talkmagic.co.uk

Lawrence wrote:Short answer: no.

Probably, but I can't be arsed doing any leg work today. Too busy, and too knackered on account of not being able to sleep in this heat.

I just put "nlp research" into Google and came up with 4,540,000 hits.

This is the first one:

http://www.nlpresearch.org/

(University of Surrey)

Barry

I don't understand the questions about whether NLP has been peer reviewed and proven. It's a meaningless question if you consider where NLP came from; Linguistics, computer programming and counselling/psychotherapy. All of these are proven, scientific methods for gaining a specific outcome. Cobble bits of them together and make something "new" and you could come up with NLP - Neuro! Linguistic! Programming!

My problem with NLP is how much is made of the fancy jargon and acronyms. It's a load of bunkum and the cynic in me says much of this is used just to sell lots of books, CD's and bums on seats at the feel good factor seminars. NLP is a wonderful tool if used appropriately and properly, but it's not the be all and end all.

Someone said in this thread that you wouldn't use a screwdriver to bash a nail in. Well, actually you could if your outcome was better than the one you got when using a hammer! That's NLP, but it's also just common sense if you think about it. If something doesn't work for you or you aren't getting the outcome you want, change your behaviour/speech/whatever until you do. It's very simple and can be unconventionally very successful. Lots of lateral thinking is required to make the most of it and many of the techniques are just fancy ways of doing things we all do naturally. NLP preachers make a huge song and dance about matching and mirroring and we get all excited and buy dozens of books. That's great, but stop and do a bit of people watching. We ALL use matching and mirroring naturally! It's unconscious competence built-in. The only thing anyone can teach about it is how to train yourself to use it at will to "manipulate" a situation to your own advantage, e.g. to make a sale or whatever. So, hear that jargon "matching and mirroring and rapport" and get to Waterstones to buy a load of books you don't really need hehe. I'm just as guilty of this as everyone else and have hundreds of pounds worth of NLP books and course materials, most of which just repeat each other and tell me stuff I already knew, but with nice new names!

There are some very useful ideas, techniques and methods under this umbrella term NLP. None of them are really new or groundbreaking. All of them have a basis in research and practise performed by other people, like Milton Erickson. As Bandler/Grinder say, NLP is a way of modelling excellence and one of the reasons they created it. Erickson couldn't explain why he was so good at what he did, it was just something that came naturally to him and required no effort. He was naturally unconsiously competent as a hypnotist and therapist. Bandler and Grinder came along, studied his methods and language and modelled it, altered it, allegedly improved it etc. and made a fortune in doing so. Good on them!

Watch Richard Bandler in one of his many seminar appearances. He's brilliant. If you have a phobia, why go through all the trauma of seeing psychologists and spending time fannying around working out what happened 30yrs ago when you were 4 and had a bad experience with a spider? It's not important. All you need to do is reprogram the way your subconscious thinks about spiders. It takes 10-15 minutes and works. Got some pain? Use hypnosis. It works and is increasingly being used routinely in some surgery for pain relief. In fact, there are already a number of cases where surgery was conducted without any anaesthesia or pain relief, using just hypnosis. Amazing. Recovery rates for patients are far better too.

All I'm trying to say is, don't get hung up on paying loads of money to learn NLP, it really isn't necessary (unless you want a nice certificate). It is based on 100% scientific methodology and can work. Those people who say NLP doesn't work for them are missing the whole point of NLP! If something doesn't work, discard it and try something else, and that includes NLP!! If NLP doesn't work, sack it and do something that does. There, you've now used NLP

I make no claims for the accuracy of this post, nor do I pretend to be an NLP guru or expert. But, I do know that I don't need to become a poor disciple in order to learn the art

Wishmaster wrote:Watch Richard Bandler in one of his many seminar appearances. He's brilliant. If you have a phobia, why go through all the trauma of seeing psychologists and spending time fannying around working out what happened 30yrs ago when you were 4 and had a bad experience with a spider? It's not important. All you need to do is reprogram the way your subconscious thinks about spiders. It takes 10-15 minutes and works. Got some pain? Use hypnosis. It works and is increasingly being used routinely in some surgery for pain relief. In fact, there are already a number of cases where surgery was conducted without any anaesthesia or pain relief, using just hypnosis. Amazing. Recovery rates for patients are far better too.

