The researchers have no explanation for this result, but Mitchell Krukoff at Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, North Carolina, suggests that the burden of knowing they were being prayed for may have put added stress on these patients after their surgery.

Source: (American Heart Journal, vol 151, p 934).

BUMP
 
Thanks, I wonder if you perform a clinical trial scientifically. Does that trial need to be repeated and if so should the result mirror the original trial. I think it's called a theory being "testable".

I also note with interest your article dated 2005. Here is such an experiment several years later and shows the opposite results.....



Source: (American Heart Journal, vol 151, p 934).

BUMP

it depends on the trial... in medicine the best clinical trials are random Double blind...you can take my word for it or you can purchase a text book that will tell you all about, case control studies, case reports, case series studies, randomization, cluster samples, coefficient of determination, community survey, confidence limits, confounding limits, correlation coefecient, cross over designs, cross sectional studies, independent variables, inferential statistics, cohort studies etc etc etc, certainly will go beyond the measure of this page, and I reckon what you are looking to infer from all of this...
you need not quote me random statements as per this study, I am very much familiar with all of it.. you wanted the gist and I gave it to you.. 10% improv in outcome. you may shell out $34 and purchase the actual article
peace!
 
Are you missing the point here Purest, other studies show the opposite. Why take 1 as proof when it supports your position and not bother with the one's that dont.

If something was truthful, then surely all studies would reflect the same results time and time and time again. The fact of the matter is simply that this is NOT the case. Even a piece of chalk is more consistent than preying, and that is a position that the data supports.......
 
No not missing the point, but well aware of what lengths you'd go to support yours. like going to a Richard Dawkings site to quote me your unsourced info..
http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18310&sid=6488498504cb3107b2913f69fce49404

I am not interested in charlatans, or quasi-scientists or people whose science depends on whether or not they are democrats or republicans or comes from shady third party sources on the Internet to foster a certain ideology... in fact there is better studies out there than the one you quoted from slightly better institutions, if you had searched a little more you'd have probably found it instead of running to your comfort blanket...the outcome of the first still stands unchallenged and the article can still be purchased from a respectable source!

And I am going to be on the level with you, it makes no difference to me whatsoever what you choose to subscribe to or not, I have nothing to prove-- so long as you are happy being an atheist and with any hope can peacefully co-exist with those who don't subscribe to your sterile approach to the world around you!
peace!
 
No not missing the point, but well aware of what lengths you'd go to support yours. like going to a Richard Dawkings site to quote me your unsourced info..
http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18310&sid=6488498504cb3107b2913f69fce49404

Wrong, I am fully subscribed to the new scientist which that thread sourced. Just shows how wrong you can be eh!

I am not interested in charlatans, or quasi-scientists or people whose science depends on whether or not they are democrats or republicans or comes from shady third party sources on the Internet to foster a certain ideology... in fact there is better studies out there than the one you quoted from slightly better institutions,

Peer reviewed journals are always far more credible. I agree that the internet contains a load of scientific dross also that has no scientific review process unlike for example http://www.scitube.tv/.

if you had searched a little more you'd have probably found it instead of running to your comfort blanket...the outcome of the first still stands unchallenged and the article can still be purchased from a respectable source!

Oh dear, your wrong again. Not only do I subscribe to the new scientist I actually buy the weekly magazine. It was several months ago that I read the full article. It remembered reading that article when you posted.

And I am going to be on the level with you, it makes no difference to me whatsoever what you choose to subscribe to or not, I have nothing to prove--

It does not matter what you have or have not to prove. Other users who read your one sided approach to prayer and healing need to know some facts that you fail to include such as the point I made. "preying is a great placebo, and only works if the person is aware that they are being prayed for" indeed as I have already pointed out, for some awareness someone is praying for them has a detrimental effect on post recovery.

so long as you are happy being an atheist and with any hope can peacefully co-exist with those who don't subscribe to your sterile approach to the world around you!
peace!

co-exist, hardly. I would NEVER live under Sharia law and thankfully I don't need to, tolerarate belief I do, however I would not sit back and allow for example several archbishops who claimed this week that the floods in the UK are due to God's punishment for moral decline anymore than I would tolerate accepting a homophobic throw them off the highest cliff attitude of Islam.

My world view is far from sterile, it's awesome to see.

The mind is like a parachute, it's useless unless it is open!
 
Wrong, I am fully subscribed to the new scientist which that thread sourced. Just shows how wrong you can be eh!

new scientist isn't accepted by the medical community as a magazine worthy of mention... it is in fact digested by-product for lay folk such as yourself!
you want peer reviewed you subscribe to uptodate and you show them your Hospital ID or student ID. It is $400 and most current on latest research.. the other magazines the medical community accepts and has out are (NEJM, Lancet, JAMA) every subfield has its own journal as well but New Sci. isn't one of them!-- They all share some peer reviewed journals, offer latest research and studies, speak of new meds etc , if a resident showed up on grand rounds or liver rounds or even student rounds with a report from "new scientist" he'd be thoroughly laughed at, the same way we laugh at your Ostentatiously lofty posts!
Peer reviewed journals are always far more credible. I agree that the internet contains a load of scientific dross also that has no scientific review process unlike for example http://www.scitube.tv/.
I am glad you know that, then please stop quoting me dross.. it is a waste of precious time...



Oh dear, your wrong again. Not only do I subscribe to the new scientist I actually buy the weekly magazine. It was several months ago that I read the full article. It remembered reading that article when you posted.

good for you The actual article not clipped to be suitable for your shallow viewing it is in the Lancet for $35.. again a worthy article comes with a price! and a hefty one and not offered to folk on the streets or through a magazine stand or a subscription... otherwise every charlatan and quasi intellect is a would be connoisseur?.. if I wanted to do more research in say what I consider to be an alteration of neuronal function thus exacerbating your grand-mal type seizures, which leads you in turn to this erratic bahavior on various posts, I pay my fees like most respected individuals and look it up in a worthy source before I make false assumptions, like so...
Evaluation of the first seizure in adults
Steven C Schachter, MD


UpToDate performs a continuous review of over 375 journals and other resources. Updates are added as important new information is published. The literature review for version 15.1 is current through December 2006; this topic was last changed on January*10,*2007. The next version of UpToDate (15.2) will be released in June 2007.

INTRODUCTION — A seizure is a sudden change in behavior that is the consequence of brain dysfunction. Epileptic seizures result from electrical hypersynchronization of neuronal networks in the cerebral cortex. Epilepsy is characterized by recurrent epileptic seizures due to a genetically determined or acquired brain disorder [1]. Approximately 0.5 to 1 percent of the population has epilepsy. Nonepileptic seizures (NES), are sudden changes in behavior that resemble epileptic seizures but are not associated with the typical neurophysiological changes that characterize epileptic seizures [2-4].

NES are subdivided into two major types: physiological and psychogenic. Physiological NES are caused by a sudden alteration of neuronal function due to metabolic derangement or hypoxemia. Causes of physiological NES include cardiac arrhythmias, syncope, and severe hypoglycemia. Psychogenic NES are thought to result from stressful psychological conflicts or major emotional trauma and are more challenging to recognize and diagnose than physiological NES, but rarely occur de novo in patients without a significant psychiatric history.

