# Religion and Medicine: Why Faith Should Not Be Mixed With Science



## eric (Jul 8, 1999)

FYI:CommentaryReligion and Medicine: Why FaithShould Not Be Mixed With ScienceRichard P. Sloan and Larry VandeCreek[MedGenMed, August 2, 2000. ï¿½ Medscape, Inc.]Does religious faith contribute to better health? Despite a lackof solid evidence, advocates of a growing trend to integratereligion with medical treatment believe that it does. In theirview, doctors would enhance their effectiveness as medicalhealers by considering, inquiring about, and attending to thespiritual needs of their patients. Indeed, a leading proponentfrom Georgetown University asserts that "the medicine of thefuture is going to be prayer and Prozac."[1] We disagree.Linking religion with medicine may seem intuitive. But, as weargue along with a group of healthcare chaplains andbiomedical researchers in a report in the June 22 New EnglandJournal of Medicine,[2] this movement oversimplifies 2 verycomplex and different realms of human experience. It overstepsthe boundaries of medicine and diminishes the power ofreligion.In doing so, it unintentionally opens the door to spiritualcoercion. As patients with various illnesses, we generallyaccept our physicians' professional authority and expertise.There are times when we entrust them with our lives. But whatexactly are we supposed to think if our doctors question usabout our religious beliefs or advise us to pray morefrequently? Is this within their area of expertise as well?We are all on dangerous ground indeed if we start asking ourdoctors to become clerics or spiritual advisors.Those who support bringing religion into medicine argue thatthere is a substantial body of evidence to prove that religiousactivities promote good health. They draw the conclusion thatgreater participation in religious activities would producehealthier individuals, and, further, that it is appropriate andeven desirable for doctors to counsel their patients to thateffect.In these times of evidence-based medicine, it is essential thatall recommendations by physicians be grounded in solidscientific data. So, let's consider the evidence. On the whole, itis weak, with significant methodologic flaws, conflictingfindings, and a lack of clarity and specificity.[3] To date, only a few well-conducted studies have demonstrateda link between religious activities and better health. Thosestudies focused on attendance at religious services, which theyfound was associated with lower death rates.[4,5] There is noevidence at all that other religious activities -- such as prayeror reading the Bible -- play a role in improving health, despitetheir importance in people's spiritual lives.But even if we concentrate solely on church attendance, thesestudies only take us so far because they fail to exploreimportant questions. For example, religious worship servicesvary widely in both style and content. Consider the differencesbetween a Quaker meeting, a Roman Catholic mass, and aJewish service. Do we really want to conduct scientific studiesto determine whether some religions are more salutary or betterthan others?Finally, we have to keep in mind that these types ofepidemiologic studies, even when well conducted, only reflectassociations at a very broad level. Correlation does not implycausation. Therefore, these studies do not provide any evidencethat recommendations by physicians to engage in religiousactivity will lead to improved health -- assuming that thoserecommendations are even followed in the first place. And ifthere are benefits, there may be an enormous differencebetween attending church on your own and attending because aphysician recommends that you do so.Although more research will certainly be done in this area, itwill likely miss the point. That's because its purpose appears tobe justifying a role for religious activities in medical treatment-- similar to the role that antibiotics play in eradicatinginfections or the role of certain surgical procedures in repairingdefective heart valves or replacing worn-out knees. But religion doesn't need medicine to validate itself. It doesn'trequire scientific empiricism because it is based on faith. Andwhen you mix faith with science, you serve neither and weakenboth.Evidence suggests that Americans lead rich spiritual lives.They are, however, highly personal and private lives. They should be kept that way. It is not up to physicians to querypatients on their religious beliefs or advise them on how oftenthey should pray or go to church. Those types of discussionsare appropriate when the counselor is a priest or a minister ora rabbi or an imam. They are not appropriate when thecounselor is a physician, who has neither the training nor thespiritual authority to offer guidance in matters of faith.If anything, spiritual counseling is an abuse of a physician'sauthority. It has the power to coerce people who are vulnerableand afraid. That is not what medicine is about. Nor is it whatreligion is about. References 1.Sides H. The calibration of belief. New York Times Magazine. December 7, 1997:92-95. 2.Sloan RP, Bagiella E, VandeCreek L, et al. Should physicians prescribe religious activities? N Engl J Med. 2000; 342:1913-1916. 3.Sloan R, Bagiella E, Powell T. Religion, spirituality, and medicine. Lancet. 1999;353:664-667. 4.Oman D, Reed D. Religion and mortality among the community-dwelling elderly. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1469-1475. 5.Hummer RA, Rogers RG, Nam CB, Ellison CG. Religious involvement and U.S. adult mortality. Demography. 1999;36:273-285. Richard P. Sloan, PhD, is Associate Professor, Department ofPsychiatry, at Columbia University and Director, BehavioralMedicine Program, Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center,New York. The Rev. Larry VandeCreek is Director ofPastoral Research, The HealthCare Chaplaincy, New York,NY. ------------------ http://www.ibshealth.com/


----------



## JeanG (Oct 20, 1999)

Hi Eric:I've seen this before, and it's an excellent article, and one that I agree with 100%.Thanks for posting it!







JeanG


----------



## Mike NoLomotil (Jun 6, 2000)

ERICAn intriguing post in the context of certain discusions on the big board. Hope somebody sees it.Mike


----------

