ANOMALOuS HEALiNg ExPEriENCES

10
Anomalous Healing Experiences

Stanley Krippner and Jeanne Achterberg
Both authors of this chapter have experienced anomalous healing experi-

ences, which we define as recoveries from serious illnesses that defy explana-
tions through conventional biomedical frameworks. Stanley Krippner was
hospitalized for internal bleeding in 1965. On the same day, not knowing of
Krippner’s hospitalization or condition, Shirley Harrison, a psychic claim-
ant living in Maine, told her daughters that she had to fly to New York City
because “Dr. Krippner needs me.” According to reports given by her daugh-
ters, Harrison added, “He is seriously ill with bleeding ulcers and will be
operated on before Monday evening.” The operation for duodenal ulcers was
Monday morning, but Krippner’s troubles were not over. The postoperative
wound in his right side, left open to permit the drainage of waste fluids, did
not close. Harrison visited Krippner in the hospital, saying that four stitches
needed to emerge from the hole before it would heal properly, and estimated
Sadly, Dr. Jeanne Achterberg died before this chapter could be published.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14258-010
Varieties of Anomalous Experience: Examining the Scientific Evidence, Second Edition, E. Cardeña,
S. J. Lynn, and S. Krippner (Editors)
Copyright © 2014 by the American Psychological Association. All rights reserved.
273
that this would occur within 3 days. Taking Harrison seriously, Krippner used
mental imagery to evoke images of the loose stitches. On the second day of
his attempts, two double-stitches emerged from the cavity, and on the fol-
lowing day the wound closed (Krippner & Welch, 1992, pp. 2–3). In this
instance, the healing process itself was not necessarily anomalous, but the
psychic claimant’s knowledge of Krippner’s condition and her subsequent
advice were possible anomalies.
Another unusual episode occurred in 1999. Earlier that year, Jeanne
Achterberg had been diagnosed with ocular melanoma, a rare and deadly form
of eye cancer (Achterberg, 2002). The only treatments available were surgical
removal of the eye or extensive radiation. Prior to treatment, Achterberg’s
eye swelled to nearly double its size, going through what might have been a
delayed hypersensitivity response, according to her physicians’ retroactive
conclusion. After 5 days, the tumor reached an even larger size, and then
reduced to a smaller fiery red orb. During the night of the intense swelling,
Krippner was in Brazil and requested that a friend, Rogerio, do a healing
ritual for Achterberg’s eye. They went to a forest near Rio de Janeiro, stop-
ping at a circular area reputed by Rogerio to be a “power spot” by local sha-
mans. As Krippner visualized Achterberg, Rogerio lit a fire, began to chant,
and added what he called “sacred herbs” to the flames. This fire ritual was
performed at the exact time of the eye’s implosion, as determined by an e-mail
sent by Krippner (without knowledge of Achterberg’s condition) upon his
return to Rio. Also, a group of Achterberg’s students was taking a course in
cross-cultural healing and enacting a ritual for her well-being the same night
as Krippner and Rogerio’s work was being conducted. Neither group nor
Achterberg herself had any knowledge of the other’s activities. Achterberg’s
swelling decreased, her condition improved, and an MRI performed in 2005
revealed no evidence of the cancer. However, it returned by 2009, when
another MRI was conducted. This time it proved to be fatal.
These are examples of healing experiences that (if reported accurately)
Western biomedicine would explain as lucky coincidences even though simi-
lar stories have been widely reported over the millennia. Frank and Frank
(1991, p. 3) described how tribal people attributed ailments to possession by
an evil spirit, loss of one’s soul, or a sorcerer’s curse, with shamans or similar
practitioners administering suitable treatment. These belief systems are still
maintained by some groups of people, and indigenous medical practitioners
still service over three fourths of the world’s population. Yet in the West
and in other industrialized societies, allopathic biomedicine has become the
dominant curative paradigm. As a result, reported healing behaviors and
experiences that deviate from this paradigm, when they are not denounced
as superstitious fakery, are often regarded as being at variance with biomedical
diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment (Porter, 2013).
274 krippner and achterberg