The pharmacological treatment of epileptic seizures is directed at restoring neuronal function to normal, while the treatment of NES is specific to the disorder that triggered the seizure. Thus, the primary goal in evaluating a patient's first seizure is to resolve whether the seizure resulted from a treatable systemic process or intrinsic dysfunction of the central nervous system and, if the latter, the nature of the underlying brain pathology. This evaluation will determine the likelihood that a patient will have additional seizures and assist in the decision whether to begin anticonvulsant therapy [5,6].

The differential diagnosis and clinical features of seizures and the diagnostic evaluation of the first seizure in adults are reviewed here. While convulsive and nonconvulsive status epilepticus may be the initial presentation of epilepsy, they are not specifically discussed because clinical recognition is straightforward [7]. (See "Status epilepticus in adults"). The treatment of chronic epilepsy is reviewed separately. (See "Overview of the management of epilepsy in adults").

ETIOLOGY

Epileptic seizures — Less than one-half of epilepsy cases have an identifiable cause. It is presumed that epilepsy in most, if not all, of these other patients is genetically determined. In the remainder of patients in whom an etiology can be determined, the causes of epileptic seizures include congenital brain malformations, inborn errors of metabolism, high fevers, head trauma, brain tumors, stroke, intracranial infection, cerebral degeneration, withdrawal states, and iatrogenic drug reactions [8]. (See "Post-traumatic seizures and epilepsy"). In the elderly, vascular, degenerative, and neoplastic etiologies are more common than in younger adults and children [9]. A higher proportion of epilepsy in children is due to congenital brain malformations than in other age groups. (See "Epilepsy syndromes in children").

These general principles were illustrated in a population-based cohort study of 1195 patients with newly diagnosed or suspected epileptic seizures, 564 of whom had definite epileptic seizures [10]. The proportions of males and females were similar, 25 percent were under the age of 15, and 24 percent were 60 years or older. The majority (62 percent) of epileptic seizures were idiopathic. In the remainder, the cause was vascular disease in 15 percent and tumor in 6 percent. The proportion with an identifiable cause was much higher in older patients; 49 percent were due to vascular disease and 11 percent to tumor.

Onset of seizures in late life may be a risk factor for stroke, possibly because covert cerebrovascular disease can often be the mechanism of new onset epilepsy in older patients. This point is illustrated by a study of 4,709 people with idiopathic epilepsy beginning at or after the age of 60 years, but no history of stroke [11]. Subjects were matched to the same number of controls with no history of epilepsy or stroke. In longitudinal follow-up, the epilepsy group had a significantly higher risk of stroke at any time point compared with controls (hazard ratio 2.9, 95% CI 2.45-3.41). This finding suggests that new onset of seizures in older patients should prompt evaluation and treatment for stroke risk factors.

Head injury accounts for a relatively small proportion of epilepsy overall. The risk to an individual who suffers head trauma varies widely from minimal risk in people who have a concussive head injury in which the loss of consciousness or amnesia is less than 30 minutes, to at least a 12-fold increased risk over 10 years in people who suffer trauma-induced prolonged amnesia, subdural hematoma, or brain contusion [12]. Antiepileptic drugs prevent seizures in the first week after head injury, but do not prevent the development of epilepsy [13]. (See "Post-traumatic seizures and epilepsy").

Physiological nonepileptic seizures — A number of medical disorders are known to cause physiological NES (show table 1). Hyperthyroidism can cause seizures and can exacerbate seizures in patients with epilepsy. Hypoglycemic seizures are most common in diabetic patients who take excessive amounts of insulin or oral hypoglycemics; islet cell tumors are much less common, but seizures may be the initial presentation. Prodromal symptoms of hypoglycemic seizures include diaphoresis, tachycardia, anxiety, and confusion. Nonketotic hyperglycemia most commonly occurs in elderly diabetics and can cause focal motor seizures. Precipitous falls in serum sodium concentrations can trigger generalized tonic-clonic seizures (see "Generalized seizures" below), usually in association with a prodrome of confusion and depressed level of consciousness. These convulsions are associated with a high risk of mortality and must be treated urgently. (See "Manifestations of hyponatremia and hypernatremia"). Hypocalcemia is a rare cause of seizures and most often occurs in neonates. In adults, hypocalcemia may occur after thyroid or parathyroid surgery or in association with renal failure, hypoparathyroidism, or pancreatitis. Typical prodromic symptoms and signs are mental status changes and tetany. Magnesium levels below 0.8 mEq/L may result in irritability, agitation, confusion, myoclonus, tetany, and convulsions, and may be accompanied by hypocalcemia. (See "Clinical manifestations of hypocalcemia"). Renal failure and uremia are often associated with seizures, particularly myoclonic seizures (see "Generalized seizures" below). Generalized tonic-clonic seizures occur in approximately 10 percent of patients with chronic renal failure, usually late in the course. Seizures may also occur in patients undergoing dialysis as part of the dialysis disequilibrium syndrome; associated symptoms are headache, nausea, muscle cramps, irritability, confusion, and depressed level of consciousness. (See "Seizures in patients undergoing hemodialysis"). Disorders of porphyrin metabolism may cause seizures. Acute intermittent porphyria (AIP) is due to a partial deficiency of porphobilinogen deaminase, which results in excess delta-aminolevulinic acid and porphobilinogen in the urine. Seizures occur in approximately 15 percent of AIP attacks and are usually generalized tonic-clonic seizures, although partial seizures may occur (see "Auras (simple partial seizures)" below and see "Complex partial seizures" below). Other symptoms of AIP include abdominal pain and behavioral changes. (See "Acute intermittent porphyria"). Cerebral anoxia as a complication of cardiac or respiratory arrest, carbon monoxide poisoning, drowning, or anesthetic complication can cause myoclonic and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Cerebral anoxia due to syncope can result in very brief tonic and/or clonic movements without a prolonged postictal state, which is why syncope frequently results in an evaluation for seizures. (See "Evaluation of the patient with syncope", section on Distinction of syncope from seizures).

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS — Several conditions must be differentiated from epileptic seizures.

Sleep disorders — Some patients have seizures that predominantly or exclusively occur during sleep; these must be distinguished from parasomnias and sleep-related movement disorders [14].

REM behavior disorder is a parasomnia that consists of sudden arousals from REM sleep immediately followed by complicated, often aggressive, behaviors for which the patient is amnestic. Diagnosis is clarified by overnight sleep testing (polysomnography). (See "Clinical features and diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies", section on REM sleep disorder). Other parasomnias that can be confused with epilepsy are sleepwalking or sleep terrors. (See "Classification of sleep disorders", section on Parasomnias.)

Specific features of the events (eg, duration, clustering, age at onset, timing, stereotypy, recall, vocalizations) can help distinguish nocturnal seizures from sleep disorders (show table 2), but individually these are neither specific nor sensitive [15]. A questionnaire that includes these features and scores their presence or absence according to likelihood of epileptic seizures has been developed and validated in a sample of 62 patients with paroxysmal nocturnal events [15]. In this study, this Frontal Lobe Epilepsy and Parasomnias (FLEP) Scale (show table 2) had a sensitivity of 100 percent and a specificity of 90 percent when compared with video-electroencephalogram monitoring, but additional validation studies are required. Recording episodes on video-EEG monitoring remains necessary when the diagnosis is unclear [16].

