religion
Donald Trump’s rhetoric is systematically racialized and frequently functions as a “dog whistle” to mobilize his racist followers. Here are but a few examples:
- July 1989 (On the Central Park Five): “I want to hate these muggers and murderers. They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes.” (From a full-page newspaper advertisement Trump took out regarding five Black and Latino teenagers accused of assault; the men were later fully exonerated by DNA evidence, but Trump repeatedly refused to apologize or rescind the sentiment).
- October 1993 (House Subcommittee Hearing on Native American Casinos): “They don’t look like Indians to me… and they don’t look like Indians to Indians.” (Questioning the authenticity of Connecticut tribal members operating competing casinos).
- June 2015 (Presidential Announcement Speech): “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
- January 2018 (Oval Office Meeting on Immigration): “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” (Referring to immigrants from Haiti and African nations during a bipartisan meeting, as corroborated by attending senators).
- July 2019 (On Baltimore and Rep. Elijah Cummings): “Cumming [sic] District is a disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess. If he spent more time in Baltimore, maybe he could help clean up this very dangerous & filthy place… No human being would want to live there.”
- July 2019 (Twitter Statements on Democratic Congresswomen): “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done.” (Directed at four minority Democratic congresswomen, three of whom were born in the United States).
- December 2019 (Speech to the Israeli American Council): “A lot of you are in the real estate business, because I know you very well. You’re brutal killers, not nice people at all. But you have to vote for me—you have no choice… You’re not going to vote for the wealth tax.” (Invoking the anti-Semitic trope that Jewish people are solely motivated by money and financial self-interest).
- December 2023 (Campaign Rally in New Hampshire): “They’re poisoning the blood of our country. That’s what they’ve done. They poison mental institutions and prisons all over the world, not just in South America, not just the three or four countries that we think about, but all over the world. They’re coming into our country, from Africa, from Asia, all over the world.”
- April 2026 (televised national address from the White House, marking Trump’s first formal address to the nation since the outbreak of the military conflict with Iran) “We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks… We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Age, where they belong.”
An analysis of his public statements and Truth Social posts revealed a abhorrent pattern: approximately 80% of the individuals he labels as “low IQ” are people of colour, specifically Black or Hispanic public figures. The term could theoretically be used as a neutral insult; however, Trump’s skewed application clearly evokes a long history of racist pseudo-science once upon a time used to justify claims of intellectual inferiority among non-white populations. Trump often reserves his most vitriolic attacks on intelligence for non-white targets. He often compounds these insults with additional degrading language, such as:
- Ketanji Brown Jackson: Described as “that new, Low IQ person, that somehow found her way to the bench”.
- Maxine Waters: Repeatedly labelled “extraordinarily low IQ” and “the face of the Democrat party”.
- Don Lemon: Referred to as “the dumbest man on television”.
When targeting white opponents, Trump tends to use labels like “crooked,” “weak,” or “disgraceful.” In contrast, his attacks on Black and Brown figures – including his description of congress women of colour as “mentally deranged” or “sick” – focus on cognitive or mental fitness, echoing historical tropes used to exclude marginalised groups from public life.
Research into the 2016 and 2020 elections suggests that support for Trump was more strongly tied to racial resentment and xenophobia than to “economic anxiety.” Exposure to such rhetoric can measurably increase the public expression of prejudice. Trump’s rhetoric often aligns with his administration’s policy priorities, which were frequently criticized as racially discriminatory:
- The “Muslim Ban”: An executive order targeting several Muslim-majority nations.
- Immigration Enforcement: Hardline policies, such as “zero tolerance” at the border, which disproportionately affected Latinx communities.
- Overt Commentary: Infamous descriptions of African nations as “shithole countries” and the use of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory to describe immigration.
Beyond specific insults, Trump’s broader narrative frequently utilizes dehumanizing imagery. He has, for instance, frequently amplified or “retweeted” supporters who use racist caricatures – such as those depicting the Obamas in a derogatory manner. Recent comments labelling nations like India and China as “hellholes” further underscore a worldview defined by national/ racial hierarchies.
Taken together, the combination of targeted slurs, racially skewed insults, and discriminatory policies provides a substantial evidentiary base for arguing that Trump’s rhetoric is not merely accidental, but a strategic effort to appeal to xenophobic and white-nationalist segments of the electorate.
Does that make him a racist?
Or are his comments merely an expression of his profound stupidity?
I let you decide.