That unrecognized or poorly understood factors are operative in these
unusual cases remains a distinct possibility, factors that seemed anomalous
at the time but are later added to the medical canon. For example, a case of
malignant melanoma was reported in Spontaneous Remission: An Annotated
Bibliography (O’Regan & Hirshberg, 1993). A 46-year-old Italian woman went
into remission following a diet that consisted exclusively of grapes. Grapes
are a major source of resveratrol, and little was known of their chemothera-
peutic effects on cancer in 1975 when the case was first reported (Savouret
& Quesne, 2002). Over the past decades hundreds, perhaps thousands, of
edible botanics (e.g., phytonutrients) have been discovered to have subtle
(at times even powerful) healing or preventive effects. In this case, what
was anomalous in 1975 was no longer anomalous a few decades later. There
are over 100 prescription drugs that were derived from plants, and many of
them came from plants used in traditional medicine (e.g., reserpine, digitalis,
vincristine; Cox, 2000).
Events and Experiences
It is important to distinguish between anomalous healing events and

anomalous healing experiences, the latter being more subjective than the
former. For example, John of God, a healer whose clinic is located in a
small town near Brasilia, the capital of Brazil, claims to practice “medium-
istic surgery,” which purportedly involves a team of spirits who take over
his body and perform both invisible operations and actual bodily incisions.
Moreira-Almeida, Moreira de Almeida, Gollner, and Krippner (2009)
received permission to collect tissues that were removed during the latter
interventions and performed histocytopathological analyses on 10 of them.
In the 3 days of follow-up, no infection was identified in any of the surgical
sites. Even though the mediumistic surgery was carried out in an attempt to
remove diseased tissue, no pathology was evident, with one exception. The
“operations” and the removal of tissue were events. Analyses carried out at
the Pathological Laboratory at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Brazil,
demonstrated that the extracted tissues were indeed from the clients’ bodies.
Clients’ healing experiences were recorded, and two clients reported notice-
able improvements in their condition, namely, improved visual acuity and
diminished pain.
John Turner, a brain surgeon from Hawaii, who had been diagnosed
with idiopathic small-fiber neuropathy in both feet, spent 2 weeks at John
of God’s clinic. According to Turner, three neurologists had told him that
there was no cure for his condition, which left him with recurring pain when-
ever he walked. In addition, Turner had an enlarged prostate gland and was
anomalous healing experiences 275

diabetic; therefore, he brought a supply of insulin and prostate medication
with him. John of God utilized what he called “invisible surgery” to treat
Turner, not physical intervention.
Turner later reported that “the experience was a hundredfold better”
than what he had expected (Tymn, 2012, p. 9). He was “extremely fatigued”
after the healing session, and for the next 36 hours he felt an extended period
of “current” running through his body. Turner also claimed to have experi-
enced the opening of his “heart chakra.” All of the former reports represent
anomalous experiences. Upon returning to Hawaii, Turner said that he was
able to walk without pain for the first time in years and reported requiring
no medication for his diabetic or prostate conditions. The cessation of medi-
cation and the absence of pain were confirmed by Turner’s physicians and
represent anomalous healing events.
Anomalous Healing Events
Examples of what biomedicine would consider anomalous events

include allegedly documented growths of sizable pieces of new bone follow-
ing spiritual healing services in both Great Britain (FitzHerbert, 1971) and
the United States (Melton, 1996). Another documented healing event is the
remission from lupus nephritis following treatment by a Filipino folk healer.
In the latter instance, a young Philippine American woman was diagnosed
with lupus, a disease notably resistant to treatment. Conventional biomedi-
cal procedures had proven unsuccessful, and in desperation she returned to
the remote Philippine village of her birth, returning with a normal diagnosis
3 weeks later. She reported that the village healer claimed to have removed
a curse placed on her by a disgruntled suitor. The lupus did not return, and
23 months later she gave birth to a healthy girl. In Kirkpatrick’s (1981, p. 1937)
description of this case for the Journal of the American Medical Association, he
asked, “By what mechanism did the machinations of an Asian medicine man
cure active lupus nephritis?” One answer to Kirkpatrick’s question would be
“spontaneous remission,” not unknown in cases of lupus. However, spontane-
ous remission, a reduction or disappearance of symptoms without any medical
intervention, is often used as a catch-all term to account for any recovery that
cannot be explained by conventional mechanisms, notably the remarkable
healings at such shrines as the one of Lourdes, France (Scott, 2010).
Probably the International Medical Commission at the Lourdes shrine
has collected the most thorough documentation of putative anomalous heal-
ing events associated with a spiritual orientation. The commission’s criteria
insist that the cure must be judged to have been caused by divine and not bio-
logical processes, possess “supernatural” rapidity, and be final and definite, and
the patient’s condition must have been “dire.” This is a difficult judgment call,