Transient ischemic attack — Transient ischemic attack — Transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) may last seconds to minutes. They are generally characterized by "negative" symptoms and signs (such as weakness or visual loss) rather than the "positive" symptoms and signs (eg, jerking movements, stiffening, or visual illusions or hallucinations) that generally accompany seizures. However, positive symptoms can occur in a TIA. As an example, so-called "limb-shaking TIAs" are a well described phenomenon associated with preocclusive disease in the contralateral internal carotid or middle cerebral artery.

Also, the postictal state after seizure may include lateralizing "negative" symptoms such as weakness, a phenomenon referred to as Todd's paralysis. If ictal symptoms were unobserved, the chief complaint may be one of primarily negative symptoms. Rarely, the seizure ictus itself is manifest as weakness, even paralysis of a limb or by speech arrest [17]. (See "Differential diagnosis of brain ischemia").

Transient global amnesia — Transient global amnesia (TGA) is a syndrome characterized by the acute onset of severe anterograde amnesia accompanied by retrograde amnesia, without other cognitive or focal neurologic impairment. The amnesia resolves within 24 hours. Most patients are middle aged or older adults. Episodes are usually not recurrent, but some patients have infrequent attacks that recur over several years.

The etiology of TGA is uncertain [18]. Most TGA episodes are probably related to vasoconstriction or migraine, but some may be caused by transient ischemia or complex partial seizures. TGA can be associated with small focal abnormalities on diffusion-weighted MRI [19-23], but the significance of these remains unclear.

Migraine — Migraine auras such as visual illusions and basilar migraine symptoms, including altered consciousness, can mimic complex partial seizures. Furthermore, the headache that follows complex partial and generalized tonic-clonic seizures is migrainous in quality and duration. (See "Complex partial seizures" below and see "Pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and diagnosis of migraine in adults").

CLINICAL FEATURES — The diagnostic evaluation of a first seizure begins with the history. An accurate description of the seizure may be difficult to obtain from the patient and witnesses; it is usually necessary to ask pointed questions about the circumstances leading up to the seizure, the ictal behaviors, and the postictal state. It is also worthwhile to inquire specifically whether the patient has had prior seizures, including febrile seizures in infancy, or other episodes that were not evaluated by a physician or that were labeled as something other than seizures.

Seizure precipitants or triggers — A key element in the history is whether a particular environmental or physiological precipitant or trigger immediately preceded the seizure. Some patients with epilepsy tend to have seizures under particular conditions, and their first seizure may provide a clue to their so-called seizure trigger. Triggers include (but are not limited to) strong emotions, intense exercise, loud music, and flashing lights. (See "Photic-induced seizures" below). These triggers are often experienced immediately before the seizure.

Other physiological conditions such as fever, the menstrual period, lack of sleep, and stress can also precipitate seizures, probably by lowering seizure threshold rather than directly causing a seizure. As a result, the temporal relationship to the presenting seizure is often less clear. Triggers may also precipitate physiological nonepileptic seizures (NES); a cough, for example, can bring on a syncopal seizure.

However, the majority of patients with epilepsy have no identifiable or consistent trigger to their seizures. In addition, triggers are the sole cause of epileptic seizures in only a very small percentage of patients.

**Photic-induced seizures — Photosensitivity has received considerable attention as a seizure trigger. The light stimulation may come from a natural or artificial source, in particular television shows and video games. The most famous incident occurred in relation to a Pokémon cartoon aired in 1997 in Japan in which 685 children (from an estimated 7 million viewers) sought medical attention for neurologic symptoms; most (about 80 percent) were felt to be seizures [24,25]. Three-fourths of the children had not experienced seizures previously.

A review of photic-induced seizures made the following epidemiologic observations [25]: Children are more susceptible to photic-induced seizures and photoparoxysmal electroencephalogram (EEG) changes than adults; and photosensitivity may decline in individuals with photic-induced seizures. A tendency for photic-induced seizures may be inherited. Photoconvulsive seizures are usually generalized, but they may be partial. Individuals may be sensitive to certain light triggers but not others. Women appear more susceptible, but males dominate in reports of video game-induced seizures, probably because they play them more.

The stimuli that are most likely to induce seizures appear to be identifiable. Guidelines for restricting use of specific signals on television broadcasts exist in Japan and Great Britain, and a working group has developed draft consensus guidelines in the United States [26].

While photosensitivity suggests seizures, it may not be specific to epilepsy. In one case report, a child with presumed photosensitive epilepsy was found to have visually-induced syncope with bradycardia followed by cardiac arrest, documented by EKG and normal EEG activity during the event [27].

Seizure symptoms and signs — The next step in the history is to identify the symptoms and signs (observed behaviors) that occurred throughout the seizure.

**Auras (simple partial seizures) — The symptoms that a patient experiences at the beginning of the seizure are referred to as the warning or aura. Auras are seizures that affect enough of the brain to cause symptoms, but not enough to interfere with consciousness. In the seizure classification system established by the International League Against Epilepsy, auras are called simple partial seizures (show table 3); "simple" means that consciousness is not impaired and "partial" means that only part of the cortex is disrupted by the seizure [28].

The symptoms of simple partial seizures vary from one patient to another and depend entirely on where the seizure originates in the brain, that is, the part of the cortex that is disrupted at the onset of the seizure. A seizure that begins in the occipital cortex may result in flashing lights, while a seizure that affects the motor cortex will result in rhythmic jerking movements of the face, arm, or leg on the side of the body opposite to the involved cortex (Jacksonian seizure).

Auras that commonly occur in patients with epilepsy are shown in the table (show table 4). These symptoms can also be experienced under other circumstances, but do not typically precede physiological NES. Thus, the occurrence of an aura supports the diagnosis of an epileptic seizure.

When a patient's first seizure was not preceded by a simple partial seizure, it is more difficult to distinguish whether it was an epileptic seizure or a NES. Many epileptic patients do not have a warning when their seizures start. Instead, they abruptly lose consciousness, which they may describe as blacking out, when the part of the cortex that controls memory is disrupted by the seizure. However, this process is not specific for epileptic seizures and therefore does not allow differentiation from NES.

**Complex partial seizures — The classification system for epileptic seizures includes several seizure types that are characterized by an abrupt loss of consciousness: complex partial seizures ("complex" means that consciousness and awareness of the surroundings are lost), absence seizures, and generalized tonic-clonic seizures (also known as convulsions; "tonic" refers to muscle stiffening and "clonic" refers to muscle jerking) (show table 3).

Complex partial seizures (previously called temporal lobe seizures or psychomotor seizures) are the most common type of seizure in epileptic adults. During the seizure patients appear to be awake but are not in contact with others in their environment and do not respond normally to instructions or questions. They often seem to stare into space and either remain motionless or engage in repetitive behaviors, called automatisms, such as facial grimacing, gesturing, chewing, lip smacking, snapping fingers, repeating words or phrases, walking, running, or undressing. Patients may become hostile or aggressive if physically restrained during complex partial seizures.

Complex partial seizures typically last less than three minutes and may be immediately preceded by a simple partial seizure. Afterward, the patient enters the postictal phase, often characterized by somnolence, confusion, and headache for up to several hours (show table 5). The patient has no memory of what took place during the seizure other than, perhaps, the aura.

The behaviors that typify complex partial seizures are not specific for epileptic seizures and may be observed in association with NES.

