Where Does Energy Work Belong?

Comment

Comment by Erica Olson on March 25, 2010 at 2:50pm

I'm going to set up a group for donkey dung therapy. I better get my share.

Vlad, I think there's more than enough poo being flung around here. Save me some Dew--I'ma come join you. I'll even bring popcorn.

Darcy, Kris, Laura? Care to join?

Comment by Erica Olson on March 25, 2010 at 2:44pm

Mike, thanks for your reply. You said quite a few things that I'd like to address.

You and Emma are just trying to protect the friendships you each have made with us and poor Vlad, Darcy and Laura are caught in the middle trying to smooth it over.

First and foremost, I'd like to state publicly, for the record, that I'm not trying to "protect any friendships," lend strength to any "alliances," or be a sycophant to anyone. I don't really give a rat's ass what people on this site think of me--I am here on a professional basis, not a personal one. There are people on here that have continually acted in a professional manner (or at least the majority of the time), and those people have my respect. Like Darcy and Vlad, I'm sick of the sniping and the name-calling, but instead of ignoring it, I chose to address it.

when he acts like the kid that got beat up a lot on the playground

Well, for crissakes, have you seen how people treat him here? Disregarded because "he's not an MT," despite the fact that he has some very valid information. He's been shunned, picked on, insulted personally, had his profession insulted, aspirations and innuendos cast upon him, and words put in his mouth. When that happens on a playground, yeah, it's bullying, and it's pretty a normal reaction for someone in his position to take a swing every now and again.

(To stick with the grade-school metaphor, I'm sure that there'll be people out there saying something along the lines of, "Oh, she's sticking up for Chris because she liiiiiiiiiikes him!" Y'all think what you will, but I'd stand up for anyone who's getting the short end of the stick. I'm not interested in being a passive supporter or disengaged onlooker.)

I own up to the facts that I stated, yes. "just another researcher trying to control research funding." Other wise he would just do his research and that would be that. . . .Everytime someone mentions energy research he's right back in here saying why it shouldn't happen. Why? To me, that is trying to control research.

You both say I don't answer his questions and he stop replying because I didn't answer his questions. Go back in this discussion and show me the questions. It's all his same ranting and opinions. I proved he even made donations for research and he got upset and quit talking to me, supposedly, again.

Okay. This, right here, is one of the big things I have trouble with in your comments. You've got a really bad habit of according incorrect and/or unsubstantiated motives and actions to people while ignoring the truth.

Example: I haven't said a word about you not replying to Chris's questions. May not seem like a big thing to you, but the devil's in the details, and you saying that I have lumps me in on Chris's "side" and leads you to saying things like I'm defending him because I'm his friend. As I already mentioned, I'm a free agent.

Example: You link Chris's repeated refusal to engage with you (poorly stuck-with, I'll agree) to a) you not answering his questions, and b) you pointing out his research donations. The latter doesn't have a blessed thing to do with any of it--there's no point in bringing it up. You could point out OMG CHRIS EATS TOFU!!! and it would still garner a "Yeah, so?" But you connecting the two makes it seem like he's trying to hide something--hence, an unsubstantiated motive.

Even if you don't state those motives directly, you imply a hell of a lot, like this whole "trying to control research funding" nonsense. If an MT says "we don't need no stinkin' research in this area," you disagree politely, claim ignorance, or ignore the statement--and move on. But heaven forbid that someone in the business disagree! Your immediate reaction gives the impression that there's some sort of Machiavellian conspiracy theory going on that we should all be aware of. It's like telling a chef that there's not enough salt in the sauce--and when he disagrees, implying that he's on the payroll of the International Anti-Salt Board or something.

Implications without proof are nearly impossible to refute. That's how rumors get started. The biggest problem I have with most of what you say is the assertive conclusions you draw, partially because it doesn't seem like you're listening. This leaves people feeling like they've been disregarded and ignored, and it's frustrating as all hell, not to mention belittling.

I haven't bothered to write out this diatribe because I'm picking on you, Mike, but because I want to give you some feedback on the way you communicate. Up until your statement that specifically said that you agreed with Laura, I couldn't tell! I thought you were all for including lots of energy work in the MTBOK--especially when you state things like "adding it in will allow us to add more K about it as we grow the energy K side of the equation." It can be very, very difficult to understand you, and often leaves everyone going in circles.

Comment by Christopher A. Moyer on March 25, 2010 at 2:30pm

I agree confidence is often a tremendous thing. And even without ever having met you, I can tell you have tremendous energy, industriousness, and enthusiasm. It doesn't surprise me that you could pull a big event together in a few months. That's a sincere compliment.