as one might expect, but many of the cases bear closer scrutiny. One case that
was designated as miraculous by the Lourdes commission referred to a woman
who reportedly recovered from paralysis and regained her sight and hearing
as well (Marnham, 1981). Yet, what is miraculous for one investigator often
strikes another as mundane. Scott (2010) observed that medieval pilgrims
left oppressing situations marked by poor hygiene and were exposed on their
journey to social support, clean water, and healthy foods. The added power
of belief and the many brain hormones and nerve chemicals released in such
circumstances might have made pilgrims feel better even if there was no cure.
West (1957) examined 11 cures pronounced “miraculous” between 1946
and 1956, concluding that the recoveries were fairly well documented but
that a lack of medical records made a complete appraisal of most of the cases
impossible. In addition, his reading of the reports convinced him that the
purported miraculous healing occurred over time, not instantaneously, as is
often claimed. West concluded that his examination of the data yielded scant
indication of any absolutely inexplicable recovery. George Bernard Shaw is
often given the last word in a discussion of the Shrine of Lourdes because he
considered it “blasphemous”: There were mountains of crutches, wheelchairs,
and braces but not one glass eye, wooden leg, or toupee—implying a limita-
tion of the power of God (LeShan, 1974, p. 110).
Definition and Description
The literature is replete with reports describing anomalous recoveries.

To describe these events and experiences, Western researchers frequently take
nomenclatures with which they are conversant and superimpose them on phe-
nomena they do not understand, or to cultures with which they are unfamiliar.
The term anomalous healing experiences, like other Western terminology, is an
attempt by members of a social group to describe or otherwise account for the
world in which they live. These phenomena have been socially constructed in
different ways in other historically situated interchanges, often among people
who see nothing puzzling or anomalous about them.
In the West, some of the descriptive terms that allude to anomalous
healing events are changes in unchangeable bodily processes (Barber, 1984), spon-
taneous healings (Weil, 1995), and remarkable recoveries (Hirshberg & Barasch,
1995). Additional terms that refer to the process responsible for the alleged
anomalies include absent healing (Edwards, 1953), faith healing (Haynes, 1977),
healing at a distance (e.g., Remen, 1996), intentional healing (Braud, 2000), mental
healing (Solfvin, 1984), nonlocal healing (Levin, 1996), occult medicine (Shealy,
1975), paranormal healing (Worrall & Worrall, 1970), psi healing (Benor,
1992, pp. 11–12; Stetler, 1976), psychic healing (St. Clair, 1974; Wallace
& Henkin, 1978), spiritual healing (Edwards, 1953; Weston, 1991, p. 38),

and therapeutic touch (Krieger, 1979). These terms are not synonyms; some
refer to the whole range of anomalous healing (e.g., mental healing), whereas
others refer to a particular practice (e.g., therapeutic touch).
LeShan (1974) described five types of alleged healing experiences of prac-
titioners. Type 1 healers use mental imagery to view themselves and the client
as one entity. Type 2 healers conceive of a “healing energy,” usually during
a laying-on of hands. Type 3 healers purport to work with discarnate entities
or “spirits.” Type 4 healers perform “surgery,” supposedly entering a client’s
body with a simple instrument or even with their bare hands. John of God’s
“mediumistic surgery” would be an example of both Types 3 and 4 because
of his claim that spirits work through him while he operates. Type 5 healers
contend that they produce major biological changes in a few minutes and
that these changes extend beyond the capacities of their client’s self-repair
mechanisms. This latter form of alleged healing typically takes place in a reli-
gious shrine or natural setting, sometimes without the presence of a human
practitioner, with Lourdes being an example.
In the case of the term spontaneous remission, it is widely agreed that no
cure is spontaneous in the sense that it lacks a causal agent but, rather, that
the putative cause is not understood. Second, relatively little is known about
the course of any disease, and the rates of remission for untreated conditions
are uncertain. Third, one can never be certain of what might constitute active
interventions. Simonton, Matthews-Simonton, and Creighton (1978) sar-
donically commented that when a malady does not proceed in ways that can
be easily explained, the result is called “spontaneous” in much the same way
as the term spontaneous generation covered medical ignorance during the late
Middle Ages. In those times, there was no easy explanation for why maggots
grew out of nonliving matter such as rotten food, and so it was said that they
were spontaneously generated.
Other terms are equally problematic. What are the parameters that sep-
arate the normal from the paranormal, the physical from the nonphysical, the
nonmiraculous from the miraculous? From our point of view, the term anoma-
lous carries less ideological baggage than its alternatives. Healing phenomena
we would refer to as anomalous are those in which people manage to recover
from serious health challenges even though that recovery does not seem to
be the result of a treatment regimen prescribed by mainstream biomedicine or
its practitioners. Nor are these recoveries due to initial misdiagnosis, demand
characteristics, the cyclical nature of the disorder, placebo effects, or sponta-
neous remission (cf. Cardeña & Cousins, 2010).
What constitutes an appropriate treatment is culturally and historically
driven. Any cancer patient given Coley’s toxins, once believed to be a quack
remedy, and who recovered would have likely been classified as spontaneous
remission by mainstream physicians. However, these toxins have been tested