I came across an interesting paper entitled “The Ethics of Tawas and Other Rituals in Medical Practices“. Here is its abstract:
Rituals in medical practice have either been seen as an anthropological aspect of current biomedical processes or as a pre-scientific aspect of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). In either tendency, the literature has since failed to account for these rituals as rituals—conveyors of meaning, expressions of identity, and even as a rite of passage from illness to wellness. As an alternative to current discussions, this paper presents the case study of tawas, a diagnostic ritual from Philippine traditional medicine that determines personalistic and mystical causes of illnesses. As a non-intrusive procedure, tawas involves incantations and some ritual objects, e.g., rice, candle, axe, etc., that do not pose any direct harm nor benefit to the patient. While complete reliance on tawas at the expense of proper medical procedures could harm patients, the very ritual of tawas itself occupies a limbo within non-beneficence and non-maleficence. Following a Wittgensteinian perspective of treating rituals as meaning-laden human activities, this paper argues that rituals like tawas, much like other rituals embedded in biomedical practices, should be understood as rituals and not as empirical cures, thereby allowing their tolerance in medical practice in general.
The author seems to advocate for the cultural integration of traditional practices like tawas into a broader medical framework. They categorize tawas not as a physiological intervention, but define it as a conveyor of meaning. By addressing the “meaning-laden” aspect of illness, the ritual may address the psychological and social dimensions of a patient’s health, even if it has no effect on their physical pathology.
It is claimed that, since tawas involves non-intrusive objects (candles, rice), it is physically benign. At the same time it is acknowledged that “complete reliance” on tawas could harm patients. From a clinical safety standpoint, the “limbo” is only maintained if the ritual is strictly adjunctive rather than alternative.
The text uses a Wittgensteinian perspective, focusing on rituals as expressions rather than theories. Modern neuroscience suggests that the “ritual” of care—the white coat, the focused attention, the diagnostic process—triggers real neurobiological changes (e.g., dopamine and endorphin release). Aacknowledging the symbolic healing power that rituals have on patient anxiety and the “meaning response,” which can objectively improve health outcomes by reducing cortisol and stress.
The author identifies tawas as a diagnostic ritual which might well be the most contentious point. In science, a “diagnosis” must be reliable and valid. Tawas clearly fails the scientific criteria for validity. The author’s defence is that tawas shouldn’t be judged by those criteria at all. While this might be philosophically sound, in a clinical setting, a “mystical diagnosis” must conflict with a biological one, potentially leading to patient non-compliance with life-saving treatments.
Ita Wegman (22 February 1876 – 4 March 1943) was born 150 years ago today. Together with Rudolf Steiner, she was a central figure in the development of anthroposophic medicine, an approach that interprets illness through spiritual–cosmological concepts. In 1921, Wegman founded the Klinisch-Therapeutisches Institut in Arlesheim, Switzerland—today the Ita Wegman Clinic—the first hospital dedicated to anthroposophic medicine. Practices developed there included rhythmical massage, a gentle bodywork technique intended to “harmonize” physiological rhythms, and mistletoe-based cancer therapy derived from Viscum album, later marketed as Iscador, as well as many other remedies influences by homeopathy. Wegman also co-founded Weleda, which remains a major producer of anthroposophic remedies and cosmetics.
Despite its continued use in parts of Europe, mistletoe therapy (including Iscador) has not demonstrated reliable clinical efficacy in improving cancer survival or tumor outcomes in well-controlled trials. Major systematic reviews conclude that evidence for benefit is inconsistent, methodologically weak, and often biased, with any reported improvements largely limited to subjective quality-of-life measures. It is therefore regarded by mainstream oncology as an unproven therapy rather than an evidence-based treatment. For Wegman’s other therapeutic innovations the evidence is even less convincing.
Her collaboration with Steiner was both professionally formative and personally intense. They met in the early 1900s, and Wegman later credited Steiner with inspiring her decision to pursue medicine relatively late, enrolling at the University of Zurich. From 1919 onward, their cooperation deepened: Steiner supplied esoteric frameworks derived from anthroposophy, while Wegman sought to translate these ideas into clinical practice. Their collaboration culminated in the book “Fundamentals of Therapy” (1925), published shortly after Steiner’s death.
Speculation about a romantic relationship between Wegman and Steiner has persisted for decades. Purported “love letters” dated to 1924 describe expressions of affection, but most scholars regard them as forgeries, citing factual errors, the absence of originals from Steiner archives, and stylistic inconsistencies with Steiner’s documented correspondence. Steiner himself described their bond in karmic terms, claiming a debt from a past incarnation that explained their closeness despite his marriage to Marie von Sivers. Historian Peter Selg and others interpret the relationship as an intense spiritual and intellectual partnership rather than a conventional affair, though contemporaries did circulate rumors.
