Skip to main content

Two Meta-Analyses of Noncontact Healing Studies

πŸ“„ Original study β†—
Roe, Chris A, Sonnex, Charmaine, Roxburgh, Elizabeth C β€’ 2015 Modern Era β€’ healing

πŸ“Œ Appears in:

Plain English Summary

Can people heal living things from a distance, without any physical contact? After tossing out fraudulent studies by a discredited researcher, this sweeping review looked at over 100 experiments β€” some on cells, animals, and plants, others on actual human patients. The non-human studies are especially clever because cells in a petri dish can't experience a placebo effect (they don't know anyone's rooting for them). The verdict? Statistically significant positive effects showed up in both categories, even after filtering for study quality. That said, higher-quality studies tended to find smaller effects, and there are signs that unsuccessful experiments may have gone unpublished. So the signal is real but modest, and the jury is still deliberating on just how strong it truly is.

Research Notes

The most comprehensive healing meta-analysis post-Wirth, directly updating Astin et al. (2000). Central to the distant healing controversy: significant effects survive quality filtering, but publication bias and quality-outcome correlations temper confidence. The non-whole-human phase is especially important as it sidesteps placebo confounds.

Are the positive findings from noncontact healing studies robust after excluding fraudulent work and accounting for methodological quality? Two meta-analyses examined 49 non-whole-human biological studies (cell cultures, animals, plants) and 57 whole-human clinical trials of distant healing, excluding the discredited studies of Daniel P. Wirth. Phase 1 yielded weighted r = .258 (CI95 .239-.278), reducing to r = .115 when restricted to 22 quality-threshold studies. Phase 2 yielded r = .203 (CI95 .180-.232), increasing to r = .224 for 27 quality-filtered studies. Both databases were heterogeneous and showed quality-outcome correlations, but significant effects survived quality filtering.

Links

Related Papers

Also by these authors

More in Healing

πŸ“‹ Cite this paper
APA
Roe, Chris A, Sonnex, Charmaine, Roxburgh, Elizabeth C (2015). Two Meta-Analyses of Noncontact Healing Studies. Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2014.10.001
BibTeX
@article{roe_2015_distant_healing,
  title = {Two Meta-Analyses of Noncontact Healing Studies},
  author = {Roe, Chris A and Sonnex, Charmaine and Roxburgh, Elizabeth C},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing},
  doi = {10.1016/j.explore.2014.10.001},
}