in clinical trials and found to be responsible for enhancing immune response,
and, at least in a few cases, have shown demonstrated effectiveness against
certain forms of the disease (Hobohm, 2005).
There are other cases in which a worthwhile treatment or substance
(e.g., the ketogenic diet for children with epilepsy) disappeared from medical
practice. Goodwin (1997) described several examples, including a medicine
called colchicum, a plant extract for gout used as early as the 5th century.
During the Renaissance it passed out of fashion in favor of bleeding and purg-
ing, which were thought to restore balance to the body. Colchicum suddenly
reappeared in 1780 as an ingredient in a French patent medicine, and it is
now used for gout in the form of colchicine.
Contrariwise, medical history is replete with examples of treatments
that were later shown to be ineffectual or even injurious. The problem is fur-
ther complicated by the fact that diet, nutritional supplements, exercise, and
other behavioral changes are now associated with positive health responses,
yet generally remain uninvestigated in studies of so-called spontaneous remis-
sions or anomalous healings.
In asking the question “Do healers really heal ill people, and are these
healings remarkable?” the answers must be cast in the light of what is meant
by “healing,” “healer,” and “illness.” Healing events have been described in
various ways and are predicated upon what a culture deems to be deviations
from what it considers to be a state of health. The World Health Organization
(1946) of the United Nations defines health, perhaps somewhat ideally, as
“a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely
the absence of disease or infirmity” (p. 1315). The most common definition
of disease across cultures is a disruption in the harmony or balance of some
aspect of one’s life (Krippner, 2004).
In 1995, a panel convened by the U.S. Office of Alternative Medicine
(now referred to as the National Center for Complementary and Alternative
Medicine, or NCCAM) defined complementary and alternative medicine as
“a broad domain of healing resources that encompasses all health systems,
modalities, and practices and their accompanying theories and beliefs, other
than those intrinsic to the politically dominant health system of a particular
society or culture in a given historical period” (O’Connor et al., 1997, p. 50).
Thus, in the Western world alternative practices are those used instead of
conventional biomedicine. Complementary practices such as massage and
nutrition can either work alone or supplement biomedicine, whereas alterna-
tive practices such as homeopathy are based on different assumptions than
biomedicine, assumptions that may be irreconcilable. As a result, anoma-
lous healing experiences emanating from the latter practices present greater
explanatory challenges than those associated with the former. The use of
some complementary and alternative practices is now subsumed under the