Steiner died on March 30, 1925, after a prolonged illness. The exact cause remains uncertain and not definitively confirmed as stomach cancer. Wegman provided Steiner’s main care from September 1924 until his death, leaving her clinic to nurse him in his studio at the Goetheanum in Dornach, Switzerland. She is said to have employed anthroposophic approaches, but specific treatments remain sparsely documented in available accounts.
Following Steiner’s death, Wegman’s authority within the movement became increasingly contested. In 1935 she was expelled from the Anthroposophical Society amid internal power struggles and accusations of doctrinal deviation; this expulsion was formally reversed in 2018. Wegman’s political stance during the Nazi period remains controversial. While anthroposophy as a movement was partially suppressed in Nazi Germany, several leading anthroposophists – including Wegman – sought accommodation rather than resistance. Wegman expressed hopes in the early 1930s that National Socialism might support a spiritual renewal of society and did not publicly oppose the regime. Although she was not a member of the Nazi Party and later faced restrictions, her posture is best described as opportunistic accommodation and ideological ambiguity.
Wegman’s collaboration with Steiner created the foundations of anthroposophic medicine. It also generated enduring scientific, ethical, and political controversies – particularly regarding the medical validity of its treatments and its leaders’ responses to authoritarian power after Steiner’s death.
- “The Law of Karma: What you sow is what you reap. If you plant carrots, don’t expect to harvest watermelons.”
- “If you want to see change in the world, become the change you want to see.”
- “If you want to reach a state of Bliss — make a decision to relinquish the need to control, the need to be approved and the need to judge.”
- “Negative people deplete your energy. Surround yourself with love and nourishment and do not allow the creation of negativity in your environment.”
- “If you want to do really important things in life and big things in life, you can’t do anything by yourself. And your best teams are your friends and your siblings.”
- “Everyone is acting from his own level of consciousness. This is all we can ask of ourselves or anyone else.”
You probably guessed: these gems of wisdom originate from, Deepak Chopra, the guru of platitude-loving Americans. If you don’t want to spend your money on buying one of his books, you can go on the Internet, find one of several available ‘bullshit generators’ and create similarly profound wisdoms all by yourself.
As Deepak is seen to be virtually overflowing with wisdom, spirituality, consciousness, and holistic health, it is perhaps surprising to find his inclusion in the Epstein Files. The link stems primarily from email correspondence and other communications between him and Epstein that have been made public as part of the ongoing disclosures. The records show repeated exchanges dating from at least 2016 through 2019 — well after Epstein’s 2008 conviction as a sex offender — in which the two men discuss a range of topics. These include scheduling meetings or meetings plans, mentions of other public figures, discussions tied to Chopra’s book projects, and exchanges that veer into casual and at times explicit language about “girls” or women. One of the widely circulated emails has Chopra writing to Epstein, “God is a construct. Cute girls are real,” in an apparently informal exploration of consciousness and personal views.
Another released thread shows discussions about meeting logistics, references to public figures such as Marla Maples (the former wife of Donald Trump), and social anecdotes that reveal the personal tenor of some exchanges. These materials were part of the dataset provided to Congress under subpoena as part of its oversight of the Epstein files.
Inclusion in the Epstein Files does not establish that Chopra was involved in any criminal activity or exploitative conduct. U.S. authorities and journalists emphasise that the raw disclosures document communications and connections — not necessarily illegal behavior — and require careful interpretation.
Nonetheless, many of the public reactions to Chopra’s appearance in these disclosures have been sharp. Social media posts and news coverage have highlighted the tone of certain messages, leading to debate and scrutiny from both followers and critics. In response to the heightened attention and criticism, Deepak Chopra issued a public statement acknowledging the gravity of what has been revealed and offering regret for the way some past communications may read in light of what the world now widely knows about Epstein’s crimes. He wrote on social media that he was “deeply saddened by the suffering of the victims in this case” and that he “unequivocally condemn[s] abuse and exploitation in all forms.” Chopra also stated that any contact he had with Epstein was “limited and unrelated to abusive activity,” and he described some of his past messages as reflecting “poor judgment in tone.”
One such ‘sharp reaction’ appeared on Facebook. As it is quite funny as well as very poignant, allow me to show it to you:
Annie McCubbin 6 February at 10:20
WOW DEEPAK THIS SEEMS TO BE A QUANTUM OF A MESS YOU’VE GOT YOURSELF INTO.
Well looky looky here. In the quantum field of possibilities, Deepak has manifested himself one thousand three hundred mentions in the Epstein files.
With the cavalier camaraderie of two average dudes leaning on the bonnet of a pick-up truck, Chopra and Epstein, amid nauseating pseudo intellectual discourse, discuss the noises cute girls make, and whether or not Deepak had found Epstein a cute Israeli.
This, it should be noted, is ten years after Epstein was registered as sex offender of children.