**Generalized seizures — In contrast to partial seizures, generalized seizures originate virtually in all the regions of the cortex. Absence seizures and generalized tonic-clonic seizures are types of generalized seizures. Other subtypes of generalized seizures are clonic, myoclonic, tonic, and atonic seizures. Absence seizures usually occur during childhood and typically last between 5 and 10 seconds. They frequently occur in clusters and may take place dozens or even hundreds of times a day. Absence seizures cause sudden staring with impaired consciousness. If an absence seizure lasts for 10 seconds or more, there may also be eye blinking and lip smacking. Absence seizures are discussed in greater detail separately. (See "Epilepsy syndromes in children", section on Absence seizures). A generalized tonic-clonic seizure (also called grand mal seizure, major motor seizure, or convulsion) is the most dramatic type of seizure (show table 6). It begins with an abrupt loss of consciousness, often in association with a scream or shriek. All of the muscles of the arms and legs as well as the chest and back then become stiff. The patient may begin to appear cyanotic during this tonic phase. After approximately one minute, the muscles begin to jerk and twitch for an additional one to two minutes. During this clonic phase the tongue can be bitten, and frothy and bloody sputum may be seen coming out of the mouth. The postictal phase begins once the twitching movements end. The patient is initially in a deep sleep, breathing deeply, and then gradually wakes up, often complaining of a headache. Clonic seizures cause rhythmical jerking muscle contractions that usually involve the arms, neck, and face. Myoclonic seizures consist of sudden, brief muscle contractions that may occur singly or in clusters and that can affect any group of muscles, although typically the arms are affected. Consciousness is usually not impaired. Tonic seizures cause sudden muscle stiffening, often associated with impaired consciousness and falling to the ground. Atonic seizures (also known as drop seizures or drop attacks) produce the opposite effect of tonic seizures — a sudden loss of control of the muscles, particularly of the legs, that results in collapsing to the ground and possible injuries.

The behaviors that typify absence seizures and generalized tonic-clonic seizures are not specific for epileptic seizures and may be observed in association with NES.

Other aspects of the patient history

**Medication history — There are a number of medications that have been associated with iatrogenic seizures [8,29]. Partial-onset seizures are less likely to be drug-induced than generalized tonic-clonic seizures.

**Past medical history — There are a number of risk factors for epileptic seizures that should be addressed, including head injury, stroke, Alzheimer's disease, history of intracranial infection, and alcohol or drug abuse.

**Family history — A positive family history of seizures is highly suggestive that the patient has epilepsy. In particular, absence seizures and myoclonic seizures may be inherited. Occasionally, a family member does not have seizures but has an abnormal electroencephalogram.

Physical and neurologic examination — The physical examination is generally unrevealing in patients with epileptic seizures, but is important when central nervous system infection or hemorrhage are diagnostic possibilities. The neurologic examination should evaluate for lateralizing abnormalities, such as weakness, hyperreflexia, or a positive Babinski sign, that may point to a contralateral structural brain lesion.

DIAGNOSTIC STUDIES

Laboratory screening — Laboratory evaluations that are appropriate for the evaluation of a first seizure include glucose, calcium, magnesium, hematology studies, renal function tests, and toxicology screens. Tests for porphyria may be considered under appropriate clinical circumstances. Some laboratory abnormalities such as metabolic acidosis and leukocytosis may occur as a result of the seizure; thus, abnormal test results detected immediately after the seizure has occurred should be repeated.

**Prolactin — Serum prolactin assessment has limited utility as a diagnostic test for epileptic seizures [30]. The serum prolactin concentration may rise shortly after generalized tonic-clonic seizures and some partial seizures. Typically, a level is drawn 10 to 20 minutes after the event and compared with a baseline level drawn six hours later. Criteria for abnormality are not well established; many investigators use twice the baseline level.

A systematic review made the following conclusions regarding prolactin as a diagnostic test for epileptic seizures [31]: Pooled sensitivity was higher for generalized tonic-clonic seizures than for partial complex seizures (60 versus 46 percent). An elevated serum prolactin level can be useful in differentiating generalized tonic-clonic and partial complex seizures from psychogenic seizures in adults and older children. The positive predictive value is greater than 93 percent, if the pretest probability is 50 percent or higher. Because of low sensitivity, a normal prolactin level is insufficient to exclude epileptic seizures or support a psychogenic diagnosis. Some studies suggest that prolactin rises after syncope. Prolactin levels cannot be used to differentiate seizure from syncope. Insufficient data preclude conclusions regarding the utility of prolactin levels after simple partial seizures, repetitive seizures, status epilepticus, and in neonates.

Lumbar puncture — A lumbar puncture is essential if the clinical presentation is suggestive of an acute infectious process that involves the central nervous system or the patient has a history of cancer that is known to metastasize to the meninges. In other circumstances the test is not likely to be helpful and may be misleading since a prolonged seizure itself can cause cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis. Lumbar puncture should only be performed after a space occupying brain lesion has been excluded by appropriate neuroimaging studies.

Electroencephalography — The electroencephalogram (EEG) is an essential study in the diagnostic evaluation of epileptic seizures. If abnormal, the EEG may aid in confirming the diagnosis of epileptic seizures and also indicate whether a patient has generalized or partial seizures. Use of sleep deprivation and provocative measures during the test, such as hyperventilation and intermittent photic stimulation, increase the yield [32,33]. In one study of 85 individuals, sleep deprivation resulted in a higher rate of focal discharges than routine EEG (13 versus 7 percent) [33]. An abnormal EEG that confirms the clinical diagnosis of epilepsy substantially increases the likelihood that the patient will experience a second seizure over the next two years [34].

However, a normal EEG does not rule out epilepsy, and many EEG abnormalities are nonspecific. As an example, both generalized and focal slowing are common in patients with migraine headaches. Diffuse slowing may also occur with a wide variety of encephalopathies or in association with some medications, especially at high dosages. Epileptiform abnormalities are usually more informative than less specific changes.

Neuroimaging — A neuroimaging study should be done to exclude a structural brain abnormality if the patient's first seizure was clearly not a physiological NES. Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is preferred over computed tomography (CT) to identify specific lesions such as cortical dysplasias, infarcts, or tumors. Nevertheless, a brain CT scan is suitable to exclude a mass lesion, hemorrhage, or large stroke under emergency situations or if an MRI is unavailable or contraindicated (eg, in patients with pacemakers, non-compatible aneurysm clips, or severe claustrophobia).

The value of neuroimaging in the evaluation of adults with a first seizure was demonstrated in a retrospective review of CTs in 148 patients studied within 30 days of the seizure [35]. The cause of seizure was established in 71 patients (48 percent); a structural lesion was identified by CT in 55, 16 had metabolic seizures, and the remainder were idiopathic. CT findings agreed with the results of neurologic and EEG examination in 82 percent of cases. However, structural lesions (including three tumors) were found by CT in an additional 14 patients (15 percent) with nonfocal findings.

Structural abnormalities on brain MRI or CT usually suggest a symptomatic, focal-onset epilepsy syndrome, but these findings should not be interpreted in isolation. In two case series, 22 to 24 percent of patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy had structural neuroimaging abnormalities [35,36]. Most of these findings, however, were nonspecific (eg, white matter and basal ganglia abnormalities, cortical atrophy).

