to me, it's the ultimate measure of desperation on the part of nurses to develop independence from physicians. that it has been turned into a "science" demeans the nursing profession terribly!
while there can be certainly a psychological/placebo effect, the seriousness with which even some phd's in nursing believe in literal truth of therapeutic touch simply amazes me.
it's witchcraft. sheer absolute nonsense in its highest refined form. the techniques are quite laughable, and have no place in medicine, any more than folk remedies supplied by witch doctors.
yet at virtually every major university, there are ladies with phd's running around who literally believe they've developed these powers in their hands. that they can "ruffle" and "realign" forces.
to many, this is the holy grail of nursing. to me, it's delusionary.
I have read research, and seen controlled experiements that prove that therapeutic touch is not and effective form of therapy. I do not know why and industry (nursing) who is so research oriented continues to endorse this modality.
What makes you think that nursing is so research oriented?
Our 'researchers' must first prove their willingness to drink the kool-aid. The phD programs are run by phD's that screen out those not their 'kind'.
Mind you, I'm not knocking TT with this comment, but our Ivory Tower.
I am quite surprised at the resistance to be open to other forms of treatment and care. I have been doing a lot of reading and experimenting with all different forms of alternative medicine. It works! The first thing is to be open to possibilities, and I am seeing a lot of resistance here in this thread. The other is to educate yourself more on it before you slam the door on it. Alternative care comes from energy, love and connection, which I believe is why most nurses got into this profession in the first place. Unfortunately our health care system and stress has hardened a lot of people. In my eyes it is sad. I feel the pain that people are carrying and only wish for you that you would stop, breathe and quiet the body and mind for a moment to see where you really are. If at this point, you are saying I am full of &%$# then I rest my case. I wish you well all the same. For those of you who are more open to this, or at least curious, watch a movie called "What the Bleep do we know", available at most video stores, as well as "The Secret" which you can order on line from http://www.thesecret.tv/ If you take time to notice, there is a real shift in the world. People are coming back to basics. The kinds of movies coming out are more spiritual ie: the Da Vinci code, Celestine Prophecy etc and the kinds of books written by others such as Wayne Dyer, Eckhart Tolle are talking more about our inner truth and relying less on the exterior world. Even leadership books such as Inspire by Lance Secretan speak about how much people are looking for love, truth and connection. If we don't change our ways and open up our minds, the world cannot change. We are the catalysts of change. There is no mistake we are where we are right now and it is not wrong or right. It just is. My request: be open, be curious, be ready to learn and then make up your own mind. Thank you for opening up this discussion. It is an opportunity for us to learn about and from each other. Namaste!
Well said. When we close the door to possibilities we only limit ourselves. Real science is about limitless possiblities. All the rest is dogma.
dropping "quantum physics" as a buzzword proves *nothing*.
what in the world does this issue have to do with caring about patients? i care enough about my patients to provide the best care that is supported by real world evidence of patient outcomes. exactly the same care i would give to my family. there is no need to "fear for nursing" if we base our practices on evidence. rather, it's basing practices on psuedo-science that threaten the profession and the health of our patients.
you can buy into all the psuedo-science you want, but i can't think of one important advance in healthcare that wasn't based on properly applied scientific method. the idea that science has a mind of its own and an evil agenda to destroy the profession is paranoid thinking.
Is that what I said? Hmm. It seems to me that he who can't find a legitimate argument feels the need to ridicule the other belief. This is not psuedo-science. Many credentialed phyicians and scientists who have done pharmaceutical research have come to different conclusions. Energy medicine is the way of the future. You don't have to believe me now. Its ok with me. Healing Touch, Therapeutic Touch were two modalities created by nursing. You're right about one thing- we don't know exactly why it has the effect it has on people. One simple explanation is it teaches us as caregivers to be present. Without our ability to be totally present (in other words, worrying about what happens next door, about what the charge nurse wants you to do, about what the doctor will say, about whether or not your assignment is fair), we don't give the patient what he really needs. I have used Healing Touch in my practice as an ICU nurse for years- with permission whenever possible. It is not "waving my hands" , although that is what you may think it looks like. The little girl with the experiment proved nothing except the people who set up that experiment knew nothing about touch healing. I often feel pain in a person whether its physical or emotional, but other times I can't. It feels "tingly" on my palm. I don't notice it if I'm tense, have my thoughts scattered a million miles away, or if that person does not want me to help them. I remember one time a fellow student dropped a large potted plant on his foot. He was a pharmaceutical salesman learning about healing. In front of many peole, I used my hand to pull the pain out. Many of them could see the pain leaving- it looked like smoke. After about 3 minutes, he had little pain, and could walk. He was totally shocked, and kept asking me questions about what I did for the rest of the day. I know and he knows I did something. Quantam physics is not pseudo-science either. If you haven't read any books on the subject, you will find it enlightening. If you have and you prefer to stick with Newton, please feel free. Some of what Einstein believed has been disproved by quantam physics. This is what physicists are studying now folks. Its time to move on to the next page.
