What falsehoods are cited above? I still don’t see any from me or Knapp.

Many things will reduce blood pressure. Simple TM can for some. I never said it couldn’t But so can petting your dog or doing progressive relaxation exercises. You have not shown that to be false. Choose your remedy. For most, I believe that doing simple, basic TM twice a day is not harmful and may even help some people. Most though probably will not stick with it. Thus I do not believe it is worth the big bucks the TMO charges for the technique. I would be more likely to recommend a different form of meditation, such as mindfulness meditation, which people can learn for free. Check the Mayo website for instructions. Or, pet your dog and do someone a kindness once a day.

Anderson may not be affiliated with the TMO but the statistician that did the work was affiliated with the TMO. I did not denounce the study without reading it. I said I could not properly comment until I have read it, but I had a concern, the involvement of the TMO in the study. Your lie was that the study was independent when the statistician himself was affiliated with the TMO. Though I would note that the Kentucky study results are contrary to the Alberta meta-analysis (which was in fact a very high quality study which I have read and was truly independant) so it is far from uncontroversial. My concern is possible cherry picking in the Kentucky study which would yield false positives. But, as I said, I can’t fully comment because I have not read it yet.

OK, you keep arguing about the science. Explain for me how you reconcile the weird ideas of the TMO that can only be described as religious. There is no science that shows you will fly or become invincible or have the strength of an elephant. There is no science that shows that living in an east facing home is healthier or keeps away the bad spirits. There is no science that supports the astrology. There is no science that supports the pulse diagnosis. So, how do you reconcile these bogus claims with your claim that TM is scientific? If the TMO will lie about flying, why not lie in research studies? They did lie you know. I was their in the 1970s when we were told we would fly and we were told that we were on the super highway to enlightenment.

And you are a doctor! And YOU are questioning others’ credentials! Must anyone who has a viewpoint different from yours be a fraud?

I challenge you to present your credentials. I suggest that the above psychologists do the same, to bring all the cards out on the table. I was about request the webmaster to check the IP addresses and expose your multiple identities, but alas, you have confessed — of course, one would have to, to accuse others of the same crime.

This is all getting way too silly.

FYI: just because your own personal practice of TM and the sidhis did not produce the results you were wishing for, does not mean that the program is a “fraud.” The illogical of this is astonishing. Nor does the fact that I experience WONDERFUL results from my TM and Sidhis practice prove anything in general (except for myself). To discount hundreds of scientific studies, and the experience of hundreds of thousands of people who embrace TM, because of your own singular experience and beliefs, is, well, bogus.

Glory Dog says: Anyone who has experienced the reality of TM, the perfect naturalness of it, the beautiful simplicity and innocence of it, anyone who has clearly experienced the process of transcending, knows what TM truly is. The people I know who are *sold* on TM are not true believers, they are true experiencers. From their own silent level of knowingness, in the depths of their own awareness, they just know. And what is it they know? Their own Self.

To address another of the many falsehoods you’re slinging out:

You say the reduction in blood pressure is slight, and imply that you could pet a dog and get the same results. Don’t try and pet Glory Dog! He can smell a fib a mile away and doesn’t like fibbers.

According to cardiologists and MDs, the levels of blood pressure reduction found through TM is often life saving, as many studies have demonstrated (Journals: Hypertension, Stroke, etc).

I leave you with the words of one James Anderson, professor of medicine at the University of Kentucky, an INDEPENDENT researcher (he was NON meditator with no stakes in the outcome) who led the meta-analysis you have denounced without reading, the findings of which rebut the controversial July 2007 study you are fond of referencing — the study which concluded that most research on meditation is low quality and found little evidence that any specific stress reduction effectively lowers blood pressure. The new meta-analysis identified all high quality meditation studies published through 2006 and rigorously analyzed their effects, which the previous government report failed to do.

From the U of K press release:

Anderson said the new meta-analysis includes only high quality studies on all available stress reduction interventions. The studies on Transcendental Meditation were conducted at five independent universities and medical institutions, and the majority of them were funded by competitive grants from the National Institutes of Health.

Says Anderson:
“Adding transcendental meditation is about equivalent to adding a second antihypertension agent to one’s current regimen, only safer and less troublesome… Many patients with mild hypertension or prehypertension may be able to avoid the need to take blood pressure medications–all of which have adverse side effects. Individuals with more severe forms of hypertension may be able to reduce the number or dosages of their BP medications under the guidance of their doctor.”

Anderson added that long-term changes in blood pressure of this magnitude are associated with at least a 15 percent reduction in rates of heart attack and stroke. “This is important to everyone because cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death in the U.S. and worldwide,” Anderson said.