In young to middle-aged adults, common MRI findings are mesial temporal sclerosis, sequelae of head injury, congenital anomalies, brain tumors, and vascular lesions. In the elderly, MRIs often reveal strokes, cerebral degeneration, or neoplasms. However, up to 50 percent of patients, regardless of age, have normal neuroimaging studies. The utility of brain MRI in children presenting with a seizure is discussed separately. (See "Clinical and laboratory diagnosis of seizures in infants and children", section on Neuroimaging).

WHEN TO START ANTIEPILEPTIC THERAPY — The decision to initiate therapy with antiepileptic drugs is often difficult. This topic is discussed separately. (See "Overview of the management of epilepsy in adults", section Antiepileptic drug therapy).

PSYCHOSOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS — Newly diagnosed patients with epilepsy may suffer a number of losses, including loss of independence, employment, insurance, ability to drive, and self-esteem. As the treatment plan is formulated, these psychosocial issues should be explored with patients so that appropriate referrals for additional help and counseling can be initiated.

Driving — States vary widely in driver licensing requirements for patients with epilepsy [37]. This topic is discussed in more detail elsewhere. (See "Driving restrictions for patients with seizures and epilepsy").

HOSPITALIZATION — Hospitalization may be required for patients who have a first seizure associated with a prolonged postictal state or incomplete recovery. Other indications for hospitalization include status epilepticus, the presence of a systemic illness that may require treatment, a history of head trauma, or questions regarding compliance.

REFERRAL — Many primary care physicians do not feel comfortable with the initial evaluation and management of patients with seizures and refer them to neurologists. All patients in whom the diagnosis is in question should be referred to a neurologist. Other indications for referral include focal findings on the neurologic examination or EEG, or a history suggestive of a focal seizure. Some experts believe that all patients with suspected seizures should be referred to a specialist [38].

CONCLUSIONS — The primary objectives of the medical evaluation of the first seizure are to establish whether it resulted from a correctable systemic process, and if not, whether the patient is at risk for developing further unprovoked seizures. A careful history, physical and neurologic examinations, and laboratory evaluation are usually helpful in achieving these objectives and determining the appropriate therapeutic approach. Referral to a specialist is indicated for most persons suspected of having a seizure, especially if focal features are present on examination or testing.


Use of UpToDate is subject to the Subscription and License Agreement. REFERENCES 1.*Chang, BS, Lowenstein, DH. Epilepsy. N Engl J Med 2003; 349:1257.
2. *Vossler, DG. Nonepileptic seizures of physiologic origin. J Epilepsy 1995; 8:1.
3.*Alper, K, Devinsky, O, Perrine, K, et al. Psychiatric classification of nonconversion nonepileptic seizures. Arch Neurol 1995; 52:199.
4. *Bortz, JJ. Nonepileptic seizures: issues in differential diagnosis and treatment. CNS Spectrums 1997; 2:20.
5.*Berg, AT, Shinnar, S. The risk of seizure recurrence following a first unprovoked seizure: a quantitative review. Neurology 1991; 41:965.
6.*Camfield, PR, Camfield, CS, Dooley, JM, et al. Epilepsy after a first unprovoked seizure in childhood. Neurology 1985; 35:1657.
7.*Willmore, LJ. Epilepsy emergencies: the first seizure and status epilepticus. Neurology 1998; 51:S34.
8.*Schachter, SC. Iatrogenic seizures. Neurol Clin 1998; 16:157.
9.*Schold, C, Yarnell, PR, Earnest, MP. Origin of seizures in elderly patients. JAMA 1977; 238:1177.
10.*Sander, JW, Hart, YM, Johnson, AL, Shorvon, SD. National General Practice Study of Epilepsy: newly diagnosed epileptic seizures in a general population. Lancet 1990; 336:1267.
11.*Cleary, P, Shorvon, S, Tallis, R. Late-onset seizures as a predictor of subsequent stroke. Lancet 2004; 363:1184.
12.*Annegers, JF, Hauser, WA, Coan, SP, Rocca, WA. A population-based study of seizures after traumatic brain injuries. N Engl J Med 1998; 338:20.
13.*Temkin, NR. Antiepileptogenesis and seizure prevention trials with antiepileptic drugs: meta-analysis of controlled trials. Epilepsia 2001; 42:515.
14.*Bazil, CW. Nocturnal seizures. Semin Neurol 2004; 24:293.
15.*Derry, CP, Davey, M, Johns, M, et al. Distinguishing sleep disorders from seizures: diagnosing bumps in the night. Arch Neurol 2006; 63:705.
16.*Derry, CP, Duncan, JS, Berkovic, SF. Paroxysmal motor disorders of sleep: the clinical spectrum and differentiation from epilepsy. Epilepsia 2006; 47:1775.
17.*Villani, F, D'Amico, D, Pincherle, A, et al. Prolonged focal negative motor seizures: a video-EEG study. Epilepsia 2006; 47:1949.
18. *Caplan, LR. Transient global amnesia. In: Handbook of Clinical Neurology, vol 1 (46), Clinical Neuropsychology, Frederiks, JAM (Ed), Vinken, PJ, Bruyn, GW, Klawans (Eds), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1985. p.205.
19.*Woolfenden, AR, O'Brien, MW, Schwartzberg, RE, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in transient global amnesia precipitated by cerebral angiography. Stroke 1997; 28:2311.
20.*Strupp, M, Bruning, R, Wu, RH, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in transient global amnesia: elevated signal intensity in the left mesial temporal lobe in 7 of 10 patients. Ann Neurol 1998; 43:164.
21.*Ay, H, Furie, KL, Yamada, K, Koroshetz, WJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI characterizes the ischemic lesion in transient global amnesia. Neurology 1998; 51:901.
22.*Sedlaczek, O, Hirsch, JG, Grips, E, et al. Detection of delayed focal MR changes in the lateral hippocampus in transient global amnesia. Neurology 2004; 62:2165.
23.*Huber, R, Aschoff, AJ, Ludolph, AC, Riepe, MW. Transient Global Amnesia. Evidence against vascular ischemic etiology from diffusion weighted imaging. J Neurol 2002; 249:1520.
24.*Takada, H, Aso, K, Watanabe, K, et al. Epileptic seizures induced by animated cartoon, "Pocket Monster". Epilepsia 1999; 40:997.
25.*Fisher, RS, Harding, G, Erba, G, et al. Photic- and pattern-induced seizures: a review for the Epilepsy Foundation of America Working Group. Epilepsia 2005; 46:1426.
26.*Harding, G, Wilkins, AJ, Erba, G, et al. Photic- and pattern-induced seizures: expert consensus of the Epilepsy Foundation of America Working Group. Epilepsia 2005; 46:1423.
27.*Seri, S, Cerquiglini, A, Harding, GF. Visually induced syncope: a nonepileptic manifestation of visual sensitivity?. Neurology 2006; 67:359.
28. *Proposal for revised classification of epilepsies and epileptic syndromes. Commission on Classification and Terminology of the International League Against Epilepsy. Epilepsia 1989; 30:389.
29. *Dallos, V, Heathfield, K. Iatrogenic epilepsy due to antidepressant drugs. Br Med J 1969; 4:80.
30.*Shukla, G, Bhatia, M, Vivekanandhan, S, et al. Serum prolactin levels for differentiation of nonepileptic versus true seizures: limited utility. Epilepsy Behav 2004; 5:517.
31.*Chen, DK, So, YT, Fisher, RS. Use of serum prolactin in diagnosing epileptic seizures: report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2005; 65:668.
32.*Shinnar, S, Kang, H, Berg, AT, et al. EEG abnormalities in children with a first unprovoked seizure. Epilepsia 1994; 35:471.
33.*Leach, JP, Stephen, LJ, Salveta, C, Brodie, MJ. Which electroencephalography (EEG) for epilepsy? The relative usefulness of different EEG protocols in patients with possible epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006; 77:1040.
34.*van Donselaar, CA, Schimsheimer, RJ, Geerts, AT, Declerck, AC. Value of the electroencephalogram in adult patients with untreated idiopathic first seizures. Arch Neurol 1992; 49:231.
35.*Ramirez-Lassepas, M, Cipolle, RJ, Morillo, LR, Gumnit, RJ. Value of computed tomographic scan in the evaluation of adult patients after their first seizure. Ann Neurol 1984; 15:536.
36.*Betting, LE, Mory, SB, Lopes-Cendes, I, et al. MRI reveals structural abnormalities in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy. Neurology 2006; 67:848.
37.*Krauss, GL, Ampaw, L, Krumholz, A. Individual state driving restrictions for people with epilepsy in the US. Neurology 2001; 57:1780.
38. *National Institute for Clinical Excellence (UK). The epilepsies: the diagnosis and management of the epilepsies in adults and children in primary and secondary care. NICE Clinical Guideline 20, Oct. 2004. www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=229249 (Accessed 3/7/05).
New Search Contents My UpToDate CME 5.5 Help

