Edit: People don't understand /s. Poe's law strikes again.
Also, The Christian Science Monitor does a terrible job monitoring Christian Science and Christianity, but they do alright on science. They're absolutely flying off the handle with their obvious slant towards uncontroversial, neutral, factual reporting. Those bastards.
The Christian Science Monitor is a model of great reporting in a time when few models exist.
I am saddened when someone downplays a CSM report as biased because the listener assumes some form of Christian fundamentalism.
Good to know. Also good to know they aren't bible thumpers, and just happen to be 'Christians' monitoring science, as per the name implies.
Stuff like the belief that disease is a mental error rather than physical disorder, and that the sick should be treated not by medicine but by a form of prayer that seeks to correct the beliefs responsible for the illusion of ill health.
Sadly, this makes the appearance of the word "Science" even more confusing to the casual observer.
Placebo's and Nocebo effects wouldn't exist without it.
And I am quite adept at finding controversial topics...
Annnnd my sources are usually from things like the NCBI... and Mayo Clinic...
But to be fair to you, I did find this study done by Wayne B Jonas posted to the NCBI: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6707261/
So I'll give it some consideration; but yeah... I usually ignore this kind of thing because of how misinformation is first seeded as being "They don't want you to know this" or "Unknown to others, but now you can learn the truth" etc, etc.
So no offense. Just me being my usual critical self.
Edit: I'd like to post this excerpt from the start of the article. It basically reiterates what I was ultimately getting at, while still pushing the authors original point and your point about placebo itself being a myth.
> The fact is people heal and that inherent healing capacity is both powerful and influenced by mental, social, and contextual factors that are embedded in every medical encounter since the idea of treatment began. In this chapter, I argue that our understanding of healing and ability to enhance it will be accelerated if we stop using the term “placebo response” and call it what it is—the meaning response, and its special application in medicine called the healing response.
https://www.etonline.com/val-kilmer-explains-why-he-got-chem...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Baker_Eddy
Val Kilmer is even a member! They definitely have a quieter, less evangelical profile than those other sects, but they do appear in the background of American cultural life, with Christian Science Reading Rooms in many cities:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science_Reading_Room
That said, despite them being a new religious movement and having very suspect beliefs about medicine, this thread isn't the first time I've heard that their newspaper, the Christian Science Monitor does very good journalism, outside of the health news reporting.
They essentially don't have much to do with religion apart from including a page on religion and you wonder a bit about health topics.
They believe Jesus (but mostly the founder, Mary Baker Eddy) came with secret knowledge of how you can heal by thinking the right thoughts. This is possible because, basically, objective reality is an illusion/all in your mind. On the heresy scale, if JW is a 3 and Mormonism is 4, i would say Christian Science is 10.
They regularly come up in the news when their kids die from rejecting medical treatment in favour of faith healing (or maybe correct-thinking healing is more accurate).
CSM lost almost all its connection to CS along with the decline of the cult's popularity.
I knew absolutely nothing about them and more than once I took down parts of their live site by accident (back in the bad old days of FTP-ing files directly to the prod server, there was no "dev"/"qa"/etc). At some point along the way I read a little more about them and was pretty disgusted by it all. Thankfully that work didn't last for very long and I was moved to other projects.
Narrative control + amplification power + even brand awareness = revenue opportunity. For example, The Epoch Times, the media mouthpiece of Falun Gong, promotes Shen Yun, the Chinese Dance troupe showcasing the 'beauty of China before Communism'. Propaganda and Profit need each other
I don’t know any other.
And I guess they rethought the subtlety because now it's "China before communism"
They must pay a lot into the parades in order to even be accepted in such large numbers.
There is no other reason they constantly try to outdo and outnumber everyone in parades that have nothing to do with religions or cults. That's why I refer to it as hijacking. It's not about them, but they absolutely make sure they are the ones you remember.
I didn't see anything like you describe[1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong#Central_teachings
If you read their books (e.g. https://falundafa.org/eng/eng/pdf/flg_en.pdf, just search for "David Copperfield"), they elaborate a bit more on the potential supernatural abilities that one can achieve through meditation.
edit: The Falun Gong have three OTA broadcast channels in Chicago, but Iranian official government news is too dangerous for me to be exposed to.
* Looks like they still do at https://en.falundafa.org/falun-dafa-books.html
https://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/03/newsweek-ibt-olive...