Have you got any citations for the bolded parts above?

magicofthemind wrote:I just put "nlp research" into Google and came up with 4,540,000 hits.

This is the first one:

http://www.nlpresearch.org/

(University of Surrey)

Barry

Google eh? Never would have thought of that!

Did you look at the first link you suggested?

What I asked, was if the effects of NLP had ever been tested, peer reviewed and published in a respected journal. Not if google could return hits.

I just wondered if someone who believed in NLP had ready access to something to prove it had any scientific testing/proof behind it.

I'm genuinely interested in this. I visited a professional hypnotherapist and master practitioner of NLP several years ago and feel the entire thing is at best a scam. Probably a well intended one. But nevertheless it seems to me to be unscientific nonsense akin to reiki or whatever they call putting hot stones on your back.

So I wondered if Nature or New Scientist or Ben Goldacre had actually ever shown any papers that prove NLP's efficacy?

MrGoat are you questioning hypnosis? Hypnotherapy or NLP?

Essentially they are a tool (Proven)
A process to use the tool (also proven)
A new process that allows finer control of specific subsets of Hypnosis (Also proven)

If you are asking if Hypnosis can substitute for anesthesia? Yes peer reviewed studies abound. If you are asking if someone has done that with specifically NLP under scientific guidelines that I do not know.

There are several of not thousands of versions of getting people into hypnosis.

Such as:
Confusion Method
Regression Method
Relaxation Method
Shock Method
Rapid Method
Bipass method
Anchor Method (etc)

NLP is another method for inducing hypnosis. Now it ALSO happens to have additional structures for cognitive restructuring. Which we would call Behavior Cognitive Therapy. Which is ultimately a fancy word for, "Changing thought to change behavior"

Ergo what do you want to know? Is it a giant scam and are we all just making fools of people who trust us? It doesn't appear so.

--Ifny

mrgoat wrote:Have you got any citations for the bolded parts above?

Hi mrgoat,

The 15 minute phobia cure using NLP is well documented and I'd imagine Google will give you the best results ("nlp phobia cure" and you'll find quite a few examples). If you do want specifics, I'll dig something out for you by all means.

As for hypnosis and surgery. I will find some references and abstracts of journals for you. I work for the NHS and have access to all the medical journals. It might take me a few days though. I'll post them in a new thread for everyone to have a read of.

One I can remember off the top of my head was documented in a book called Human Givens (it's a therapy model). One of the authors of the book (a therapist and hypnotist iirc) had some surgery on his hand. He used only self hypnosis rather than anaesthesia and pain relief during the whole procedure. He made a full recovery and in better time than would normally be expected. Oh, and again from memory, I believe using hypnosis in surgery actually reduces bleeding quite significantly.

Hypnosis is used more and more in medicine as they realise through empirical research that it can help with certain conditions. Despite what some would have you believe, hypnosis is of only limited use in certain cases. For stopping smoking, the research currently shows no better results with hypnosis as opposed to patches or other methods. This isn't surprising when you consider most smokers don't really want to stop and that's a key aspect of hypnosis. If you don't believe it will help or have reason to show "resistance" (cue Star Trek jokes), it simply won't work. I know, because I used to be a heavy smoker and tried everything, to no avail! What stopped me? An instant cure when I contracted a near fatal case of bilateral pneumonia 2yrs ago. The only reason I'm still here is because my wife resucitated me. Nice. I'll never touch a cigarette again and never thought I'd say that hehe!

Wishmaster

For hypnosis and surgery, start looking for Esdale and surgery, named after the surgeon John Esdale who discovered the state of complete hypnotic insensibility and used it on patients who couldn't tollerate a full general anaesthetic during the days of the Raj.

http://cnettv.cnet.com/hypnosis-instead ... 31766.html


Its well documented as far as medical hypnosis is concerned. I do it a lot for fMRI's when they need cognitive functions and the person has claustrophobia.