term integrative medicine, a practice that combines standard and nonstandard
treatments when there is evidence for their safety and effectiveness.
The NCCAM, however, has not received unanimous positive notices.
Mielczarek and Engler (2012) surveyed 2 decades of its research grants, con-
cluding that they yielded “no discoveries that would lead to new areas of
scientific medical research or treatment” (p. 42). They also ridiculed the term
mind–body medicine, calling it a “heart-warming phrase implying personal
control over medical problems” (p. 41).
A rather narrow focus on physical health precludes a more global assess-
ment of the nature of unusual healing. The situation is quite different for
many alternative and complementary practitioners who differentiate healing
from curing, maintaining that healing can even occur in the event of death
(Dossey, 1995). Many indigenous practitioners consider that the term healing
refers to the restoration of the client’s physical, mental, emotional, or spiri-
tual capacities, whereas curing describes surmounting a disease or dysfunction
that is primarily biologically based. If a client dies, curing has failed, but
if that person has been spiritually restored before death, healing has been
successful (Krippner & Welch, 1992). Of course, curing can more easily be
operationally identified and operationalized than healing.
Another contrast is sometimes made between illness and disease, the latter
term referring to a mechanical difficulty of the body resulting from injury, infec-
tion, or an ecological disequilibrium (as in “environmental diseases”). Illness,
however, implies dysfunctional behavior, mood disorders, or inappropriate
thoughts and feelings. These behaviors, moods, thoughts, and feelings can
accompany an injury, infection, or imbalance, or can exist without them. We
speak of a bodily “disease” but of “mental illness” (Krippner & Welch, 1992).
The term healer is variously applied to shamans and other indigenous
practitioners, including so-called mediums, purported “channelers,” and any-
one else with a reputation (deserved or not) for restoring health, balance, and/
or well-being to an indisposed client (see Chapters 7 and 9, this volume). The
use of the term healer does not imply that clients necessarily respond favorably
to the practitioner’s ministrations. Nor is the term reserved for indigenous or
alternative practitioners; some physicians and psychotherapists are informally
referred to as healers by their satisfied patients and clients.
Phenomenological and Experiential Characteristics
Although scantily, the phenomenology of anomalous healing has been

investigated on the part of both the client (often called the healee in these
studies) and the healer. Numerous case reports indicate that during the time
the anomalous healing takes place, it is not unusual for the healee to see reli-
gious figures and balls of great white light, to have special dreams and visions,

and to feel heat and tingling in the location of the problem (e.g., Barasch,
1993). Heat is of particular interest, because fever was one of the more com-
monly reported triggers for spontaneous remissions from cancer (O’Regan
& Hirshberg, 1993). However, LeShan (1974, pp. 112–113) wrote that the
sensation of heat is simply the “expected response” when someone’s hands
are held on someone’s body.
Krippner, Winstead, and White (2002) conducted a phenomenological
analysis of 34 healer and healee essays solicited in response to a contest, which
referred to a “long-lasting” recovery that was unexpected. The volunteers for
this study represented a wide range of practitioners, and the healees tended
to be well educated and conversant with the topic, because the contest was
announced in a number of professional and popular parapsychological pub-
lications. The first-person healer essays contained such common themes as
asking for help from a higher power, sensing one’s own empowerment, and
experiencing mental imagery and various types of “healing energy.”
First-person healee reports contained common themes as well: contact-
ing one’s “inner healer,” sensing a turning point in the course of the sickness,
and experiencing “energy,” “warmth,” and “light.” There were many indi-
vidual differences as well. The authors found commonalities between the
themes and case histories of the recipients of unexpected recoveries reported
by Cranston (1957), Greenfield (2008), Harvey (1983), Schouten (1993),
Solfvin (1984), and Van Baalen, Gondrie, and De Vries (1987).
Cooperstein (1992) studied 10 first-person accounts by healers and
interviewed an additional 10 healers who had participated in laboratory
experiments. There was a tendency among the 20 healers for their attention
to become diffuse, focused neither externally nor internally but simultane-
ously encompassing both the outer and inner environment, with an emphasis
on the former. Healers tended to use mental imagery and become absorbed
in the process, often to the point of feeling that they were “merging” with
the client. The types of reported imagery included mythological symbols that
supported the healer’s belief systems, diagnostic information, and treatment
process. For example, one practitioner reported, “During my healing, I become
the person I am trying to help. I lose my identity and take on the complaints
of that person.” Another one commented, “I enter into a state of oneness with
the universe and include the client in that state of consciousness.”
Appelbaum (1993) interviewed 26 healers and administered projective
techniques, including the Rorschach. He concluded that three healers had
severe psychiatric disturbances and half of the others were sound with regard
to their testing of reality. Members of the “in between” group were inclined
to reshape their perception of reality according to their wishes and tended to
engage in self-delusion. As a group, healers’ responses reflected “sublime self-
confidence, however cloaked in humility” (p. 37).

