Hypnosurgery

Post by **The Beatles** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:20 pm

There's little cause for mentioning the alternative to traditional anaesthesia called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnosurgery

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:18 pm

Uh huh... a great example of what I like to call, "Silly science".

Post by **The Beatles** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:44 pm

Now really, you as a moderator should know better than to use language like that!

And I don't see what you have against it, not until you've watched the programme anyways. Anaesthesia is something that's really easy to objectively measure: does the patient feel pain or not? Additionally, the subjectivity of pain has been well-researched in modern science (I wrote a brief essay on that once), so the work seems perfectly plausible to me. I don't expect a full success rate, that's about the only difference I can envision to current anaesthetic techniques.

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:01 pm

Because hypnotism itself is a load of hooey. That's what I have against it.

Sorry about the language. I've been cussing alot this weekend and it just slipped out.

Post by **The Beatles** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:28 pm

Why don't you watch the program and then come to a conclusion?

Hypnotism is not "a load of hooey". It has not received the level of attention that more recent discoveries have, but it has been scientifically evaluated.

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:36 am

Scientifically evaluated, and found to be a load of hooey. I don't need to watch the program. Hypnotism works on willing individuals, on an inconsistent basis, and provides nothing more than a placebo effect to patients going through surgery. It's purely subjective. Before anesthetics, people went through surgery conscious, and this is simply a way to do that without some of the people actually feeling it. Hypnotism is hooey.

Post by **The Beatles** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:40 am

without some of the people actually feeling it

In other words, it works?

BTW, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnotism# ... n_Hypnosis

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:59 am

These are the same people who wouldn't feel it if they were given pills full of sugar that they were told would take away the pain. Placebo effect.

Post by **The Beatles** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:09 am

Yes... but if it works, what's your problem? So bleeding what? Pain is not objective, pain is subjective. Thought is objective, senses aren't.

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:18 am

My problem is, is should work for everyone. And it doesn't. If it works for you, great. But I'll stick with actual drugs that have been tested.

Post by **The Beatles** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:20 am

Most drugs don't work for everyone. Hypnotism is trivial and non-damaging to test on each patient, unlike commercial drugs.

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:24 am

Yes, but the percentage for hypnotism is alot higher than the percentage for any drug. If hypotism was being tested by the FDA, it would be rejected.

Post by **The Beatles** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:39 am

Not if it were evaluated without a guarantee, as many commercial drugs are.

Post by **Gen. Volkov** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:48 am

No, you are thinking of supplements. The classification of the drug does determine it's path through the FDA. All anesthetics, being mind-altering subsistences, get the strictest testing.

Post by **The Beatles** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:30 am

Yes, and this is a non-mind-altering anaesthetic.

Most medications we take in the course of everyday life are in fact supplements. In operations, of course, drugs. But at that level, they do have to be tailored to the patient: that is why there is a trained anaesthetist specially for each operation.

Frost And Flame Forums

Hypnosurgery

Members connected in real time