Now, as to ALL Western therapies being seated in science, lets look at cancer therapies. Are you aware that, according to John R. Lee, MD and David Zava, PhD, cancer survivial has not changed one lick since 1950? Why? Because our detection is so much better that we catch it earlier and "treat" it earlier. Unfortunately, this just moves the time line, not the survival time in total. You can continue to believe dogma, or you can actually read more than one journal from more than one bias and use your own mind to conclude. That's what I did 16 years ago, and I'm 10 times healthier physically and mentally. All of you in sick care think you're in health care, but I don't see anything healthy about our system.
Well said. When we close the door to possibilities we only limit ourselves. Real science is about limitless possiblities. All the rest is dogma.
To say that real science is about limitless possibilities is the dogma. Science is only 'limitless' in possibility when you refuse to accept the natural 'boundaries' that science seeks to discover.
That's a circular argument. Because science can be anything, it must be this. And this must be real because it has to be science, because science can be anything.
Real science is about exploring the 'real' conditions of our universe.
Newton didn't give up trying to explain the boundaries of gravity because 'anything is possible'. Neither did Einstein in his taking it to the next level. In both cases, while new worlds were indeed opened up, that was accomplished by searching for the boundaries that led to the door that opened up a greater understanding.
Is that what I said? Hmm. It seems to me that he who can't find a legitimate argument feels the need to ridicule the other belief. This is not psuedo-science. Many credentialed phyicians and scientists who have done pharmaceutical research have come to different conclusions. Energy medicine is the way of the future. You don't have to believe me now. Its ok with me. Healing Touch, Therapeutic Touch were two modalities created by nursing. You're right about one thing- we don't know exactly why it has the effect it has on people. One simple explanation is it teaches us as caregivers to be present. Without our ability to be totally present (in other words, worrying about what happens next door, about what the charge nurse wants you to do, about what the doctor will say, about whether or not your assignment is fair), we don't give the patient what he really needs. I have used Healing Touch in my practice as an ICU nurse for years- with permission whenever possible. It is not "waving my hands" , although that is what you may think it looks like. The little girl with the experiment proved nothing except the people who set up that experiment knew nothing about touch healing. I often feel pain in a person whether its physical or emotional, but other times I can't. It feels "tingly" on my palm. I don't notice it if I'm tense, have my thoughts scattered a million miles away, or if that person does not want me to help them. I remember one time a fellow student dropped a large potted plant on his foot. He was a pharmaceutical salesman learning about healing. In front of many peole, I used my hand to pull the pain out. Many of them could see the pain leaving- it looked like smoke. After about 3 minutes, he had little pain, and could walk. He was totally shocked, and kept asking me questions about what I did for the rest of the day. I know and he knows I did something. Quantam physics is not pseudo-science either. If you haven't read any books on the subject, you will find it enlightening. If you have and you prefer to stick with Newton, please feel free. Some of what Einstein believed has been disproved by quantam physics. This is what physicists are studying now folks. Its time to move on to the next page.
Now, as to ALL Western therapies being seated in science, lets look at cancer therapies. Are you aware that, according to John R. Lee, MD and David Zava, PhD, cancer survivial has not changed one lick since 1950? Why? Because our detection is so much better that we catch it earlier and "treat" it earlier. Unfortunately, this just moves the time line, not the survival time in total. You can continue to believe dogma, or you can actually read more than one journal from more than one bias and use your own mind to conclude. That's what I did 16 years ago, and I'm 10 times healthier physically and mentally. All of you in sick care think you're in health care, but I don't see anything healthy about our system.
i didn't say that quantum physics is psuedo science. i'm saying that extrapolating from sub atomic particles to therapeutic touch IS PSEUDOSCIENCE. there is a no evidence to support this. it is simply buzzword dropping. so we get from quarks to therapeutic touch (waving of hands is in fact waving of hands) by saying "It's quantum physics, and that proves it"... as though that is a satisfactory explanation. hogwash!
"energy medicine" is the way of the future? according to whom? some fringe kook of a doctor? (there are some phd's who are kooks). some of us think it's the way of the dark ages. cancer survival rates are unchanged since the 1950's? many forms of cancer have shown improved survival rates. that is a grossly irresponsible statement. you need to tell the people who are walking around alive because of advances in medical science that they're really dead.
pain looks like smoke? you pulled it out? i'm sorry, but i don't see a point in us continuing to argue this. i don't find these reports credible enough to address.
Nurses need to be sensitive to the needs of their patients.
Consumers want alternative therapies offered, the question is do nurses use this opportunity to expand their practice or let another take over such as PT. Consumers will find providers many of them interested in their pocket book then the patients well being.
I want to remind all that patient support groups, chaplaincy, and Lamaze where all once thought to be alternative care.
Nobody is claiming TT cures anything...... it help to relieve pain, anxiety, and emotional distress.
Does it belong in Grad Programs....absolutely! There is nursing research to prove the benefits of TT but even if you don't embrace the concept, as a patient advocate a nurse needs to be culturally sensitive.