The experiences of official and unofficial healings at Lourdes, collected
by Cranston (1957), include mention of a sense of unawareness, of being
absorbed in thought, being dazed, being transported beyond oneself, and
exhibiting so-called dissociative symptoms, as well as physical sensations
of red-hot heat permeating the body. A study of 918 Canadian Pentecostal
pilgrims who sought healing revealed the importance of ritual participation
(e.g., prayer, music), communal emotional experience, and somatic mani-
festations (e.g., shaking, laughing, crying), all of which were associated with
alleged spiritual healing and, to a lesser extent, with purported mental, physi-
cal, and “inner” healing (Poloma & Hoelter, 1998).
Biological Markers and Psychophysiological Characteristics
The biological markers and psychophysiological aspects of anomalous

healing experiences have been inadequately investigated, in part because of
the prevailing skepticism, the difficulty in determining what is anomalous
and what is not, and the hesitation of the biomedical literature to report
anomalous cures. However, in Weil’s (1995, p. 132) collection of spontane-
ous remissions there were indications that the phenomenon was unlikely to
occur if the body’s defenses were weak or if there were overwhelming infec-
tions, toxic injuries, and dysfunctional mental and emotional beliefs and
attitudes. The body’s healing system depends on a coordinated interaction of
stimulating and inhibiting factors affecting the growth and proliferation of
cells. Thus, a possible biological marker would be the capacity to regenerate
lost or damaged structures, both those at surfaces exposed to constant irrita-
tion and those located deeper inside the body (e.g., the heart muscle).
During the spontaneous disappearance of warts, some investigators
(e.g., Samek, 1931) have reported an inflammatory reaction in the dermis
consisting of dilation of blood vessels, hyperemia (increased blood supply),
edema, and perivascular infiltration of white blood cells. Hypnotic treatment
of “fish-skin” diseases may involve stimulation of the vascular bed of the
affected areas countering their disturbed metabolism (Kidd, 1966). Changes
in blood supply have also been implicated in rapid recovery from burns
(Barber, 1984). In addition, there is an extensive literature on individuals
who can shift more blood to a specific area of the skin through biofeedback
or other forms of self-regulation (e.g., Chang, Casey, Dusek, & Benson, 2010;
Silverman & McGough, 1971).
The term stigmata refers to apparent bleeding from areas of the body
corresponding to most people’s beliefs of where the wounds of Jesus Christ
occurred during his crucifixion. A number of psychophysiological mecha-
nisms have been considered, especially those that see stigmatic bleeding as

evidence of psychogenic bleeding, posttraumatic bleeding, somatization,
and/or dissociation. The same mechanisms may be at play in unusual cases
of healing because those who experience the stigmata may be experiencing
meaningful spiritual growth and development as well. Krippner (2002) sur-
veyed documented stigmatics, finding that they shared common characteris-
tics, namely, a history of somatization, identification with a religious figure,
secondary gain such as attention-getting associated with the bleeding, and
the occurrence of stigmata at times of high affect. These characteristics may
also apply to people reporting anomalous healing experiences.
Barber’s (1965) literature review revealed that hypnotic suggestion has
been associated with reports of changes in such “unchangeable” bodily pro-
cesses as the nonsurgical removal of warts and rapid recovery from burns,
one of them a third-degree burn of a type so severe that skin grafting is typi-
cally required (Ewin, 1978). DuBreuil and Spanos (1993) reported data that
“hypnotic suggestions produce wart remission that cannot be accounted for
in terms of spontaneous remission” (p. 637). DuBreuil and Spanos also used
nonhypnotic imagery as a successful treatment for wart remission.
A related observation is so-called instantaneous healing of deliberately
caused bodily damages, a practice during which members of a religious group
claim immunity to damage from spikes and skewers inserted into the body.
No hypnotic-like procedures are said to be used before the insertions occur,
and the body openings supposedly close quickly (Fotoohi & Hussein, 1998).
Although these adepts have yet to be tested under controlled conditions,
similar effects were reported in laboratory tests with a psychic claimant, Jack
Schwarz, who inserted knitting needles into his arm, with no apparent bleed-
ing once they were removed. Schwarz attributed this feat to “voluntary con-
trol” of bodily functions when he was studied by Green and Green (1977,
pp. 225–241; see also Chapter 7, this volume).
Rossi (2002) contended that psychosomatic problems are individual-
ized expressions of the learning and life experiences that have been encoded
as state-bound information and behavior. All life episodes are “bound” to
physiological responses by the body chemicals activated during those events.
Remarkable tales of mind–body healing can be explained by the ways in
which new cell assemblies and changed molecular structures are evoked by
a practitioner’s use of hypnosis, suggestion, or the placebo effect. In regard
to the client, brain plasticity, the new growth of synapses and neurons in
the brain, can be enhanced by novelty, enriched life experiences, and phys-
ical exercise. According to Rossi, these experiences can guide healing by
modulating gene expression. Rossi’s proposals are controversial (e.g., Spiegel,
2002) but present a viable research opportunity for the study of anomalous
healing experiences.