Infinite wrote:http://cnettv.cnet.com/hypnosis-instead-anesthetic/9742-1_53-50031766.html


Its well documented as far as medical hypnosis is concerned. I do it a lot for fMRI's when they need cognitive functions and the person has claustrophobia.

I understand how being in a tube could freak out susceptible people, but personally I'd LOVE a go in an fMRI machine!

Tomo wrote:For hypnosis and surgery, start looking for Esdale and surgery, named after the surgeon John Esdale who discovered the state of complete hypnotic insensibility and used it on patients who couldn't tollerate a full general anaesthetic during the days of the Raj.

That's lovely. What I wanted, was peer-reviewed, properly researched studies published in a proper journal.

You know, where they perform double blind tests for example. Could get a load of patients having a painful. Give some of them drugs to stop the brain feeling the pain. And the others can have someone chat with them for a bit and 'do' NLP. Then a control group.

The doctors don't know who is who and have to perform the same painful op.

If I was sure that NLP stopped pain and I tried to make money selling NLP I'd be really sure to fund research like that myself so as to prove it works and this make myself loads of money.

Wishmaster wrote:

mrgoat wrote:Have you got any citations for the bolded parts above?

Hi mrgoat,

Wishmaster wrote:The 15 minute phobia cure using NLP is well documented and I'd imagine Google will give you the best results ("nlp phobia cure" and you'll find quite a few examples). If you do want specifics, I'll dig something out for you by all means.

I've never heard of any peer-reviewed research published in a recognised journal that shows NLP cures phobias. I've looked on google before, but if you can find something I'd totally love to read it. Not saying it isn't out there, just I've not read it.

Wishmaster wrote:As for hypnosis and surgery. I will find some references and abstracts of journals for you. I work for the NHS and have access to all the medical journals. It might take me a few days though. I'll post them in a new thread for everyone to have a read of.

That would be really interesting. Although the NHS do invest money in homeopathy and other demonstrable nonsense!

Wishmaster wrote:One I can remember off the top of my head was documented in a book called Human Givens (it's a therapy model). One of the authors of the book (a therapist and hypnotist iirc) had some surgery on his hand. He used only self hypnosis rather than anaesthesia and pain relief during the whole procedure. He made a full recovery and in better time than would normally be expected.

I am 100% sure there are thousands of examples where someone who believes it is going to work can have something painful happen to them and them not feel it. No doubt about that whatsoever. If it works in a clinical test or not is my concern.

Wishmaster wrote: Oh, and again from memory, I believe using hypnosis in surgery actually reduces bleeding quite significantly.

You'd have thought, if that is true, that hospitals all around the world would have NLP Master Practitioners on the payroll then stopping bleeding. I mean, imagine the progress that would be made if people had problems clotting and NLP man and zoom in and chat to them for a bit and then they stop bleeding.

Sorry to be trite, but really. But why isn't it being used everywhere?

I'm not at all trying to bust your balls, just love to read some proof. I've just finished the EXCELLENT 'Bad Science' book by Ben Goldacre and he is now making me question everything. But not only question it, look into the citations and check sources. You'd be amazed at what 'Dr' (sic) Gillian McKeith has had published claiming nonsense. Then when you look into the 'proof' she cites, it's no more than a press release from a company manufacturing whatever seeds she's pimping!

I mean no offence to the folk here who clearly believe in the scientific benefits behind this. I just was seeking clarification as to any actual serious testing.

Infinite wrote:http://cnettv.cnet.com/hypnosis-instead-anesthetic/9742-1_53-50031766.html

Its well documented as far as medical hypnosis is concerned.

We must have different definitions of well documented.