Chopra has made an admission, of sorts. It has the tone of someone who has spent his life beguiling his followers from behind a screen of opaque confounding verbiage, so I guess it’s true to form when he writes the sentence: –
‘Some past emails have surfaced that reflect poor judgement in tone. I regret that and understand how they read today given what was publicly known at the time.’
No Deepak, you purveyor of impenetrable piffle, it’s not how they read ‘today’, it’s just how they read. So how about you take out the obfuscating ‘today’, turn comments back on, come out from behind the infinite consciousness of the karmic trance of the egoic super self, and face the music.
These emails are not anachronistic innocent exchanges between two older gentlemen musing in a reflective way about the opposite sex. No, these men presented a clear and present danger to women. These exchanges are between a seventy-one-year grifter who has promised his millions of followers hope and healing, and a sixty-four-year-old registered sex offender who had been charged with procuring a minor for prostitution.
So, this great spiritual leader. This purveyor of divine transcendence. This guru who imbues his incomprehensible gobbledy gook with the historical spiritual relevance of the subcontinent, has shown a complete paucity of decency, care and morality
Not only are his discussions with Epstein disturbing but they’re peppered with moments where he cynically mocks his own spiritual repartee.
Perhaps his millions of followers who may have felt spiritually dull witted, may be relieved to discover that his entire shtick is a simple reordering of the following eighteen words:-Consciousness, meditation, infinite, universe, god, vibration, stillness, mirror, manifest, luminous. elemental, connection, awareness, love, gratitude, eternal, karma, and divine.
His collection of books, videos, podcasts, products like ‘The ritual care kit.’ supplements and ‘wellness retreats.’ are not the result of Deepak’s deep wisdom but merely pseudoscientific quasi spiritual guff, concocted with all the care of a four-year-old making a cake with dirt, a hair clip, their mothers Estée Lauder anti-aging cream and the stuffing from the dog’s toy rabbit.
Why do so many of us collapse so willingly into the arms of these grifter gurus?
Well, we are told the answer to our emptiness is to look within. We are just an inspirational quote away from happiness. We are seduced by bite sized morsels of the transcendent to sooth our souls.
We can ask what is missing from my life, and the answer will be delivered in three hours via Amazon. $35 plus shipping. How easy is it to sit on our couches and have the soothing tone of Deepak deliver an immersive learning experience into our noise cancelling head phones? Maybe we may muse, it would be truly beneficial to attend one of his wellness retreats. What’s money when we’re on the path to enlightenment? Perhaps we’ll discover the divine goddess within? Seems easier than fighting for the actual rights of women.
Connecting to the self is given a big rap in wellness circles but it seems to be at the cost of reconnecting with others.
The self-care, self-love movement, implying poverty or illness is a misalignment with the abundance on offer from the universe, absolves its’ followers of any responsibility to help others. You sick or poor? Manifest better.
It has been a fabulous distraction from the rapacity of the neocons, dismantling our social structures and denuding our public services, confident in the knowledge we’re too busy healing from within to look outward.
But the empty void within will not be filled by listening to the lilting tones of Deepak. By all means work out your maladaptive patterns and beliefs by talking to a psychologist but maybe swear off the gurus for a bit. It seems they all, at some point, fall from grace.
Chopra while preaching love compassion and peace, was showing off to his convicted sex offender friend, that he can play the misogynistic game as good as the big boys. Meanwhile women all over the world are dying at the hands of their partners. Men schooled and supported in the ideology that women are lesser beings to be controlled, used, punished and discarded.
To so lightly squander the loyalty of your trusting audience seems careless of you Deepak, but maybe the grifting isn’t over. Maybe you can obfuscate out of this, and have an online well published dark night of the soul replete with a brand-new great awakening. There has to be a couple of apps and a book in it.
I hope not. I hope this tearing in the space time continuum has revealed the black hole of grifting where the snake oil salesman sit waiting with their three easy payment options.
Anyway, let us end on one of Deepak’s quotes. ‘Karma memory and desire are just the software of the soul.’
Well Deepak, better strap in, I hear karma can be a real bitch.
This study aimed to distinguish between the usage of complementary medicine and alternative medicine, often jointly referred to as CAM. Furthermore, the analysis focuses on the role of religion, healthcare system satisfaction and the country of residence.
The analysis uses data of the International Social Survey Programme 2021 “Health and Health Care II” (ISSP 2021) to estimate the prevalence of complementary medicine and alternative medicine. A nested logistic regression model was applied to distinguish between no medicine use, conventional medicine, complementary medicine and alternative medicine.
The findings indicate the following:
- Complementary medicine is significantly more prevalent than alternative medicine, though substantial cross-country differences are observed.