©2007 UpToDate® • www.uptodate.com
And that is how many references would come with a well researched medical article, respected by professionals in the medical community.


It does not matter what you have or have not to prove. Other users who read your one sided approach to prayer and healing need to know some facts that you fail to include such as the point I made. "preying is a great placebo, and only works if the person is aware that they are being prayed for" indeed as I have already pointed out, for some awareness someone is praying for them has a detrimental effect on post recovery.
I think it is awfully presumptuous of you, not to mention almost bordering on a grand delusion to think people are so driven and empty as to misconstrue what you write or what any one writes and take it at face value-- oh leader of the pack and a holder of the flame the last of the "free thought crusader" who has come to knock us out of our juvenile medieval thought processes.
Again, facts are presented from well-respected institutions and the reader whomever he or she maybe hopefully isn't an empty vessel ready to imbue whatever garbage is spewed no matter how authoritatively written!

co-exist, hardly. I would NEVER live under Sharia law and thankfully I don't need to, tolerarate belief I do, however I would not sit back and allow for example several archbishops who claimed this week that the floods in the UK are due to God's punishment for moral decline anymore than I would tolerate accepting a homophobic throw them off the highest cliff attitude of Islam.
You are under some false assumption that what you want or can never tolerate is somehow of biblical importance? ( did I give you a false impression that what you can or cannot tolerate somehow matters of affects me or others on this forum?) eh it is ok--If you can't co-exist then gladtiding indeed-- pls ask a mod to disable your account and take a few of your buddies with you ( I think at this point we are all wasting each other's time). If I wanted a forum to support and foster my views I'd join one, in fact I have! you on the other hand seem to be better suited for the Dawkin's forum?! I am not sure why you waste your time here? Do you think they who navaigated with their fingers to this forum can't navigate to another of opposite views? I'd like to think everyone is here by choice... you in my humble opinion yet again seem like an abrasive character who is condescending and patronizing to almost if not totally to everyone who is Muslim(we don't share your mental veil or as you'd like to think "enlightenment") , so why not be more happy with like minds spending endless hours with you in agreement?..

Lastly, I don't care much for the church or its dark ages which continue on the same path, nothing you or any devout Christian member here will be of actual consequence when you tie the two together.. and it is in fact a non-sequitur to compare what an Archbishop said to Islamic Sharia law.. they are based on completely different fundamentals.. one has led its folks to the path of enlightenment, the other has led its folks to its darkest period of history.. there is simply no comparison!

My world view is far from sterile, it's awesome to see.
Again good for you! in my humble opinion you and everything in your world is so very uni-dimensional, and extremely sterile ( Kal' An3am, ball Adhal Sabeelan!) I'd if you had a humane quality about you, I'd almost feel sorry for you (but I don't) and you represent your ilk well!... To me life is a beautiful interweaved integration of the sciences the arts, politics, literature, history, theology, philosophy, nature, social structure ideas and beliefs, one field simply can't impose its presence without the full-fledged influence of the others, a Tree isn't made up of just one leaf; And if it were, it is probably in a very ailing state!
The mind is like a parachute, it's useless unless it is open!
Also very useless if your mind..er parachute is full of holes.. better not to take flight at all than to crash miserably .. there is nothing worst than ignorance short of little knowledge or feigning it in my humble opinion!
 
Last edited:
If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts, but if he will content to begin with doubts, he shall end in certainties. . ~ Francis Bacon
 
^^ I am not sure what this has to do with the topic but thank you!.. at a risk of extending this beyond where it needs to go, we'll let the wisdom and locutions of dead philosophers solve all our problems with boldness composure and equanimity!

peace!
 
new scientist isn't accepted by the medical community as a magazine worthy of mention... it is in fact digested by-product for lay folk such as yourself!

You misunderstand the purpose of the new scientist and obviously have never even read it. Your typical blinkered tunnel vision is preventing you from seeing the obvious. It's a wekly science magazine reporting current news across the sciences.

you want peer reviewed you subscribe to uptodate and you show them your Hospital ID or student ID. It is $400 and most current on latest research.. the other magazines the medical community accepts and has out are (NEJM, Lancet, JAMA)

Great, $400 to subscribe to obtain my source for the life sciences which is what medical science belongs to. Tell, me since you apparantly seem to know it all. Would that subscription for the "Medical Community" as part of the Life Science give me access to the other branches of that science Botany, Zoology Genetics. Would it also include access to the Earth Sciences (Geology, Oceanography, Paleontology, Meteorology) and The Physical sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy)?

A simple yes or no will suffice here. I look forward to the Yes or No answer!

every subfield has its own journal as well but New Sci. isn't one of them!-- They all share some peer reviewed journals, offer latest research and studies, speak of new meds etc , if a resident showed up on grand rounds or liver rounds or even student rounds with a report from "new scientist" he'd be thoroughly laughed at, the same way we laugh at your Ostentatiously lofty posts!!

Your blinkered tunnel vision again. The NS (New Scientist) reports news from across the whole of the sciences & is not for one specific science, so your time consuming response has been wasted.

I am glad you know that, then please stop quoting me dross.. it is a waste of precious time...

The NS reports medical science news and new peer reviewed publications within them. I hope this clarifies it for you.

good for you The actual article not clipped to be suitable for your shallow viewing it is in the Lancet for $35.. again a worthy article comes with a price! and a hefty one and not offered to folk on the streets or through a magazine stand or a subscription...

WRONG. (Again). Actually the article can be obtained from The Lancet free of charge, you can register (for free) to access the paper. When I did, I found it interesting that your source in which you posted here was dated 2001:

http://www.islamicboard.com/health-science/45379-scientific-effects-saying-allah-2.html

This paper of yours from the initial MANTRA study concluded the following which I have taken from your post which is linked above:

This is an important study because it provides preliminary information suggestive of a positive effect that needs further study in a larger study sample," said Dr. Harold G. Koenig, associate professor of psychiatry at Duke University Medical Center, and one of the study authors. "Some of the greatest scientific achievements have come from those who step outside of the box, and I believe that is what this study does. The results tend to lean toward prayer helping people, but more study is needed."