I also saw a post that I had missed before from a Dr. Pat. Another purported clinical psychologist? Or are you the same person as Dr. P. Loveland? Given that I erred in posting with more than one entity, feel free to confess if you did as well. :)

Dr. Pat/ Dr. Loveland, how do you feel about the more peculiar claims of the TMO? Do you think the TM siddhis program is good for your patients? Do you think that it is good for them to believe that they will fly when they think: Relationship of body and akasha - lightness of cotton fiber? Become invincible? To have the strength of an elephant?

Knapp mentioned the Alberta study and the Cambridge handbook, both of which I have read. He correctly summarized the results.

My criticisms of the poster who claimed to be a clinical psychologist and a “scientist.” I would never say that a clinical psychologist is a scientist, they are clinicians. I am an MD, I do not consider myself a scientist. I questioned his bona fides because he made statements I found extremely problematic. He basically called Knapp unethical for not recommending TM when he said: “But as a person who has even minimal training in the field of therapy he should know it is highly unethical to dissuade others from pursuing help that has been scientifically verified to be of benefit.” Mr. Knapp has clients who had bad experiences with TM. It would be unethical to recommend that they go back to TM.

TruthwillOut, I have not yet read the Kentucky study so I cannot comment properly. However, I am somewhat concerned as TMO researchers were involved in the study. True believers often argue that research institutions researching are independent. Most often there nevertheless was involvement by a researcher who is a practitioner of TM and often what I would call a true believer. A little reduction in blood pressure? I would rather pet my dog and get the same results.

What is especially bothersome to me is the assumption that true believers make that TM is always good, always right for everyone. Sorry, some people do not have good experiences with TM, especially with the siddhis program and with rounding. And some people have bad experiences with the TM organizations.

I am a former TM’er. I meditated for years and found no meaningful effects. I do not do the siddhis. I find that program to be a fraud as not of MMY’s claims ever panned out.

So, I ask again true believers, how do you find these blogs that mention meditation? Do you also use google alerts?

So, true believers, do you believe you will fly? Do you live in east facing homes? Do you purchase astrology charts from the TMO? Do you have pundits do yagyas for you for a fee? Do you believe you will become enlightened? Have you reached god consciousness?

This is why some call the TMO a cult.

“Blood pressure response to transcendental meditation: a meta-analysis”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18311126?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

BACKGROUND: Prior clinical trials suggest that the Transcendental Meditation technique may decrease blood pressure of normotensive and hypertensive individuals but study-quality issues have been raised. This study was designed to assess effects of Transcendental Meditation on blood pressure using objective quality assessments and meta-analyses.

METHODS: PubMed and Cochrane databases through December 2006 and collected publications on Transcendental Meditation were searched. Randomized, controlled trials comparing blood pressure responses to the Transcendental Meditation technique with a control group were evaluated. Primary outcome measures were changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure after practicing Transcendental Meditation or following control procedures. A specific rating system (0-20 points) was used to evaluate studies and random-effects models were used for meta-analyses.

RESULTS: Nine randomized, controlled trials met eligibility criteria. Study-quality scores ranged from low (score, 7) to high (16) with three studies of high quality (15 or 16) and three of acceptable quality (11 or 12). The random-effects meta-analysis model for systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively, indicated that Transcendental Meditation, compared to control, was associated with the following changes: -4.7 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI), -7.4 to -1.9 mm Hg) and -3.2 mm Hg (95% CI, -5.4 to -1.3 mm Hg). Subgroup analyses of hypertensive groups and high-quality studies showed similar reductions. CONCLUSIONS: The regular practice of Transcendental Meditation may have the potential to reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure by approximately 4.7 and 3.2 mm Hg, respectively. These are clinically meaningful changes.

And the negative criticism you interject whenever you receive your TM alerts is not in response to so-called “misinformation” disseminated by the TM organization, but are in response to independent news articles or blog posts by individuals. “Letting go” does not require that the negative misinformation go unaddressed by anybody who wants to help shine a light.

I said I do not know Mr. Knapp. I do not know him. I have read his blog and found nothing untoward.

To operate a site called “TM-Free Blog” does indeed suggest an unhealthy attachment. As any mental health professional can attest: if one really aims to be free of some particular practice or organization, the last thing you want to do is spend interminable hours almost daily denouncing it on blogs, to the point of obsession, it appears; maintaining at least three websites where you denounce it; actually trying to build a career around this negative engagement.

this is not a personal attack, just a word of advice for ruth/knapp.june etc. . knapp is obviously not free of TM. he focuses on it as much as most TM teachers, but in an unhealthy and negative way. too bad that some people have to carry such negative emotions with them.

Ironically, TM is all about letting go.

so no need to over react to truthout’s position.