- While religious affiliation alone does not show a significant relationship with CAM usage, individuals who attend religious services regularly are more likely to use CAM in a complementary manner, alongside conventional medicine.
- Individuals who are dissatisfied with the health care system also are more likely to use both complementary medicine and alternative medicine.
- Higher levels of education are negatively associated with the use of alternative medicine.
- Younger individuals are more likely to use CAM and specific alternative medicine, compared to older age groups.
- Being female is consistently associated with a higher chance of CAM usage overall.
The authorsconcluded that treating complementary and alternative medicine as distinct reveals different prevalence rates and influencing factors. Religion, satisfaction with the healthcare system, education, age, and gender play varying roles depending on whether CAM is used alongside or instead of conventional medicine. Cross-country differences point to cultural and health system influences. For public health, distinguishing between complementary and alternative use can support more targeted strategies to promote safe integration and reduce risks from substituting conventional treatment.
Complementary medicine is defined as medicine being used alongside conventional medicine; alternative medicine is defined as medicine being used instead of conventional medicine. This distinction is problematic, if not impossible. One and the same therapy can be used in an alternative fashion today and in a complementary way tomorrow. One and the same therapy will often be used in an alternative fashion for one condition and in a complementary way for another. In other words there are no alternative medicines as distinct from complementary medicines. There are merely distinct ways of using these therapies.
In turn this means that the above paper set out from a flawed premise. But perhaps it nevertheless generated some interesting findings? Let’s look at the points listed above:
- This has been noted many times before.
- This has been noted many times before.
- This has been noted many times before.
- This is invalid because of the points above.
- This has been noted many times before.
- This has been noted many times before.
My conclusion: much of the research into so-called alternative medicine is hardly worth the paper that it is printed on.
This post is inspired by an article by Michael Miller entitled ‘6 Reasons Why People Believe Health Misinformation‘ published recently in PSYCHOLOGY TODAY. Miller identified the following reasons:
- Reasons 1 and 2: Mistrust of Experts and Personal Autonomy
- Reason 3: Misinformation Makes Money (and Advances Other Agendas)
- Reason 4: Misinformation Sounds Like It’s True
- Reasons 5 and 6: Charisma and Simplicity Sell Soothing Misinformation
In my post, I will try to avoid much overlap with Miller’s paper and name 6 reasons why people believe misinformation specifically about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). The evidence for the reasons I list comes from 30 years of research into SCAM and from stuying many thousands of papers published on these and related issues.
VIPs
Almost 20 years ago, Max Pittler and I published an article entitled ‘Celebrity-based medicine‘; here is its abstract:
Objective: To collect contemporary accounts of celebrity use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), to aid clinicians in determining which CAM treatments patients are likely to use.
Design: Articles published during 2005 and 2006 reporting celebrity use of CAM.
Results: 38 celebrities were found to use a wide range of CAM interventions. Homeopathy, acupuncture and Ayurveda were the most popular modalities.
Conclusions: There may be many reasons why consumers use CAM, and wanting to imitate their idols is one of them.
Lots has changed since but wanting to imitate idols, VIPs and celebrities is still a powerful motivator, in fact, more powerful than ever before. The number of VIPs who have jumped on the SCAM bandwaggon has increase manyfold. As we have often discussed here, many of them now have even started to profit from the need of consumers to admire their stupidity of using worthless, expensive and often dangerous treatments.
Desperation
Many people who employ SCAM are unwell, suffer symptoms or even fight for their lives. They are desperate and leave no stone unturned to get better. In their desperation, they come across the many irresponsible promises of the SCAM industry. Like drowning individuals they cling to every bit of straw they can grab. And SCAM practitioners are often only too willing to offer (and charge for) false hope.
Consumers want to believe
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” We all – well almost all – want to believe that there is more than our rationality lets us to believe. Science does not know everything, many feel, and turn to pseudoscience. From there it it only a small step to turn from medicine to SCAM, particularly if they have enough money in their pocket to give it a try. This is regrettable, no doubt, but it also is the undeniable truth.
Journalists’ promotion
Journalists have a bizarrely keen interest in SCAM. This is presumably because certain sections of the public – those who are in favour of SCAM – like to read about it. And this means that a reinforcing spiral drives the odd phenomenon: plenty of people are in favour of SCAM –> they want to read positive things about SCAM –> journalists deliver what is wanted, namely uncritical promotion of SCAM –> more and more people get convinced about the value of SCAM.
Disappointment
Many of us are disappointed with what conventional healthcare offers to them. I can fully understand this sentiment. In theory, modern medicine is better than it ever was. In practice, it all too often is abominable. This can be due to phenomena ranging from human or professional incompetence to marode healthcare systems to financial constraints. Whatever the reason, people who are disappointed look elsewhere and, for many, SCAM seems an obvious solution.
