BBC Focus Magazine

[Hyrulian Outlaw]

Just wondered if anyone would like to put their minds into working this one out.

The Rice experiment
"The rice experiment is another famous Emoto demonstration of the power of negative thinking (and conversely, the power of positive thinking.)

In this experiment, Dr Emoto placed portions of cooked rice into two containers. On one container he wrote "thank you" and on the other "you fool". He then instructed school children to say the labels on the jars out loud everyday when they passed them by. Aftr 30 days, the rice in the container with positive thoughts had barely changed, while the other was moldy and rotten."

Theres plenty of people out there saying they have done this experiment themselves with positive results. Alarmingly finding evidence to debunk it is rather more difficult. A quick googling and you will see for yourselves.

There is also similar stuff going on for the water experiment, whereby water that has positive thoughts "projected" at it forms ice crystals that are more aesthetically pleasing.

I'm really, really sceptical about this and need a little help figuring it all out if any one is interested in doing so?

[Shadowwolf]

Well first off the fact that guy makes big bucks from peddling his altered water is a sure sign of conflict of interest. The new agey aspect to his site also does not lend towards credibility.

The Rice experiment

So he puts some rice into containers, labels them and has kids recite the words for thirty days. Were all the grains of rice checked to ensure that they all contained the same level of contaminants and spores, were the containers sterilised prior to the rice going in, were the lids of equal capacity in their seal, hell were they tightened equally? One grain, a poor seal or spores already in the jar - and it's fifty fifty that the rot happens in the fool jar and not the other - and one could easily go far faster than its neighbour. Then we could have willful tampering to create a desired result or even sub-conscious bias, thereby creating a subtle lack of care in the negative sample by the experimenter who has a desired outcome in mind. Single shot is certainly no good.

Then there is the matter of the words, were they merely recited, was a feeling to be imagined whilst they did so, was this even done on each pass? The words are meaningless in and of themselves as tone or feeling is what gives them context, thank you can be said with no genuine sense of thanks and you fool can be said with fondness and no malice. So if it was merely recite the words then neither would have any positive or negative aspects to bring down one jar and make the other feel good. Also how do we know the kids did as they were asked and not forget most of the time; we don't and we can't, experiment is full of issues.

Then of course there is the small matter of the force of interaction. If positive and negative thoughts effect the rice then how, by what means is this effect being transferred, what physical laws underpin it and how can it be detected? This seems like another one of those mystical forces that does lots but is utterly undetectable and the proponent just cannot be bothered to find out. However why would any thought have any effect on inanimate, cooked rice, it's dead matter, there's nothing to feel good about receiving nice thoughts.

As for random folks; uncontrolled and likely of no value.

Bunk I'm thinking.

There is also similar stuff going on for the water experiment, whereby water that has positive thoughts "projected" at it forms ice crystals that are more aesthetically pleasing.

Aesthetics, in other words the personal subjective opinions of the interpreter and hence utterly meaningless. You might say this crystal is nicer and I might say that this one is nicer and neither of us is objectively correct. The choice of music is indicative of an inherent bias, classical creates nice crystals whilst metal creates bad crystals. By what objective law is classical good and metal bad? I love metal and I like classical, like metal more though. Bunk.

Whether it's rice, ice crystals or water it seems just like chi, homeopathy and similar related claims. The proponent insists that there is a change but has no explanation of how this change takes place, no explanation that gets around known physical laws, no vehicle for interaction, no objective evidence just hand waving and saccharine slop.

[M Paul Lloyd]

I seem to recall an experiment using patients in hospital whereby one group were prayed for and another not, the subjects were not made aware of which group they were in and after a period of time their conditions compared ............. and, no difference was observed whatsoever.

So I am going to apply the same logic to this rice experiment and assume it is bunkum.

[Hyrulian Outlaw]

I fully agree it's all rubbish.

The water experiment has apparently been done several times with good scientific control. One example was people in Japan were asked to send positive or negative thoughts to the water sample they were assigned in America. The positive, negative and control water were all then photographed by independant photographers and the results rated for aesthetics by another group who where not told of any of the previous part of the experiment. The positive water scored more in the test. Results for the control and negative were similar. Apparently.

Emoto has freely admitted that in his experiments that all photos are taken selectively, only those that suit his needs are used

The problem with people who believe this stuff is the fallback argument of intention. As its an intention experiment, you get the results you want, wether they be sub-concious or knowingly intended.

