Cranio-sacral Therapy

[Homeoskeptic]

I think you actually need to go away and read up about what craniosacral therapy is. It does not consist of tapping at all as you call it. I don't know what kind of practitioners you have had, but obviously ones who do not know what they are doing and who are not properly trained.

Do the reading and then you just may have some sensible comments to make that are worthwhile reading or listening to!!

 

[MRC_Hans]

Perhaps, Homeoskeptic (isn't it time you changed that handle?), but do you have any comments to the description offered in the link below?

Skeptic's Dictionary: Craniosacral therapy

SkepDic is a goldmine of information.

Hans

 

[Rolfe]

I don't know what kind of practitioners you have had, but obviously ones who do not know what they are doing and who are not properly trained.

Oh, we're back to "No True Scotsman" again. Just as all the controlled studies that found no effect of homoeopathy, although they were designed in co-operation with homoeopaths, failed because these homoeopaths were "not true homoeopaths". But Naturalhealth just doesn't want to be bothered designing studies that would amaze us all, s/he's too busy "treating patients" (for that, read "ripping off the gullible").

Typical quack, if it doesn't work it's because the practitioner involved wasn't doing it right. But this doesn't mean that a test should be set up to see if it works if it is "done right" (of course, if that didn't work, we'd just have someone else saying that no, that wasn't the right way to do it either....), or that there should be any sort of regulation introduced to ascertain what the "right" way to do it actually is, and ensure that only people who are doing it "right" are allowed to practise.

Oh dear, I have to go and check my Quality Assessment scores now, to make sure that all our assay systems are performing to tolerance. I think I'm in the wrong job!

Rolfe.

 

[Psiload]

I think you actually need to go away and read up about what craniosacral therapy is. It does not consist of tapping at all as you call it. I don't know what kind of practitioners you have had, but obviously ones who do not know what they are doing and who are not properly trained.

Do the reading and then you just may have some sensible comments to make that are worthwhile reading or listening to!!

I took your advice and I did just that. Thanks for the suggestion. My research revealed some facts that solidified my opinion of "Dr." Upledger in general, and craniosacral therapy in particular. Here are some of the gems I discovered:

From "Dr." Upledger's book- Touchstone of Natural Healing:

By connecting deeply with a patient while doing CranioSacral Therapy, it was possible in most cases to solicit contact with the patient's Inner Physician. It also became clear that the Inner Physician could take any for m the patient could imagine -- an image, a voice or a feeling. Usually once the image of the Inner Physician appeared, it was ready to dialog with me and answer questions about the underlying causes of the patient's health problems and what can be done to resolve them. It also became clear that when the conversation with the Inner Physician was authentic, the craniosacral system went into a holding pattern

And this zinger describing a conversation between "Dr." Upledger and an infant's "inner physician":

I requested aloud in English that the craniosacral rhythm stop if the answer to a question was "yes" and not stop if the answer was "no." The rhythm stopped for about ten seconds. I took this as an indication that I was being understood. I then asked if it was possible during this session for the rhythm to stop only in response to my question and not for other reasons, such as body position, etc., The rhythm stopped again. I was feeling more confident. I proceeded.

Or how about "Dr." Upledger advising one of his patients to attach a long copper wire between herself and a kitchen drain in order to drain the excess energy from her body?

Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

 

[Homeoskeptic]

One of these days I will design my own trial for homeopathy.

Treating patients is actually the best way of proving that it actually works. I have cases and cases that have got better over my years of practice. Perhaps I should publish some of my cases sometimes so you can see. This is all evidence that it most certainly works.

That is the difference here though, I actually value my patients and spending time with them and treating them rather than reading all these trials that are totally inconclusive anyway. That is a lot more than can be said for you and yes Rolfe, you said it mate, you most definitely are in the wrong job, so I won't hold my breath!!!

 

[RSLancastr]

I have cases and cases that have got better over my years of practice.

So, you've dropped the ill-conceived facade?