Research is continuing. Phase II of the MANTRA project has already enrolled nearly 500 patients out of an enrollment target of 1,500 patients. The larger study is underway at nine sites throughout the U.S., including Duke University Medical Center, Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, Washington Heart Center in Washington, Abbott Northwestern Hospital in Minneapolis, Scripps Clinic/Scripps Mercy Hospitals in San Diego, Geisinger Clinic in Danville, Pa., Florida Cardiovascular Center in Atlantis, Fla., and the Durham VAMC.

Preliminary data from this pilot study were previously reported at the 71st meeting of the American Heart Association in 1998. The American Heart Journal article represents the complete, tabulated, peer-reviewed results of the phase I study.

So you posted a preliminary study AKA MANTRA which called for more study AKA MANTRA II when MANTRA II study had already been completed and available for free via the Lancet, here is a little snippet for you:

We applaud Mitchell Krucoff and colleagues (July 16, p 211)1 and The Lancet editors2 for publishing an extensive, well controlled, multisite study on prayer and healing. The Article and accompanying Editorial note that prayer had no significant effect on outcome in 748 heart patients.1,2 Study of the intangible is challenging, and the researchers should be recognised for their insight and courage.

Source:http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673605677185/fulltext

[otherwise every charlatan and quasi intellect is a would be connoisseur?.. if I wanted to do more research in say what I consider to be an alteration of neuronal function thus exacerbating your grand-mal type seizures,

It was very sneaky and devious of you to post MANTRA I which indicated support for your position and conveniantly forget that MANTRA II was a more recent study aimed at confirming the findings of MANTRA I, the problem was it did the opposite.

Here is the peer reviewed journal on the Lancet:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673605669103/fulltext

(please note FREE registration is required to view it)

.
which leads you in turn to this erratic bahavior on various posts, I pay my fees like most respected individuals and look it up in a worthy source before I make false assumptions, like so...
And that is how many references would come with a well researched medical article, respected by professionals in the medical community.,

Indeed. Further, we should make sure our peer reviewed sources are actually not out of date and that the futher and most recent studies are used else you may end up with egg on your face like you undoubtably have.

I think it is awfully presumptuous of you, not to mention almost bordering on a grand delusion to think people are so driven and empty as to misconstrue what you write or what any one writes and take it at face value--

SNIP.,

So true Purest, afterall your outdated initial study may have been accepted as the authorative most recent study. Good job we never took it at face value eh


You are under some false assumption that what you want or can never tolerate is somehow of biblical importance? ( did I give you a false impression that what you can or cannot tolerate somehow matters of affects me or others on this forum?) eh it is ok--If you can't co-exist then gladtiding indeed-- pls ask a mod to disable your account and take a few of your buddies with you ( I think at this point we are all wasting each other's time). If I wanted a forum to support and foster my views I'd join one, in fact I have! you on the other hand seem to be better suited for the Dawkin's forum?! I am not sure why you waste your time here? Do you think they who navaigated with their fingers to this forum can't navigate to another of opposite views? I'd like to think everyone is here by choice... you in my humble opinion yet again seem like an abrasive character who is condescending and patronizing to almost if not totally to everyone who is Muslim(we don't share your mental veil or as you'd like to think "enlightenment") , so why not be more happy with like minds spending endless hours with you in agreement?...,

Your ranting, calm down my dear you may suffer a grand mal seizure :D

Also very useless if your mind..er parachute is full of holes.. better not to take flight at all than to crash miserably .. there is nothing worst than ignorance short of little knowledge or feigning it in my humble opinion!

Totally agree, and as I have exposed your trickery with outdated peer review journals and shown that indeed your parachute has more holes than swiss chesse.

Can we now finally put this to bed.

Conclusion

Prayer healing is no better than a piece of chalk.
 
THis is a long long thread with a lot to read. I don't know if this has been mentioned before. But I just received in email today. I have no sorce for it either. Mayb our forums memebers can do a research on it. As it is related to this subject I am pasting it:

Scientist has proved that the sound which comes from heart beat is LUB DUB.
But now they analyze that it is RUB RUB... RUB is an Arabic
word which means who made each n everythin.... That is
ALLAH............So
it means every heart beat says ALLAH ALLAH............. If u believe
in this...........fwd dis to all ur FRNDS
 
^^ I am not sure what this has to do with the topic but thank you!.. at a risk of extending this beyond where it needs to go, we'll let the wisdom and locutions of dead philosophers solve all our problems with boldness composure and equanimity!

peace!

You're welcome! Sometimes it's nice to have a little randomness in life. :smile:
 
THis is a long long thread with a lot to read. I don't know if this has been mentioned before. But I just received in email today. I have no sorce for it either. Mayb our forums memebers can do a research on it. As it is related to this subject I am pasting it:

Scientist has proved that the sound which comes from heart beat is LUB DUB.
But now they analyze that it is RUB RUB... RUB is an Arabic
word which means who made each n everythin.... That is
ALLAH............So
it means every heart beat says ALLAH ALLAH............. If u believe
in this...........fwd dis to all ur FRNDS

OK Need I even say anything? It's a lovely thought AmarFaisal, it really would be amazing wouldn't it. But its very easy for someone to fabricate a harmless chain e-mail like this, and it's easily done for those that don't have those good intentions, but quite the opposite.

I'm not going go on about this like a stuck record, but I will refer you back to my original point which was not on the subject matter but more involving the willingness of general folk to accept any old information thrown at them.

We're all guilty of it - for example just think about when you read the paper or watch the news..... but that's another thread!

:p
 
OK Need I even say anything? It's a lovely thought AmarFaisal, it really would be amazing wouldn't it. But its very easy for someone to fabricate a harmless chain e-mail like this, and it's easily done for those that don't have those good intentions, but quite the opposite.

I'm not going go on about this like a stuck record, but I will refer you back to my original point which was not on the subject matter but more involving the willingness of general folk to accept any old information thrown at them.

We're all guilty of it - for example just think about when you read the paper or watch the news..... but that's another thread!

:p
see i always thought the heart went,
rub a dub dub..

of course no telling what that may say in another language..... ;)
 
You misunderstand the purpose of the new scientist and obviously have never even read it. Your typical blinkered tunnel vision is preventing you from seeing the obvious. It's a wekly science magazine reporting current news across the sciences.
This concerns me how?

Great, $400 to subscribe to obtain my source for the life sciences which is what medical science belongs to. Tell, me since you apparantly seem to know it all. Would that subscription for the "Medical Community" as part of the Life Science give me access to the other branches of that science Botany, Zoology Genetics. Would it also include access to the Earth Sciences (Geology, Oceanography, Paleontology, Meteorology) and The Physical sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy)?
Medicine is indeed all encompassing of all the other sciences .. it doesn't exist without the support and build on other sciences , you couldn't have medicine without Genetics, or physiology or biochemistry or pathology or pharmacology etc etc.. again what is your point? This particular article came out in two medical journals initially the study conducted by Duke university ( a univ. very dear to my heart) but I digress... The study wasn't offered us courtesy of botanists world or zoologists city or from oceanographer anonymous.. in the very least pls try to be consistent without side tracking us with tangential off topic posts!