In other cases, confidence can blind us. I'll leave it at that.

Pseudo-modalities list, O.K. It will be incomplete, of course. I'll just try to hit some of the bigger ones.

reiki
crystal therapies
biofield therapies of all kinds
astrology
past life regression
EMDR (the counseling part works fine - the EM part is unnec.)
traditional theories of acupuncture (being needled may have an actual effect, but not in the way the historical theories describe - sham acupuncture works as well as 'real' acupuncture)
reflexology

There could be many, many more. Note they all have some things in common - any or all of them could appear to work under uncontrolled circumstances, due to placebo effects, attention effects, time effects, and other confounds. That's very different from actually working.

Your turn - how about some of those many overturned scientific laws? And they gotta be laws - not ideas or theories, but scientific laws.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on March 25, 2010 at 2:19pm

That is what makes me successful, Christopher. I do not lack confidence in being sure. I start projects by visualizing them as having already happened and were successful and then I work my chart backwards. I set goals a long the way and I attain them. It works.

Confidence is huge portion of what it takes to be successful. I live it and try to instill it into as many therapists as possible. It should be taught in schools. You don't solve problems by sitting around. You do something about it.

I was told I only had 2 months to pull off the first Festival. Just wait till next year Mike, I was told by local experts. Then, I was told it wasn't very big, just let the experts do it. We doubled in size. The next two years were the same. I was told by experts not to go into Texas. The associations were at odds and I would fail. It was our best year yet. And the Texans were getting along fine when I left!

P.S. Still can't wait to see your psuedo-modalities list.

Comment by Laura Allen on March 25, 2010 at 2:07pm

Darcy, in my past life of teaching Reiki for years, I always taught my students that it was totally without integrity to give energy work to someone without their permission, unless they are in a coma and another family member has to speak for them. It is a boundary violation to do so, just the same as it would be for a massage therapist to commit a violation, and it is in fact against the Code of Ethics of The Reiki Association.

Comment by Christopher A. Moyer on March 25, 2010 at 1:45pm

Massage will always recieve the bulk of funding. I am sure.

You are one of the most consistently sure people I have ever encountered.

P.S. Still can't wait for those examples of overthrown scientific laws. Should be easy since there were many of them.

Comment by Christopher A. Moyer on March 25, 2010 at 1:39pm

Vlad, your latest remark brings me back to something I said about 50 posts back - scotch the MTBOK, and replace it with the CoSSMTD (Collection of Stuff Some Massage Therapists Do).

P.S. Like how I worked the word scotch in there? I know you wee Irish folk don't call it that, but "whiskey" didn't work in the context.

Comment by Darcy Neibaur on March 25, 2010 at 1:37pm

I will skip on the Donkey Dung and Dew. You all can have as much as you want.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on March 25, 2010 at 1:36pm

Massage will always recieve the bulk of funding. I am sure. But a lot of therapists feel alternatives need to be explored as well. Some may prove fruitful. Why must EBP be given all the research and funding? There is so much more to this wonderful profession. Much of it can not be explained as yet. Research in many areas may not prove frugal or true. But many studies were done to prove what is accepted now. The research may even open new avenues for EBP Massage.

We do not need to be protectionists. Once you start down that slope you will have therapists only funding what they specifically believe in. That's silly and hurts funding. We need to spread research around some and look for options and possibilities. One great side bar on this, it may spur average therapists with ideas and more people get involved and donate and we grow. We need to grow. We can do this quicker, I think by educating people about massage and getting them to look at their practice and ask how research can help them grow. Laura says it looks like over half of the courses offered at NCB are woo-woo. You don't grow by tossing aside this wishes of over half of what therapist are interested in. You get them interested. And your videos will help start the educational process. It will take time. But watch it grow! More people have written me about their feelings on research in the last two months than had in the previous 6 years! Research is becoming a "Hot Topic" amongst therapists and we need to keep it growing!

Comment by Christopher A. Moyer on March 25, 2010 at 1:34pm

Thanks for added detail, Darcy.

I agree it is an interesting phenomenon. But it is still not a scientific test of reiki.

Just hypothetically, if you care to answer it - if we did block your ears and eyes, and told you 'ok, there is a 50/50 chance that the reiki practitioner will work on you, or not,' do you think you would be able to reliably tell us whether reiki had been done or not?

P.S. Note that if we were testing donkey dung therapy, we'd also have to block one's nose. You know, to be scientific. Unless, of course, olfaction is how it works.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 14
• Next ›
• Page