 n
1986, cardiologist Dr. Randy Byrd conducted a study of
393 coronary patients at San Francisco General Hospital. In the study,
Dr. Byrd, without telling either the patients in the study or their treating
physicians, arranged for prayer groups to pray for half of the patients,
but not for the other half. The patients in the two groups were comparable
in terms of age and severity of medical condition.
While all the patients in the study were in San Francisco, those who
did the praying were located in all parts of California, in Oregon, and
on the East Coast.
Pray-ers included Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. Each person prayed
for many different patients. Each patient had from 5 to 7 people praying
for him or her. The pray-ers were given the names of the patients, their
diagnosis and their condition. Each pray-er was asked to pray every day.
There was no specific amount or method of prayer required except that all
prayers had to be for “beneficial healing and quick recovery.” Some of
the pray-ers gathered in groups in each other’s homes, but most prayed
alone.
The patients who were the recipients of prayer did significantly better
than the ones who were not. They had fewer complications. For example,
only 3 of the “prayed for” required antibiotics, compared with 16 of the
“unprayed for”; only 6 suffered pulmonary edema, which is waterlogging
of the lungs, compared with 18 of the “unprayed for”; and none of the “prayed
for” required intubation (the insertion of a breathing tube into the trachea)
while 12 of the “unprayed for” did.
Maybe this is the kind of thing that caused Shakespeare to observe through
the mouth of Hamlet: There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Think about it. |
