TV Skeptic: The medium and Oz

On an episode of "The Dr. Oz Show" (5 p.m. KTTV) this week, the good doctor stepped away from his usual attention to the science and practice of medicine and instead welcomed the self-proclaimed psychic medium John Edward. The pair discussed whether communicating with the dead may be therapeutic.

In this age of modern medicine, Dr. Mehmet Oz, arguably one of the country's most influential doctors, seemed to be promoting a medieval therapy for today’s patients. The condition Edward claimed to treat is grief.

“Grief is an energetic form of cancer,” Edward told  the TV audience. “If it is not treated it will metastasize, and it will reach out and grow into other aspects of a person's life.”

And one therapy for this condition? Communication with the deceased through a medium can be “extremely therapuetic.” 

Dr. Oz then called upon Katherine C. Nordal,  executive director for the American Psychological Assn., who immediately disputed Edward’s description of grief. 

“Grief is not a disease,” she said, rather sternly, “It's not a disorder and it doesn't need a pill and often times normal grief doesn't even need counseling.”

But any hope the skeptic may have had that this noted authority would raise critical questions about the practice of visiting psychics and mediums for therapy were soon dashed. The show jumped to the next segment when Edward began his process, which he referred to as “readings.” 

In a letter to producers of "The Dr. Oz" show Nordal said, "I provided very balanced responses to Dr. Oz's questions during the show's taping, however, the editing of my responses did not capture my full comments or give viewers an accurate portrayal of my professional view on John Edward's methods. Instead, it seems that 'The Doctor Oz' show intentionally edited my responses in a way that gave the appearance of my endorsement of Edward's methods as a legitimate intervention."

For his first reading, Edward called on a young woman, who asked a question about how strenuous it might be for those who have died to communicate with the living. Edward answered by speaking about the woman’s deceased mother, and amazed the studio audience with details that seemed to have come from beyond the grave. No one seemed to think it at all suspicious that the two had a previous connection -- Edward had done a reading for the girl’s mother years before.

His next victim (patient?) was a middle-aged man who rose to his feet when Edward suggested someone had lost a son. As the reading continued, Edward informed the grief-stricken parent that the car accident that claimed his son’s life was in fact a suicide.

"I've never known that he committed suicide for sure," said the grieving father, “but I believe it."

This father seemed able to cope with that information, but I’m not sure every grieving parent would take that kind of news as well. What's particularly noteworthy is that it has no basis in fact or truth.

Edward has been accused over the years of obtaining personal information before doing readings, and using deceptive editing on his TV show. In the media he’s been roundly skewered on shows like “South Park” and “Penn & Teller.”

Yet Dr. Oz seemed to buy into Edward’s “therapy.”  It should go without saying that Edward’s ability to communicate with the dead has never been tested under the rigors and standards of the scientific method. 

But the therapeutic value of visiting a psychic or medium to communicate with a deceased loved ones has never passed the standard of scientific scrutiny either. Which makes one wonder why Dr. Oz was so entirely credulous. Truly a doctor, particularly one with such wide influence, should know better.

After this episode the critically thinking skeptic may be left wondering, what’s next?  Voodoo dolls? Oujia boards? Blood-letting at the local barber? 

 -- Ed Stockly

Photo: Dr. Mehmet Oz. Credit: David M. Russell / Associated Press

Comments

[Nicole Guice]

As much sympathy as I have for those in the throes of grief after losing a loved one, my instinct is to say that this sort of "treatment" is not so much therapeutic as it is cruel. Grief has certain stages that are, in most cases, all required for healthy emotional recovery. This seems pretty likely to stick people in the "denial" stage and never let them all the way out. Not that a certain amount of comfort isn't due to those who feel they need it, but perhaps the rigorous standards of the scientific community should finally be applied to this particular sort...and, at the very least, a study or two on how the beliefs fostered by these readings affect patients later on.