Naivety
I often tell people: IF IT SOUNDS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE, IT PROBABLY IS. It’s a simple principle that sadly is not often heeded, particularly by individuals who are gullible and tend to believe or even lap up whatever SCAM practitioners promise. Some may call it ignorance or even stupidity, I prefer naivety – whatever it is, it renders people easy prey of the SCAM industry.
The list of reasons why consumers believe the misinformation that is currently abundantly available about SCAM is almost endless. Different people have (and different situations bring forth) different reasons. Understanding them might enable us to minimise some of the damage misinformation causes.
One key element of damage limitation must be reliable information which is the raison d’etre of my blog.
Have you heard about the “Trivedi Effect”?
No?
Let me tell you all about it.
This study aimed to compare the growth, meat quality, nutrition, consumer preference, and shelf life of biofield-treated birds with those of the unblessed/untreated control (UBCONG).
Commercial genotypes (Cobb 430Y) of white broiler eggs/chicks were used. The eggs were split into two groups: an UBCONG and a biofield (blessings) energy-treated group. Body weight and feed intake were recorded weekly, and meat quality was assessed using nutritional and sensory parameters.
The mean feed conversion ratio was found to be significantly better in the groups of biofield-treated eggs (BTEG; p < 0.01), biofield-treated chicks (BTCG; p < 0.001), and BTEG and chicks [Double biofield (blessing) energy treatment on both eggs and chicks group (DBECG); p < 0.001] than in the UBCONG. Edible meat weight was significantly increased in both BTCG (p < 0.05; 62.69%) and DBECG (p < 0.001; 77.19%) compared with that in UBCONG. Carbohydrate was significantly (p < 0.001) increased by 189.47% and 363.16% in BTEG and DBECG, respectively, compared to UBCONG. Vitamin B3 was significantly (p < 0.001) increased by 26.45% in BTEG compared with UBCONG. Minerals such as iron and copper were significantly (p < 0.001) increased by 2614.92% and 316.67%, respectively, in DBECG compared to UBCONG. The levels of unsaturated fats, monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA), polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA), C18:1-oleic acid, C18:2-linoleic acid, and C18:3-linolenic acid were significantly (p < 0.001) increased by 96.06%, 111.39%, 72.92%, 88.91%, 66%, and 145.35%, respectively, compared with those of UBCONG. The scoring of sensory parameters (color, flavor, taste, tenderness, juiciness, and overall quality/acceptability) was significantly improved (p < 0.001) in the biofield treatment groups compared with the UBCONG. The shelf-life examination of raw chicken meat indicated that it was safe for storage for up to 21 days.
The authors concluded that the biofield (blessing) energy treatment significantly improved growth-related parameters compared with the UBCONG. This treatment also improved the meat quality compared to the increased levels of carbohydrate, PUFA, MUFA, and few minerals such as Ca, Fe, Zn, and Cu than UBCONG.
The trouble here, it seems to me, is that biofield energy is an invention; IT DOES NOT EXIST!
Perhaps, we need to ask how this study came into being. Its authors (1st author Mahendra Kumar Trivedi) come from ‘TRIVEDI GLOBAL INC’. Mahendra Kumar Trivedi has a Bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering and managed to publish around 50 Medline-listed studies on the ‘Trivedi Effect’, all showing that it is effective as a panacea.
Trivedi Global, Inc. is a US-based company founded by Mahendra Kumar Trivedi. The company is centered around The Trivedi Effect, which they describe as an evidence-based phenomenon in which an individual can harness an inherently intelligent energy from nature and transmit it to living organisms and non-living materials, anywhere in the world through thought intention, to significantly enhance potency and beneficially alter their characteristics. Mahendra Kumar Trivedi claims to have discovered his ability to induce this effect in 1995.
The apparently substantial revenue for Trivedi Global, Inc. is primarily generated from commercializing the “Trivedi Effect”:
- Collaborating with companies to “energize” or “treat” their products using the Trivedi Effect before they are sold to the public.
- Offering energy transmissions or “Consciousness Energy Healing Treatments” and hosting associated wellness events or programs for individuals.
- Training other individuals as “Biofield Energy Healers” to utilize the Trivedi Effect.
Key products and services of the company include:
- Mahendra Kumar Trivedi and other “Trivedi Healers” transmitting the Biofield Energy to individuals or materials remotely.
- Paid, structured training program to develop a person’s “innate healing abilities.”
- Applying the “Trivedi Effect” to ingredients, food, or consumer products.
Detailed and specific pricings for these services seem to be not publicly available.