As for the rice experiment I agree with what you say Mr. Wolf, there is certainy too many ways for the results to be skewed. It still doesn't make sense why so many people report that it works, i'd expect a very slim difference of results going one way or the other. May give it a go myself. I have seen quite a few forum posts from people who say they have put good control measure in place, explain the process they used and still got positive results, so quite perplexed as to the mechanism by which it may work. There must be a real explanation instead of the hocus pocus stuff thats currently believed by so many.

One thing I will say though is that profiteering from something doesn't invalidate genuine results, it will however seriously shift the balance in reported accuracy. Every good invention ever is the result of genuine results from experiments leading to a viable product that can be sold.

I recall reading a similar thing MPL. Though I seem to remember they got good results, even so far as to get people to pray for medically sick people who had been ill years before. The people prayed for had either recovered or passed away from their illness. Two groups of similar people, gender, age, illness all accounted for in each group to keep thing as fair as possible. The recovery rate for the group that was prayed for was higher than those who werent, so apparently the power of prayer also defies the boundaries of time, shame it doesn't work for all those that were prayed for.

[M Paul Lloyd]

I guess it depends on who's version of events you go by.

Long-Awaited Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer By BENEDICT CAREY
Published: March 31, 2006 New York Times
Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found.
And patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms, perhaps because of the expectations the prayers created, the researchers suggested.
Because it is the most scientifically rigorous investigation of whether prayer can heal illness, the study, begun almost a decade ago and involving more than 1,800 patients, has for years been the subject of speculation.
The question has been a contentious one among researchers. Proponents have argued that prayer is perhaps the most deeply human response to disease, and that it may relieve suffering by some mechanism that is not yet understood. Skeptics have contended that studying prayer is a waste of money and that it presupposes supernatural intervention, putting it by definition beyond the reach of science.

Read more.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

[Shadowwolf]

The prayer thing has been well debunked these days.

Emoto has freely admitted that in his experiments that all photos are taken selectively, only those that suit his needs are used

That tells you all one needs to know, they selected the pictures that accorded to the outcome they wanted to find. As if the subjective realm of what is or is not aesthetically pleasing is not bad enough they completely invalidate their experiment by managing the results in such fashion.

I must say that this alleged effect is quite amazing, it can travel thousands of miles and somehow find the exact location of the intended target yet it cannot be detected and it is not known by any physical process. Must be quantum

Also I've seen on Wiki that a further test was done by other folks, triple blinded they say and this one found nothing.

The problem with people who believe this stuff is the fallback argument of intention. As its an intention experiment, you get the results you want, wether they be sub-concious or knowingly intended.

Unless they have specifically outlined exactly what the end result should be and put in place proper controls to eliminate selective bias on input and data, they don't get to claim that whatever outcome is what they intended after the fact.

I have seen quite a few forum posts from people who say they have put good control measure in place, explain the process they used and still got positive results, so quite perplexed as to the mechanism by which it may work.

But who is doing it, are they folks who already believe Mr Emoto or are likely to believe such claims and hence pre-disposed towards getting a positive result? Have they repeated the experiment themselves a few times? Whilst some may claim they have put good controls in place we don't actually know whether that is just in their mind or not or even if they're just saying it for effect. They were also directly involved as one would expect with home based experiment so blinded this is not. I don't think a whole lot of credibility can be put in ad-hoc experimentation from sources unknown.

One thing I will say though is that profiteering from something doesn't invalidate genuine results,

True but when the person profiting is the only one making the claim by virtue of uncontrolled experiments and credible, independent confirmation is lacking as well and any known physical or chemical law to underpin the phenomena. There is a large question mark over the trustworthiness of the source.

[Hyrulian Outlaw]

All good stuff, thanks.

I haven't looked into the prayer stuff for a long time as I don't believe in it, nice to know theres been credible research into it however. As most here would agree, a negative outcome is still an important result.

Some very sound reasoning Mr. S, sadly it's not enough to convince an ardent hippy believer. I can't find anything on the basis of an actual scientific study that trashes the idea. Do you perhaps have some sources beyond your own reasoning? Would appreciate a link if you have one.

As for it must be quantum, have any of you seen this
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00xxgbn

Its an episode of Horizon called "What is reality", it delves into the possibilities of what could be real. Theres a piece about the universe may be a hologram and things don't exist unless they are observed. Well worth a watch.