[Ed Stockly]

A couple comments suggested that Edward had been scientifically tested. He has not. There is a difference between someone running a "test" and a scientific study which follows the scientific method and has been published in a peer-reviewed journal. That is the minimal standard for science. In science, no scientist, no matter how well regarded, or how accomplished, is considered enough of an authority that are allowed bypass the scientific method and peer-review process. There are two questions that could be studied in this case: Does Edward actually communicate with the dead? Does someone suffering from debilitating grief get therapeutic results from visiting a medium/psychic (whether or not the 'therapist' is actually communicating with the dead). In Edward's case neither question has been scientifically tested. We wouldn't start using a drug or any other new therapy based on anything less, nor should doctors promote paranormal treatments or any other therapies unless they have been scientifically proven effective.

[ImaBeliever]

Three months after the passing of my mother 4 years ago me and my 4 siblings went to one of John's seminars in NYC. There were about 500 people there and out of the 2 and a half hour seminar only about 5 families were read.
We were one of them.
Let me tell you this...HE IS FOR REAL!!! John spent about 20 mintues on us telling us some very specific things that nobody outside of our family knows. John has almost an aggressive attitude when he is not being filmed. He doesn't "fish" around for answers. He basically just tells you what he and your loved one has to say and doesn't really care if you confirm it or not. He knows what he is telling you is true. He just spits out info non-stop. On camera he engages more in a dialogue because that helps the viewer see the confimation. John also called on my brother and told him to stand up that he was with him. At first other people were trying to "own" this info but John actually called on us personally.
A couple of my siblings were skeptics when we went so we didn't say a word about our mom once in the room since some people say they have microphones under the chairs. A friend of mine who went with us purchased the tickets so they were in her name. That debunks how some people say they research you in advanced.
John gave us peace of mind. For someone who is in active grief it is priceless. You could say that we were more eager to "believe" in him because our loss was recent but we were absolutely blown away by things he knew, very specific things. Here is one example: 16 years ago my 19 year old cousin accidently overdosed while experimenting with drugs. His name was Ralphie. His father's name was also Ralphie so we always called my uncle "Big" Ralphie and my cousin "Little Ralphie". Once my cousin died we stopped saying big and just called him uncle Ralphie. John actually said that my mom was with someone named "little" Ralphie. My uncle never accepted his sons loss and goes to his grave almost every day still. John told us to please get a message to little Ralphie's dad that he is ok. John said it was VERY important that he know this.
Another small example was that he acknowledged that we had consecutive birthdays in the family on the 18th and the 19th. My sister's birthday is on Dec 18 and my mom was Dec 19th. He also gave us some specifics on how exactly my mom passed. It's not something that one could just "guess".
I'm sure people are going to rip apart what I have said but I don't care. John gave my family peace of mind that my mom was still with us and that to someone who is grieving is a gift of enormous value.. It helped my family heal. So even if one day John himself came out and said he was fake it wouldn't matter. He helped us move forward and ease some the intense grief we were feeling. For that I will be forever grateful.

[jilltoo]

The argument being made here-- that Dr. Oz/John Edward is a fraud because they presented something not scientifically based or peer reviewed-- would also apply to a belief in God. And yet, if your physician told you that he was an atheist, you would probably select another. You cannot prove a God; ergo he doesn't exist?

I don't know if Edward is real or not (or even is God is real or not.) However, I find it interesting with the thousands of reads he has done and the speed of information available, I haven't found even one accounting that disproves his practice or shows him to be a charlatan. You might find his practice distressing but that does not disprove him.

[aware]

As a mother who has lost a child, I can tell you that reputable mediums are the real deal. They do not do cold readings and this theory has been disproved over and over again. Instead of commenting on something you know nothing about, take the time to pick up a book and read. It's called educating yourself as opposed to being led like cattle. For anyone who has never been to a medium how can you comment one way or another. As far as science is concerned, we've been told many things only to have someone correct them later on. Remember how the world was flat. WRONG! When a total stranger can tell you your childs name, what his room looks like, nicknames, habits, age, things that have happened since their passing, not just before they passed, and so much more relevant information you have to sit up and listen. We are grieving, we are not crazy. I can personally attest to the therapeutic advantages to seeing a medium that can put you in contact with your child and loved ones. There is nothing else like it. It is thanks to the many books i've read on the afterlife, near death experiences and the comprehensive testing done on the validity of mediumship that I am still here today. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourselves. Make an informed decision.