Individual Differences
Are there predisposing factors in anomalous healing? Given the prob-

lems described earlier in determining what qualifies as an anomalous healing,
it is not surprising that few studies have explored this question. Nevertheless,
the research on “exceptional survivors” might be generalized to this arena.
Psychological testing on cancer patients who survived significantly longer
than predicted, as compared with those who died within the median life
expectancy, indicates that the former were more creative and flexible, had
greater ego strength, and were more argumentative, even ornery (Achterberg,
Matthews-Simonton, & Simonton, 1977). In another study, the survival of
cancer patients was significantly higher among those who had reacted to their
diagnosis with a fighting spirit—or with denial. In the first 24 hours after hos-
pitalization for a heart attack, denial correlated strongly with increased sur-
vival rates. Dossey (1995) suggested that denial leads to less fear and anxiety,
lower blood levels of circulating catecholamines, and reduced susceptibility
to cardiac arrhythmias.
The most thorough collection of unusual cures of cancer is a medical data-
base of 3,500 references, collected from 800 journals (O’Regan & Hirshberg,
1993). This collection includes accounts of other conditions, predominantly
infectious, parasitic, endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases. This wor-
thy effort, the largest of its kind in the world, contains disappointingly little
information on the patients themselves; little is known of their experience
or the suggested psychophysiological mechanisms per se because these topics
are not usually reported in the medical literature. Nonetheless, it is a database
that can be useful in the design of more precise investigations.
Andreescu (2011) identified three predisposing factors that can hasten
or slow healing: patients’ worldview, their “intentional normative dissocia-
tion” (allowing them to temporarily disengage from the tension accompany-
ing their sickness), and their “psychosomatic plasticity proneness.” The latter
allows patients to turn their personal psychological and emotional content
into bodily reality. The progression of a disease or the regaining of health
reflects how the patient’s “social body” is incorporated into the “physical
body.” Barber (1965) suggested that “fantasy-prone” individuals are charac-
terized by a “psychosomatic plasticity” that facilitates extraordinary bodily
changes. For example, the most fantasy-prone individuals in various studies
had a profound imagination ranging from daydreaming to out-of-body experi-
ences to sexual orgasm produced purely through fantasy (Lynn & Rhue, 1988;
Wilson & Barber, 1978).
Some placebo effects may work through genetic predispositions, oth-
ers through expectancy, and still others through patients’ relationships with
their practitioners. There are individual differences in regard to who will

respond most readily to placebos and other forms of suggestion (Shenefelt,
2000). Kirsch and Lynn (1999) noted that people come to a therapeutic ses-
sion with varying expectations and respond differently to the way a practitio-
ner asks questions and makes suggestions. There are individual differences in
the plasticity of brain and body states as well as in the capacity for imagina-
tive experiences and fantasy. Furmark et al. (2008) studied 25 people with
social anxiety disorder who agreed to participate in an 8-week medication
program, which was actually a placebo. Ten participants responded to the
placebo better than the rest; their anxiety scores had lowered and activity in
the amygdala had dropped at the end of 8 weeks. When subjected to genetic
testing, eight of the 10 had two copies of the gene tryptophan hydroxylase-2,
which is involved in the production of serotonin. In Furmark et al.’s opinion,
the effect of this gene may extend to other conditions involving the amygdala
including depression, phobias, and pain disorders.
Cranston (1957) noted that the people cured at Lourdes are “almost
invariably simple people—the poor and the humble; people who do not inter-
pose a strong intellect between themselves and the Higher Power” (p. 125).
It is generally believed that persons who remain entirely unmoved by the
ceremonies do not experience cures. Skeptics who are healed generally have
a devout parent or spouse, suggesting to Frank and Frank (1991) that “their
skepticism was a reaction-formation against an underlying desire to believe,
or at least that the pilgrimage involved emotional conflict” (p. 107). The
emotions aroused at Lourdes may be unpleasant as well as intense, yet their
effect is generally beneficial: “In the context of the journey, their distress may
have come to signify hope instead of despair” (p. 60). This mobilization of
hope has been reported in studies of charismatic healing services as well (e.g.,
Glik, 1986), leading Frank and Frank to conclude that the process arouses the
patient’s hope, bolsters self-esteem, stirs emotion, and encourages patients’ ties
with a supportive group (p. 112).
Aftereffects and Outcomes
Drawing on the biofeedback literature, Young (1985) listed several