[M Paul Lloyd]

Oh dear the 'things don't happen unless they are observed' hypothosis................... trees in forests making a sound etc etc, thing is entire star systems have been born an died without our 'godlike' overview so why should some quantum theory about things not happening without being observed be credible? Sorry, I just don't buy it.

[Shadowwolf]

sadly it's not enough to convince an ardent hippy believer.

Usually nothing is, they want to believe and that's that. Unfortunately scientific evidence is unlikely to budge them either, there is always an excuse to be found if it's wanted badly enough. Most of what I said was borne from having a brief look see at it but there are relevant ideas that could be linked to when I go find em.

As for Horizon, Beeb player don't work here for some odd reason. I can watch it via cable where it is intentionally supplied but I can't watch the same thing online, weird.

I'm certainly initially skeptical of any suggestion that some things don't exist because there is no sentient observer around to see it. Perhaps one could elaborate on what they meant?

Oh and I mentioned quantum merely because there is hardly any woo out there that does not wheel out the term as though it magically explains everything

[M Paul Lloyd]

Oh and I mentioned quantum merely because there is hardly any woo out there that does not wheel out the term as though it magically explains everything

Good point.

[Hyrulian Outlaw]

I can't elaborate as frankly the idea of it is so hard to understand. Youtube however is everyones friend
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTjUqI6W3yQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXNIfxcV ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QJxnaT- ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AuxyzKZ ... re=related

[Shadowwolf]

Excellent, now to get a free hour

[Lateralman]

What language did the rice speak to understand the words “thank you” or “you fool?”

Was it Japanese or English or was the rice bilingual?

[Shadowwolf]

Just one of the many issues with the claim.

[Healerman]

There are lots of dialects; Basmati, Carnaroli...

[M Paul Lloyd]

Lapsam Sushong?

[Colm]

On the prayer thing, it will never be debunked. There is always the "you shall not put the lord to the test" in other words since God knows it's a test he won't listen to the prayer. This can be used to refute any evidence that he doesn't exist. Even if you use historical data of "genuine" prayers, he can tell the future.

Besides you're assuming the best possible outcome is recovery. But of course getting into heaven is. All those prayed people might be getting fast-tracked into heaven.

[Healerman]

On the prayer thing, it will never be debunked. There is always the "you shall not put the lord to the test" in other words since God knows it's a test he won't listen to the prayer.

Sounds a bit like the quantum world - if you know where I am, you can't know what I'm doing.

Quanta move in mysterious ways.

[elusive11]

More Evidence From Dr Masaru Emoto On The Power Of Thoughts
Most people agree that positive thinking has power. But just how much power is debatable. positive thinking power

Masaru Emoto, a researcher and alternative healer from Japan has given the world a good deal of evidence of the magic of positive thinking.

You may have heard of Dr Emoto. He became famous when his water molecule experiments featured in the 2004 film, What The Bleep Do We Know?

His experiments demonstrate that human thoughts and intentions can alter physical reality, in this case the molecular structure of water. Given that humans are comprised of at least 60% water, his discovery has far reaching implications... can anyone really afford to have negative thoughts or intentions?
Positive Thinking Power: Dr Emoto's Rice Experiment
The rice experiment is another famous Emoto demonstration of the power of negative thinking (and conversely, the power of positive thinking.)

In this experiment, Dr Emoto placed portions of cooked rice into two containers. On one container he wrote "thank you" and on the other "you fool". He then instructed school children to say the labels on the jars out loud everyday when they passed them by. Aftr 30 days, the rice in the container with positive thoughts had barely changed, while the other was moldy and rotten.

If you have any doubt in the validity of this test, try it at home for yourself. Be sure to spend at least 30 seconds, twice a day consciously intending negative thoughts or positive thoughts at the respective containers of rice. And make sure you use cooked rice, as its water content is what produces the results.

If you don't want to do it at home but you're curious to see positive thinking power in action, watch this video from youtube documenting one person's experience at trying it:

[MrIsaksson]

His experiments demonstrate that human thoughts and intentions can alter physical reality, in this case the molecular structure of water. Given that humans are comprised of at least 60% water, his discovery has far reaching implications... can anyone really afford to have negative thoughts or intentions?

Changing the molecular structure of water?? What a lot of b.s. if dont mind me saying it.
So it is no longer 2 hydrogen atoms and 1 oxygen?
Also where is the evidence? No matter how much either of us stare at a jug of water would you or I be able to say that the molecular structure has changed.

Sorry this type of random nonsense really annoys me