Your link is a professional hypnotherapist who allegedly hypnotised himself before surgery on his hand. Nice publicity. For a more reasoned look at it check out Mr Lenkel check out:

"If only the mainstream media utilized more dedicated science journalists - and in a health-related case ones with medical training. A skeptical and knowledgeable journalist should have asked the penetrating questions to ascertain whether or not this story is actually true. Instead the public was treated to a superficial and sensationalized account that is likely highly misleading."

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=277

It'd be brilliant if it was true. But, if it was true, and also the case of Jack Gibson, then why on earth aren't they setting up proper tests to prove it?

Surely, if they really can do this and stop pain, they should be up for the Nobel prize? Or at least Randi's million...

I wouldn't dismiss homeopathy as nonsense so quickly. Whether or not it works is for you to decide, but...one thing that does work and is very well documented is the placebo effect. If you believe it works, it probably will! Homeopathy may or may not work on its own merit, although from what I've read, that seems unlikely (flames on a postcard to...). I'm of the mind that it works because people want it to and believe it does. The placebo effect is extremely powerful. Again, a well documented and clinically proven phenomena.

I doubt hospitals would employ NLP practitioners over dedicated hypnotists. The majority of hypnosis practitioners in hospital are doctors. You really need the medical expertise alongside the hypnosis training for it to be of any use in this setting. Many dentists use hypnosis too, as it is very effective with pain relief and to calm nervous patients. It is being used widely across the world in the hospital setting and has been widely reported in the media. But, like I said, it isn't effective for everything and more trials are being conducted all the time to determine where and when it's most useful and appropriate. Like most things, change comes slowly in the NHS. Hypnosis is beginning to make inroads in maternity units too as it helps with childbirth. I think the research on this is still emerging though.

There's nothing wrong with questioning things mrgoat. It's good to do that rather than take other people's word for things! I will find some examples of medical and surgical use of hypnosis as soon as I can get to the journals.

Wishmaster wrote:I wouldn't dismiss homeopathy as nonsense so quickly.

Oh it's nonsense. Every test has proven it's no more effective than a sugar pill. And the science behind it is utter ballderdash. Water has a memory? And you have such a small amount of the herb that has the properties you seek that there isn't even a TRACE amount of it in the water?

It's these tests I look for. Science has proven time and time again that homeopathy is a sugar pill. Yet still people spend millions on little bottles of pointless water.

Wishmaster wrote:Whether or not it works is for you to decide, but...one thing that does work and is very well documented is the placebo effect. If you believe it works, it probably will! Homeopathy may or may not work on its own merit, although from what I've read, that seems unlikely (flames on a postcard to...). I'm of the mind that it works because people want it to and believe it does. The placebo effect is extremely powerful. Again, a well documented and clinically proven phenomena.

Totally. There is an entire chapter in the Goldacre book devoted to the placebo effect. Of course it works.

Wishmaster wrote:I doubt hospitals would employ NLP practitioners over dedicated hypnotists. The majority of hypnosis practitioners in hospital are doctors. You really need the medical expertise alongside the hypnosis training for it to be of any use in this setting. Many dentists use hypnosis too, as it is very effective with pain relief and to calm nervous patients. It is being used widely across the world in the hospital setting and has been widely reported in the media. But, like I said, it isn't effective for everything and more trials are being conducted all the time to determine where and when it's most useful and appropriate. Like most things, change comes slowly in the NHS. Hypnosis is beginning to make inroads in maternity units too as it helps with childbirth. I think the research on this is still emerging though.

I'd just love to read one of the trials!

I am sure 'it' can be used to calm people down before an MRI or in the dental chair or in childbirth etc. But I reckon so could just having a nice chat with someone.

Wishmaster wrote:There's nothing wrong with questioning things mrgoat. It's good to do that rather than take other people's word for things! I will find some examples of medical and surgical use of hypnosis as soon as I can get to the journals.

I really look forward to reading up on this.

I currently suspect that hypnosis doesn't exist in much more than a placebo effect, coupled with the social conditioning that one behaves in such a way because one is expected to.

However, I look forward to you finding some actual meaningful trials for me to have a read of.