Why the Prayer Study Fails

After having read the entire study, I found a few major problems which introduced unknown variables. It may be interesting to note that the writers of the study were completely aware of this, acknowledged it, and were the ones who pointed it out to me. (Again shoot me an email for the entire study, tomsilvertyre@hotmail.com)

Here are the reasons that I do not find the prayer study's conclusions compelling.

1. According to the study, "The overall daily mean of intercessors was 33
   (range 10-58). Intercessors reported praying from 30 seconds
   to several hours, from 1 to 4 times per day."
2. There was likely a large amount of non-study prayer which was not recorded- Prayer from family, friends, and congregations, prayer for 'the sick in general' from people all over the world, and prayer for one's self.
3. There were three groups which prayed. Two of the groups were Catholic nuns and friars (this is not a problem). The third group was listed as 'Protestant,' but after further examination I do not think they are Christians. I discount prayers from the third group because I am interested in the question "do Christian's prayers effect healing," not "do prayers from non-Christian groups effect healing." I realize there could be debate on this third point, and if so let me know! I will do a post on it for clarification.

I think the study says it the best. (Does anyone know if I am infringing on copyright for making such a large quote? )

We did not request that subjects alter any plans for

family, friends, and/or members of their religious

institutions to pray for them, because to do so would

have been unethical and impractical. At enrollment,

most subjects did expect to receive prayers from others

regardless of their participation in the study. We also

recognize that subjects may have prayed for themselves.

Thus, our study subjects may have been exposed to a

large amount of non–study prayer, and this could have

made it more difficult to detect the effects of prayer

provided by the intercessors.

The finding that intercessory prayer, as provided in

this study, had no effect on complication-free recovery

from CABG may be due to the study limitations.

Understanding why certainty of receiving intercessory

prayer was associated with a higher incidence of

complications will require additional study.

Private or family prayer is widely believed to influence

recovery from illness, and the results of this study do not

challenge this belief. Our study focused only on

intercessory prayer as provided in this trial and was

never intended to and cannot address a large number of

religious questions, such as whether God exists,

whether God answers intercessory prayers, or whether

prayers from one religious group work in the same way

as prayers from other groups.

Conclusion:
I do not find the study to be compelling evidence against the power of prayer due to key limitations. The number of intercessors (22-33 per day) is small enough to be subject to the introduction of significant error based on prayers from outside sources (unknown per day).

Other questions such as 'does the intercessor's relationship to the patient correlate to the effectiveness of prayer?' 'Does the amount of time praying have an effect on God's response?' and 'Does the intensity with which one prays effect God's response?' have been unanswered at this point.

I would love to see the results of future studies on prayer. Hopefully the problems that occurred in this study will not be repeated, and better conclusions can be drawn.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me know what you think!