Personal attacks are unnecessary and unseemly.

For most people, the science that supports TM is enough to convince. But to those “true believers” in their negative opinions, as Dr Pat describes them to above, the science remains invisible. So let the june/ruth/knapps of the world rail against TM all they want. Fortunately there are so many people practicing TM and keeping an eye out for these spreaders of misinformation that the naysaying will always be answered back with the facts.

I question your bona fides.

I’m a clinical psychologist who works daily with people who experience anxiety, depression, psychosis, etc. I have found the TM technique a significant help to many of my patients. Those who start TM typically find improved sleep, reduced anxiety and depression, more happiness, greater ability to enjoy, feelings of wholeness and less physical illness.

As a scientist I am aware that debate and opposing valid scientific research is essential to the growth of a reliable body of knowledge. But bizarre assertions such as Mr. Knapp is making is not science. If we resort to this kind of hearsay, personal bias and superstition, we will reverse scientific understanding and protocol by 300 years. The reason we turn to science to begin with is because we all have different ideas and opinions. Science provides us a valid, reliable, objective, repeatable means to investigate a given field of study.

Perhaps science is not the forte of Mr. Knapp–and that’s understandable. But as a person who has even minimal training in the field of therapy he should know it is highly unethical to dissuade others from pursuing help that has been scientifically verified to be of benefit. For example, if a patient comes to a doctor and complains of migraine headaches the doctor cannot refuse that person medication because he doesn’t like the way the medication is distributed. Doctors who do so run the risk of losing their license. So, to Knapp and those who evaluate scientific procedure by tendentious means–Please, consider the harmful impact of discouraging even one individual from doing something so good for themselves.

Sincerely,

Dr. P. Loveland

As a therapist who uses Transcendental Meditation in my practice, I feel is actually irresponsible for people to make allegations of negative results from a practice that has proven to be so useful. Note that these accusations above come from a limited-licensed social worker, not a trained psychologist with clinical experience using TM as a therapeutic modality. The unique state of profound rest experienced during TM is the exact opposite of harmful — it rejuvenates and harmonizes mind, body, and emotions.

It is a blatant falsehood to claim that the scientists who have conducted studies on TM are “nearly uniformly affiliated with the TM organizations.” The vast majority of these scientists actually have no affiliation with any TM organization whatsoever. How could the TM organization *have* so many hundreds of “affiliated” scientists conducting TM research at Harvard, UCLA, Yale, University of San Francisco, University of Kentucky, Stanford Medical School, and hundreds of other institutions around the world? And, affiliated with it *how*? Such claims are a joke. (For an extensive list of non-meditating scientists who have researched TM, see Dr. David Orme Johnson’s website, truthabouttm.)

It does sometimes happen that after conducting research on the TM technique, the scientists *then* decide to learn TM, once they’ve actually witnessed consistent results in controlled studies and randomized trails. This happened recently, for example, to a non-meditating scientist at the University of Kentucky who was involved in a study investigating the effects of TM on high blood pressure, comparing it to other practices. The study, just published in the American Journal of Hypertension, found that no other meditation practice or relaxation technique produced the same, powerful results as TM in lowering blood pressure (in fact, no other mind/body practice showed any significant results at all).

As to the fears and obsessions with “cults’ that plague certain people who denounce TM, while that is something that therapy might help, I offer the following insight from a leading neurologist at Scripps Memorial Hospital, one of many physicians who is speaking out about the life-enriching effects of the TM program:

“Dr. Sandeep Chaudhary: If anyone is concerned that the TM program might be some kind of religious sect or cult, then just ask yourself: How many so-called cults have been awarded $24 million in research grants by the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health, or offer programs verified by research studies in hundreds of refereed medical and scientific journals, including the American Medical Association’s Archives of Internal Medicine?
How many religious sects have offered AMA-approved continuing education courses for physicians, or teach systematic instruction in a technique that’s regularly featured in brain research presentations at the American Psychological Association’s annual conferences, and highlighted in the American College of Cardiology press releases for benefits to cardiovascular health?
The distinguished recognition and scientific validation goes on and on.”

Many such comments and interviews can be found at the Ask the Doctors website, maintained by a national association of medical doctors and scientists who represent thousands of physicians across the US who practice TM and recommend it to their patients. The site is a great resource, I think, for any therapist.

Be well, all
Dr. Pat

So no need to overreact at his position.