Nurses need to be sensitive to the needs of their patients.
Consumers want alternative therapies offered, the question is do nurses use this opportunity to expand their practice or let another take over such as PT. Consumers will find providers many of them interested in their pocket book then the patients well being.
I want to remind all that patient support groups, chaplaincy, and Lamaze where all once thought to be alternative care.
Nobody is claiming TT cures anything...... it help to relieve pain, anxiety, and emotional distress.
Does it belong in Grad Programs....absolutely! There is nursing research to prove the benefits of TT but even if you don't embrace the concept, as a patient advocate a nurse needs to be culturally sensitive.
it would seem to be unethically opportunistic to expand into a practice of faith healing as a nurse. if you want to do it as a faith healer, be my guest. just don't call it nursing. just because consumers want additional therapies (many are desperate) doesn't mean we should provide them as nurses. what if consumers want sex therapy? does this mean nurses should offer it, or we'll lose out to prostitutes?
nobody is claiming tt cures anything? some nurses claim they heal wounds with tt. that claim has been around a long time. there are many preposterous claims that aren't supported by evidence. a previous poster just stated that she pulled pain out in the form of smoke. did she heal the underlying injury to the tissues as well?
the quality of the research supporting tt is issue. outside the ivory tower of nursing, the research isn't viewed as credible. even within the ivory tower, there is much dissention.
what does any of this have to do with cutural sensitivity? if someone comes from a culture that believes in voodoo, does that mean nurses have to embrace voodoo as a practice, or they're failing as patient advocates? should we teach voodoo healing in nursing school?
there is only one thing that levels the playing field and keeps us from straying into absolute foolishness.. and that is evidence based practice.
and why do support groups need to be run by nurses? why does chaplaincy and lamaze need to be adminstered by nurses?
certainly we have a responsibility to attend to a patient's psychological needs. people aren't machines. but we have to be very careful where we take this profession if we want to be credible, and we should leave practices such as religion and faith healing to others. if we do provide them, we need to be clear to our patients that we are stepping outside of the role as nurse and into another role.
let me break it down for you. antibiotic therapy can be evaluated using cultures and counts. there is an objective standard. to suggest that it really depends on how a physician is dressed is simply nonsense.
Of course antibiotics can be evaluated using cultures. I'm saying that when any research study involves human to human interaction...such as when the antiobiotics are actually given to a patient...consciousness comes into play.
Your reply just shows that you have lack of experience and knowledge on the subject. It is very well documented...you'll find it if you wish. Might want to study up on rituals and ceremony in healthcare, also if you do not believe that your presentation has a bearing on a patient's responses.
it would seem to be unethically opportunistic to expand into a practice of faith healing as a nurse. if you want to do it as a faith healer, be my guest. just don't call it nursing. just because consumers want additional therapies (many are desperate) doesn't mean we should provide them as nurses. what if consumers want sex therapy? does this mean nurses should offer it, or we'll lose out to prostitutes?
And have you thought about "why" people are desperate? They are "failures" of our healthcare system. And other professions provide sex therapy so that's a non issue here.
nobody is claiming tt cures anything? some nurses claim they heal wounds with tt.
Didn't I already provide you with wound care research using TT?
Of course antibiotics can be evaluated using cultures. I'm saying that when any research study involves human to human interaction...such as when the antiobiotics are actually given to a patient...consciousness comes into play.
Your reply just shows that you have lack of experience and knowledge on the subject. It is very well documented...you'll find it if you wish. Might want to study up on rituals and ceremony in healthcare, also if you do not believe that your presentation has a bearing on a patient's responses.
the question becomes (in drug administration, for example) how much substance is consciousness and ritual vs pharmacological effect? i don't think many would say the ritual has much effect.
in my opinion, your reply just shows that you place far too much emphasis on fluff rather than substance. unfortunately, i don't think any amount of additional study will ever help you see the difference. but as long as you administer the med and do the things supported by evidence, that's fine. if you need to bring along an extra bit of showmanship for your own psychological needs, i don't see it being a problem as a practical matter.
And have you thought about "why" people are desperate? They are "failures" of our healthcare system. And other professions provide sex therapy so that's a non issue here.
people are desperate becuase disease is a terribly debilitating. that in no way proves the validity of alternative treatments, nor does it prove our healthcare system is such a whopping failure.
maybe other professions should provide tt, chaplian services, voodoo, etc! that's exactly the point. i don't think nurses should just discriminate against sex services :).
well, it's been fun, and the discussion has been a bit outlandish at times. however, i'm going to let this thread go, since i've got other fish to fry and more pressing matters. cheers everyone :).
ZASHAGALKA, RN
3,322 Posts
What makes you think that nursing is so research oriented?
Our 'researchers' must first prove their willingness to drink the kool-aid. The phD programs are run by phD's that screen out those not their 'kind'.
Mind you, I'm not knocking TT with this comment, but our Ivory Tower.
~faith,
Timothy.