So, what should we make of the above-mentioned, new study? Let me express it as politely as I can: I do not trust its findings until I see an independent replication.
To my surprise (and delight), I have been asked to become a patron of the Humanists UK Patron: Professor Edzard Ernst. I am not someone who easily joins clubs, groups or organisations. Yet, I accepted this invitation without hesitation. This Humanists UK state about themselves this:
Think for yourself, act for everyone
At Humanists UK, we want a tolerant world where rational thinking and kindness prevail. We work to support lasting change for a better society, championing ideas for the one life we have.
We do this because we’re humanists, people who shape our own lives in the here and now, because we believe it’s the only life we get.
Our work helps people be happier and more fulfilled, and by bringing non-religious people together we help them develop their own views and an understanding of the world around them.
We’re committed to putting humanism into practice. Through our ceremonies, pastoral support, education services, and campaigning work, we advance free thinking and freedom of choice so everyone can live in a fair and equal society.
More about us
We started out in 1896, and since then we’ve always been a growing movement at the forefront of social change. Today we’re trusted by over 150,000 members and supporters and over 70 local and special interest affiliates to promote humanism.
We put humanism into practice through effective campaigning and services, supporting lasting change for happier, more fulfilling lives. Our policies are informed with the support of over 200 of the UK’s most prominent philosophers, scientists, and other thinkers and experts and we seek to advance them with the help of over 120 parliamentarians in membership of the All Party Parliamentary Humanist Group. We bring like-minded people together to make change happen, and we strive to be their voice in public debate, drawing on contemporary humanist thought and the worldwide humanist tradition.
We’ve been conducting non-religious funerals, weddings, and baby-namings for over 125 years. Our highly trained celebrants are the best you’ll find anywhere, and they support individuals to create authentic, bespoke ceremonies that put people and their stories at the heart of every occasion.
We also help vulnerable people easily access like-minded and effective non-religious pastoral support that is specially tailored to work for them. Our trained and accredited non-religious pastoral support volunteers operate across hospitals, prisons, and the armed forces.
If you want to support us in our work, please do join or donate. We are dependent on charitable giving to continue our work.
Humanists UK is the operating name of the British Humanist Association. We are a charitable company (no. 228781), formed in 1896 and incorporated in 1928, and registered in England and Wales. Our governing document is our Articles of Association, which can be viewed here.
Our Safeguarding policy can be found here.
I feel honoured and would encourage everyone to consider becoming a member of this worthy organisation.
In the realm of so-called alternative medicine, one often comes across weird articles. Some are clearly weirder than others. This paper belongs into the former category. Here is its abstract:
The belief in non- physical beings playing crucial roles in illness and healing is widespread across diverse cultures. Our previous study found reports of alleged non- physical beings during energy medicine sessions. To evaluate the perceived presence and characteristics of non- physical beings mentioned during Reiki sessions. Six seers observed 40 Reiki sessions, and quantitative and qualitative data were collected from the seers, participants, and Reiki practitioners. The presence and function of the non-physical beings during the sessions and the correspondence between quantitative and qualitative data types were evaluated. All sessions had reports of alleged non- physical beings, with angelic beings, spirit guides, and possession/spirit attachments most commonly noted. The reported entities mainly aided the healing process, but some were also linked to pathology. While this study did not explore the effectiveness of treatment, the findings do highlight the potential importance of ostensible non- physical entities in Reiki, warranting further investigation.
The authors concluded that “this report presents exploratory data analyses from a parent study in which six seers observed 40 Reiki sessions. The analysis shows that seers reported perceptions of non- physical beings, such as RM’s and Participant’s Guides, Unspecified Spiritual Beings/Helpers, Angelic Presences, Unhelpful Beings (e.g.,
spirit attachments), ETI, and Animal Spirits during all of the sessions. However, other than for ETI and Unhelpful Beings, agreement between raters regarding the type of non- physical beings reported was low, suggesting that caution should be exercised when reviewing these reports. Most of these beings were perceived as aiding the Reiki session by grounding, supporting, and healing. On the other hand, Unhelpful Beings were mentioned as contributing to pathology by blocking or attaching. Although many sessions showed alignment between the coded
data and textual data, the correlations were not significant when individual seer scores were retained; multiple comparison corrections were applied. This study is unique and significant in its systematic approach to quantifying and analyzing the correspondence of observers’ perceptions of non- physical beings in healing sessions, especially given the limited research this topic has received. However, this study also highlights the need for future research into the role of non- physical beings in energy medicine healing, including control conditions, to ensure that the reported perceptions are specific to the healing process and not to other factors. Future research prompted by these results includes exploring the potential differences in healing outcomes for individuals who report encounters with various non- physical beings during Reiki energy medicine sessions. Investigating this could provide support for the argument that, as physical and mental health practitioners increasingly recognize the impact of spiritual connections on disease and pathology, it becomes crucial to reframe traditional understandings of conditions like psychosis to include the influence of non- physical beings (Pederzoli et al. 2021)”.