As far as the studies, even though some were published under the auspices of reputable universities, the researchers were nearly uniformly affiliated with the TM organizations.

i beg to differ with the claim that nothing is advanced by referring to knapp as “bitter’ and “disgruntled,” for it posits a reasonable explanation for his obsessive life-endeavor to smear TM and it’s founder. and knapp’s case *begs* for an explanation. it is indeed an oddity that a grown man spends so much time on the internet devoted to slamming something that is well-proven to be positive and beneficial. seeing him as merely disgruntled and bitter puts it in perspective, for me. what else could explain it?

but i agree with “ruth” about one thing: it’s true that out of the 6 million people who have learned TM, no one can know how many are regularly practicing twice-daily everyday, just as no one knows how many of the tens-of-thousands of people who have bought nordictrack are exercising everyday. but what kind of criticism would that be to say that nordictrack is no good because we don’t know how many people use them everyday? it’s a grabbing-for-straws criticism, i’d say. but what’s more significant is the point brought out above, that out of the millions who have learned TM, there are so few people who actually claim, as knapp and his few (disgruntled?) buddies claim, that TM is no good.

but here’s where science comes in and where knapp’s crowd is truly at a loss. if there were only 10 or 20 scientific peer-reviewed studies showing TM’s benefits, and if these research studies were published only in minor, fringe journals, then knapp might reasonably argue (without appearing irrational) that TM’s benefits are not well supported and that the practice doesn’t really help people. but with *hundreds* of peer-reviewed research studies, from harvard, u of penn., u of kentucky, yale medical school, and so many other *independent* institutions, published in such journals as the international journal of neuroscience, scientific american, science, the ama’s journal, and so on, all verifying the benefits of TM, it’s really without merit to decry TM as non-beneficial. but knapp goes further and actually calls it *harmful.* this is where knapp’s argument goes off the deep end.

i’ve been meditating for 23 years. i went through maharishi univeristy. now i live near a major TM center where there are so many wonderful people enjoying TM’s benefits. i am also a therapist who has recommended TM to clients. i have seen such relief and profound transformation in people who had tried everything else. from my point of view, it is a grave wrong that knapp is trying to denigrate something so helpful and which lifts people’s spirits and dissolves stress so efficiently thorough the deep rest. but don’t just take my word for it. i’m just one person. all anyone has to do is consider the science. after 50 years, TM has proven itself. it’s still here and growing stronger. it is my joy to help spread the word about it. but now, off to work.

be well, all
kk

As far as TM helping millions of people, this is unsupported. Yes, the TM organizations claim to have taught roughly 6 million people. However, it is not know how many continue the practice and is not known what nearly all of those 6 million feel about the practice and whether it has helped or harmed them or, more likely, had no effect at all.

John Knapp’s insinuated criticism toward people for writing “lengthy” responses to his posts is, well, ironic and funny. He is probably the most active anti-meditation spammer in the blogosphere. He maintains three websites against meditation. He keeps up probably hundreds of anti-TM web pages.

But to address his points: He implies that the TM organization chooses to promote certain studies and ignore others. The research on TM is not paid advertising by the non-profit TM educational organization, it is independent scientific research conducted at such institutions Harvard Medical School, UCLA, Yale Medical School, Stanford, ect., and as has undergone intense peer-reviewed scrutiny. Such research belongs to the scientific community, and is not solely promotional the material for an organization. The Alberta Study Knapp refers to is was highly controversial, was not peer-reviewed, not “well-respected,” and was criticized by scientists around the world for bias and lack of proper controls. This study and the other he mentioned are discussed on Dr. David Orme-Johnson’s website truthabouttm, dot org, if anyone wants to know the facts.

And thanks to those above for exposing John Knapp, known to be an anti-meditation internet activist who disingenuously takes advantage of the blogging medium by constantly spamming it to promote his websites. His copy-and-paste negative posts against TM are “sprinkled like bird droppings throughout the blogosphere,” as was cleverly been said of him elsewhere.

Knapp and a small handful of his pals, literally 4-5 obviously disgruntled former TMers, try to create a perception on the internet that TM is controversial. Because of how Google works — retrieving information but not verifying its accuracy — Knapp and his small cadre have been able to throw their negative mix into the Google search. His websites (he maintains at least three himself) are Misinformation Central, replete with rumor and falsehood. It is also suspected by people who have encountered him on blogs that he uses more than one name to post, giving the impression that he has someone agreeing with him.

About 6 million people have learned TM over the past 50 years. The fact that there are only this small handful of detractors on the internet is powerful testimony to the benign and benefitial nature of the TM program. (Knapp’s own anti-TM blog features only 5-6 regular contributors, and this after years of soliciting for contributions).

There are so many people like myself and those above whose experience with TM is totally positive and enriching over a lifetime, and who speak up to clarify the facts, that Mr. Knapp’s postings (and those of his few naysaying friends) are becoming sidelined by the simple truth that TM is an invaluable tool to maximize health and happiness.

Let the great benefits of TM continue to be celebrated in the world.

Laughingcrow out.