|
|
|
|
|
|
by lyudmil
5476 days ago
|
|
|
The sample seems a bit odd. Reading the comments it seems that a disproportionate percentage of the subjects were into meditation (a number of them report "increasing meditation"). I haven't read the study but it seems to me they'd have a hard time publishing their conclusions as they stand now. I'm particularly skeptical of medical research. An ex-girlfriend was a student at Harvard Medical School and worked in three different labs on drug development. Two of the three studies all the labs published in a year contained data that was either pruned or simply misreported to exaggerate the effect of the drug. I know that's anecdotal evidence, but there's a lot of grant money floating around in medical research and all the incentives are skewed towards positive results, which often leads to bad science. I fear this may be yet another example (speculating, admittedly). |
|
|
I haven't read this study yet, but I know that Johns Hopkins is doing another study where one of the groups actually takes meditation lessons for six months before taking the drug. These studies are mostly meant to validate the methodology and to demonstrate that they can be used safely in a well chosen population when done under professional supervision. It's not really meant to accurately measure what percentage of the population at large would be able to safely achieve ego death and/or have a primary religious experience.
Also, I agree with you that medical studies are generally sketchy, but these aren't medical studies. These studies might eventually be used by a drug company in convincing the FDA to grant a new drug investigation permit, but probably not for at least another 5 - 10 years.