The authors discuss that energy healing practitioners often assert that they must connect with a source of healing, such as God, spirit, or the Earth’s energy, and then channel or facilitate that energy to the client. Others describe a more direct intervention of God, spirits, or other external agents. This connection with non- physical sources is believed to be crucial for effective healing.
Wow!
Who can publish such weird stuff pretending this is science?
And to what institution does the author of this paper belong?
I am tempted to start a competition for ‘THE MOST IMPRESSIVE BULLSHIT OF THE YEAR’.
The article originates from the “Research Department, Institute of Noetic Sciences, Novato, California, USA“. This seems to be a well-funded institute with ~ 20 staff. They state: “At the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), we are inspired by the power of science to explain phenomena not previously understood, harnessing the best of the rational mind to make advances that further our knowledge and enhance our human experience.”
They have an impressively long list of publications. The very first in the list rang a bell; they cite it as follows:
Astin et al (2000). The efficacy of “distant healing”: A systematic review of randomized trials. Annals of Internal Medicine. pdf
It rang a bell because I and a co-worker of mine are 2 of its 3 authors:
The efficacy of “distant healing”: a systematic review of randomized trials.
The 1st author, John Astin worked at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
As far as I can make out, none of us had or have any connection to the Institute of Noetic Sciences!
How come then that they list our paper as one of their own?
Fraud?
No, I imagine that an angelic being or perhaps a spirit guide must have mis-filed it … got to prove that “non-physical beings”can make mistakes too! To err is not just human; it’s also super-human.
We have often discussed the fact that chiropractic does not offer an effective option of healthcare. This begs the question, if it’s not healthcare, what is it? DD Palmer, the inventor of chiropractic, was tempted by the idea of turning it into a religion. In a way, this makes sense. As we all know, religions are not based on evidence, they are based on powerful beliefs – and so is chiropractic! Thus the concept of chiropractic as a religion might be less far-fetched as it seems at first glance.
Here is an excerpt of a letter by DD Palmer of May 1911, the period where he was very much into the religious idea:
…I occupy in chiropractic a similar position as did Mrs. Eddy in Christian Science. Mrs. Eddy claimed to receive her ideas from the other world and so do I. She founded theron a religion, so may I. I am THE ONLY ONE IN CHIROPRACTIC WHO CAN DO SO…
You ask, what I think will be the final outcome of our law getting. It will be that we will have to build a boat similar to Christian Science and hoist a religious flag. I have received chiropractic from the other world, similar as did Mrs. Eddy. No other one has laid claim to that, NOT EVEN B.J.
Exemption clauses instead of chiro laws by all means, and LET THAT EXEMPTION BE THE RIGHT TO PRACTICE OUR RELIGION. But we must have a religious head, one who is the founder, as did Christ, Mohamed, Jo. Smith, Mrs. Eddy, Martin Luther and other who have founded religions. I am the fountain head. I am the founder of chiropractic in its science, in its art, in its philosophy and in its religious phase. Now, if chiropractors desire to claim me as their head, their leader, the way is clear. My writings have been gradually steering in that direction until now it is time to assume that we have the same right to as has Christian Scientists.
Oregon is free to Chiropractors. California gives Chiropractors only one chance, that of practicing our religion.
The protective policy of the U.C.A. is O.K., but that of religion is far better. The latter can only be assumed by having a leader, a head, a person who has received chiropractic as a science, as an art, as a philosophy and as a religion. Do you catch on?
The policy of the U.C.A. is the best that B.J. can be at the head of, BUT THE RELIGIOUS MOVE IS FAR BETTER, but we must incorporate under the man who received the principles of chiropractic from the other world, who wrote the book of all chiropractic books, who today has much new matter, valuable, which is not contained in that book.
If you will watch my book closely as you read, you will find it has a religion contained in it, altho I do not so name it.
If either of the Davenport schools would take advantage of practicing our religion founded by D.D. Palmer, it will make the way of chiropractic as easy as it was for the S.C.’s…
I feel that, of the many daft and dangerous ideas of Palmer, this one is more plausible and viable than the rest (had he not died several months later, he might have succeeded with his plan). The concept of chiropractic as a religion explains the chiropractors’ stubborn rejection of science, evidence, rationality, etc. as well as their often fanatic belief in their actions. And, of course, it makes the many weird comments of chiropractors on my blog appear in an entirely different light.