A simple yes or no will suffice here. I look forward to the Yes or No answer!
See above


Your blinkered tunnel vision again. The NS (New Scientist) reports news from across the whole of the sciences & is not for one specific science, so your time consuming response has been wasted.
It hasn't saved you from being redundant though? with every 'new' paragraph I am flashing back to the one previous.. are you really in that much need of validation? :lol:

The NS reports medical science news and new peer reviewed publications within them. I hope this clarifies it for you.
WRONG. (Again). Actually the article can be obtained from The Lancet free of charge, you can register (for free) to access the paper. When I did, I found it interesting that your source in which you posted here was dated 2001:

http://www.islamicboard.com/health-science/45379-scientific-effects-saying-allah-2.html

This paper of yours from the initial MANTRA study concluded the following which I have taken from your post which is linked above:
So you posted a preliminary study AKA MANTRA which called for more study AKA MANTRA II when MANTRA II study had already been completed and available for free via the Lancet, here is a little snippet for you:Source:http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673605677185/fulltext

It was very sneaky and devious of you to post MANTRA I which indicated support for your position and conveniantly forget that MANTRA II was a more recent study aimed at confirming the findings of MANTRA I, the problem was it did the opposite.
Here is the peer reviewed journal on the Lancet:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673605669103/fulltext
(please note FREE registration is required to view it)
Indeed. Further, we should make sure our peer reviewed sources are actually not out of date and that the futher and most recent studies are used else you may end up with egg on your face like you undoubtably have.
so true Purest, afterall your outdated initial study may have been accepted as the authorative most recent study. Good job we never took it at face value eh
Your ranting, calm down my dear you may suffer a grand mal seizure :D
Totally agree, and as I have exposed your trickery with outdated peer review journals and shown that indeed your parachute has more holes than swiss chesse.
Can we now finally put this to bed.
Conclusion
Prayer healing is no better than a piece of chalk.


You are droll and hyperbolic! -- Rather than take the time answering your usual glib queries. I'll demonstrate your vacuity in a couple of paragraphs ...
I haven't the time to play your terpsichore on this forum or any other for that matter! I am not sure how to reduce terms to a more plebeian level to spark your linear understanding? Is it the monolithic insulation of fat that is concentric around your brain proper that disables you from understanding things from a very low common denominator? Again there is difference between what you buy on the stand, what is available to you as lay man even from a medical journal when you sign in as a GUEST --(which by the way I was the one who pointed your attention to)...and that whic is offered the medical community. I believe I have demonstrated that adequately with the uptodate article above .. further a couple of posts ago demonstrated how the [public/ 'patient'] booklet differs significantly, that can still be seen and compared in a post so entitled 'gilbertson's disease'!

Medicine is indeed the mother of all sciences, given your lilliputian cognition, I have no hope or expectations of you knowing what that entails-- nor am I surprised by your usual discharge of bull. I can pose for you a couple of questions that would have you in a stupor for days, neither your busy finger , or you transmissible spongiform encephalopathic mind, your google and especially not your new scientist would avail you..

How many respected institutions are running the same simultaneous studies and putting out different papers, with subtle nuances, different outcome, what makes one study superior to another? which ones would go in the discard pile and which would be given a second glance? Do two studies of the same nature with different outcomes nullify each other? Does one have superiority over another? What are the confounders? How does the outcome of one group compare to the outcome of another in something this visceral? was there observer bias or expectations? a hawthorne effect? Do you know?

Rather than go through the painstaking task of debunking another one of your pronunciamento, further humiliating and rousing you from your state of child like glee. I'll ask you instead if your NS has presented you with similar peer reviewed studies on the following cardiac issues since, to me frankly if you are not a scientist by profession with some understanding on how to navigate though research articles, it becomes highly suspicious to let you in on THE ONE study that fosters your impressions and beliefs and discards the rest:
For instance Did new scientist offer you the latest research articles on how to manage a heart failure patient, one with super imposed diabetes? Did it give you the latest research on how to manage someone with high risk coronary artery disease along with triglyceridemia? How about research on how to manage someone with hypertension with chronic renal failure? what is the latest research on someone with left ventricular hypertrophy who has had a previous stroke? How about HTN in someone with Wegener's granulomatosis? which study do you think is more impressive on how to manage someone with cor pulmonale? How about the research on how to manage someone with an arrhythmias as a result of Chagas Disease (trypanosomiasis), with concomitant dilation of the heart, esophagus and colon. which study is most beneficial when it comes to the RX. of Wolff-Parkinson-White Syndrome? do you think giving someone Digioxin in that condition would be most suitable?--How about someone with pre-renal azotemia, already in congestive heart failure and is volume over loaded and third spaced??

Did it give you a second comparative parallel study on when amiodarone would be of any benefit? How about its useage in someone with arrhythmia along with pulmonary fibrosis? Do you know when the situation would call for adenosine given that the pt. would go into arrest for the first 30 seconds or so? was there a paper telling you when to use class Ia antiarrhythmics? has new scientist offered you the latest research on Quinidine in Short QT Syndrome? did it offer you the latest study on when disopyramide would be of more benefit? how about the latest study on sotalol, or dofetilide, or ibutilide or when any of them would be of use? when is it best to go for a mechanical valve? and in that case how would one deal with all the mechanical hemolysis with schistocytes?

Did New scientist offer you from one of the thousands of research articles out there the one on the benefits monotherapy with a diuretic?.. did it tell you which two heart meds. have the highest risk when used together in what patient population? Do you know when to use a beta blocker, or an ACE inhibitor, or calcium-channel blocker-- the Non-dihydropyridines type.. do you know when it is time for a cardiac cardiac glycoside?.. was there a research article in there telling you how to distinguish between an Aortic dissection from an angina or a cardiac arrest, pericarditis from restrictive heart disease? Did it offer you research on what meds to adminster in someone with peaked T waves of the EKG? or what to do in the case of J waves? How about in the case of a Myxoma? It seems the heart indeed doesn't have a prayer-- let's branch out to other fields since NS is all about the sciences what is the latest research techniques on how to distinguish Mesenteric fibromatosis from gastrointestinal stromal tumors with a better outcome for the patients?

Did NS give you a nice intro on how to tell the superiority of one study over another in terms of (P) value? in terms of (relative Risk assessment) in terms of confounders? in terms of observer bias?? in terms of pt. population?--
If your fingers found there way to dorland or equivalent medical dictionary, to look up half of those terminologies along with appropriate studies and treatment!.. then please stop exerting your feelings of cultural, emotional and scientific superiority when it is clearely nonexistent!
If I had more time I'd make this much more painful for you Just for the mere pleasure of it.. but what I have written, and what I always write is for the Muslims on board. You have lost all value in my eyes as a credible human being!-- and frankly I don't even want to give you leverage in the form of reply no matter how remote! (I thought we were mutually on the other's ignore list?) I believe the ethical thing for you to do is honor your own words?-- there is something cowardly and ignoble in your attitude -- that makes me actually glad you are who and what you are-- a unidemensional finite Atheist with a dandy Subscription to NS (ib'aa khleeha tinfa3ak ya fali7!)...
la ba'as-- enjoy!
peace!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top