Perhaps I should publish some of my cases sometimes so you can see. This is all evidence that it most certainly works.

Riiiiight.

That is the difference here though, I actually value my patients and spending time with them and treating them rather than reading all these trials that are totally inconclusive anyway.

Translation: "I'd rather spend my time ripping off gullible, desperate people than bother reading up on what I already know is crap, albeit profitable crap."

As to your swipe at Rolfe, I'll let him deal with it. My response would not meet the board's language standards.

 

[geni]

One of these days I will design my own trial for homeopathy.

One million dollars isn't enough to tempt you to do it now?

Treating patients is actually the best way of proving that it actually works. I have cases and cases that have got better over my years of practice. Perhaps I should publish some of my cases sometimes so you can see. This is all evidence that it most certainly works.

You know the problems with your above statment. You don't accept belin wall as a geniun homeopathic remedy and yet I can provide three cases of people claiming sucessful results using it.

That is the difference here though, I actually value my patients and spending time with them and treating them rather than reading all these trials that are totally inconclusive anyway. That is a lot more than can be said for you and yes Rolfe, you said it mate, you most definitely are in the wrong job, so I won't hold my breath!!!

Cold hard data is the only thing that something as important as health should be based on. You can't say that not enough time has elapsed to show that even one ultramolecular homeopathic remedy has an effect different from the stock solvent. So why do you make these amazing claims that dissapear once proper control are applied?

 

[Loon]

One of these days I will design my own trial for homeopathy.

Excellent. We are eagerly awaiting your protocol. Even showing that you can distinguish between rememdy and solvent significantly more often than chance would predict would carry a lot of weight, at least with me.

Originally posted by Homeoskeptic
I have cases and cases that have got better over my years of practice.

I suspect that this may just be your rhetorical style, or perhaps the lack of vocal cues in reading, but "cases and cases" doesn't sound like much for 20 years of work. More along the lines of 1000's of cases. But before you said you had hundreds of cases. At only one patient a day, 5 days a week (with two weeks vacation per year) with only a 50% cure rate would be 2500 patients. What about the number of your patients who don't show any improvement, HS?

Originally posted by Homeoskeptic
Perhaps I should publish some of my cases sometimes so you can see. This is all evidence that it most certainly works.

No. This is evidence that a patient got better. It is not evidence that homeopathy had anything to do with it. You'd do a great deal toward swaying us with some verifiable statistics or even a plausible mechanism (i.e., something beyond the memory of water).

Originally posted by Homeoskeptic
That is the difference here though, I actually value my patients and spending time with them and treating them rather than reading all these trials that are totally inconclusive anyway.

I'm willing to bet that a large part of any effects is the fact that someone has spent time with the patients. In a lot of hospitals, this is simply not possible, as there are many more patients than doctors. But if it's just the counseling that helps, you might as well be a nurse- you spend more time with patients and don't have all the added weight of unproven theories.

 

[epepke]

My wife also uses this and swears by it. Again, I do not really know anything about it, but wonder if it really works?

Many posters here have their crania far too close to their sacra as it.

As they almost say in the Army, "Heads away from sacra PULL!"

I've seldom noticed any therapy for this condition working. When it works, though, it's great.

 

[epepke]

Treating patients is actually the best way of proving that it actually works. I have cases and cases that have got better over my years of practice. Perhaps I should publish some of my cases sometimes so you can see. This is all evidence that it most certainly works.

Yes, you definitely should publish. Please be sure to tell us when you get an article published in JAMA or NEJM or The Lancet.

 

[plindboe]

Treating patients is actually the best way of proving that it actually works. I have cases and cases that have got better over my years of practice. Perhaps I should publish some of my cases sometimes so you can see. This is all evidence that it most certainly works.

Everything works if people believe it will work. That is called the placebo effect. You need to show that there's an effect besides that, otherwise you might as well give them sugar pills.

Read about the placebo effect here: http://skepdic.com/placebo.html