So Vaj, this study you refer to,the Unique Effect study, has it been replicated? Is it the only study of its kind with this finding?
--- Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2008, at 6:08 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela > Mailander > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <snip> > > > The argument between Judy and Vaj was mostly > about > > > who's form of meditation is better and who has > the > > > better scientific proof. I think the jury's > still > > > out. > > > > Actually, the argument between Vaj and me was > about > > whether the Buddhist researchers he champions had > > shown that TM researchers hadn't shown that TM was > > unique, as Vaj claims they did. > > > > I said the Buddhist researchers had ignored large > > numbers of more recent TM studies and hadn't > > bothered to grasp what the TM researchers were > > actually saying about TM's uniqueness. > > > > As far as Vaj is concerned, the case against TM is > > closed. > > > > I'm the one saying the jury is still out. > > > > (And with this post, I'm gone until Saturday.) > > > Uh Judy, it might help to read the study I'm > actually referring to-- > not the one you assumed I was talking about. The > landmark study that > really dismantles a lot of the TM research brouhaha > is entitled > Meditation: In Search of a Unique Effect. The bottom > line is really > rather simple, when you actually compare TMers to > controls, it turns > out to be not nearly as wonderful as what we were > told and > indoctrinated on. In some cases the controls > actually do better than > the TMers! And they are rather systematic about > dismantling the > uniqueness claim while pointing out some good points > here and there. > > It's really rather a letdown to read. I wouldn't be > surprised at all > to find out the TMO has tried to put countering faux > research in place > over time to attempt to offset it. I wouldn't be > surprised at all. > > The research you're confusing with the research I'm > referring to is > the Cambridge text. It showed a couple of important > things, but the > most important IMO is that the very basis of the > Maharishi Effect, the > much touted "coherence" that's used to recruit large > numbers of > meditators is really not what we were lead to > believe, not by a long > shot. Another big letdown. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