dimensions that should govern the evaluation of a technique’s therapeutic
potential: (a) the degree of clinical meaningfulness of the changes reported;
(b) the quality of the experimental design used in gathering and reporting
the data; (c) the extent of follow-up obtained or reported; (d) the proportion
of the treated patient sample that improved significantly; (e) the degree of
replicability of the results; and (f) the degree to which changes obtained in the
clinic or laboratory transferred to the patient’s ordinary environment (p. 355).
When these criteria are applied to reputed anomalous healing, aftereffects are
an important criterion for determining the nature of the results.

The first published prayer study was an 1872 survey by Sir Francis Galton,
who reasoned that because monarchs were regularly prayed for, their health
and longevity should exceed that of ordinary people if prayer is effective. He
found the opposite: Sovereign heads of state lived shorter lives than other
affluent people. Contemporary prayer and healing research was launched in
the middle of the 20th century when the efficacy of intercessory prayer on
such maladies as rheumatoid arthritis, coronary problems, chronic fatigue
syndrome, and childhood leukemia was investigated (e.g., Radin et al., 2008;
Walach et al., 2008). Since that time, about two dozen studies have been
published in peer-reviewed journals, half of which favored the intervention
group toward which healing intentions were extended (Dossey, 2008). For
instance, Byrd (1988) investigated the effects of intercessory prayer for
383 patients sequentially admitted to a coronary care unit. He reported a
significant improvement in hospital course and decreased medical complica-
tions in the treated group. However, outcome measures were not well defined,
nor were delayed effects. Posner (1990) observed that members of the treated
group may also have been prayed for by friends and relatives, as might mem-
bers of the untreated group, a flaw also acknowledged by Byrd. In 1985, Clark
and Clark reviewed the literature on anomalous healing, concluding that
many studies are flawed and those that were well designed yield no positive
results or results that appear to be transient. More recent meta-analyses have
generally been more supportive. For example, Schlitz and Braud (1997) con-
ducted a meta-analysis of studies demonstrating direct mental influence of the
intention and attention of one person on the ongoing physiological (electro
dermal) activity of another person, monitored at a distance; the results were
highly significant statistically, as were those of a meta-analysis looking at
studies that tried to evaluate the effect of someone else’s remote intention
on a person’s attention (Schmidt, 2012). French (2010) has discussed many
problems that accompany the use of meta-analyses for parapsychological
studies, including publication bias and alternative ways of interpreting the
data, but it is arguable whether the proposed flaws have actually compromised
the meta-analyses in question.
The best-known recent prayer and healing experiment was the Harvard
Medical School Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer
(STEP; Benson et al., 2006). It involved 1,802 patients undergoing coronary
artery bypass surgery in six U.S. hospitals assigned to one of three groups.
The first group of patients was told they might or might not be prayed for,
and were prayed for; the second group was not told that they might or might
not be prayed for, and were not prayed for; and the third group was told that
they would be prayed for and definitely were prayed for. Three Christian
groups prayed for the patients for 2 weeks, beginning on the evening or day
of surgery, starting with a prescribed prayer, and were then allowed to pray in

their own way. They were given the first name and the final name’s initial of
those for whom they were praying. In the first group, 52% had postoperative
complications; 51% of the second group had such complications; and 59%
of the third group had complications, a significant difference from that of the
other groups. The STEP researchers refuted the possibility that the prayers
may have been harmful, suggesting that the negative outcome may have been
a chance finding.
In commenting on this study, Dossey (2008) noted that the patients in
the third group knew that outsiders were praying for them and speculated that
they may have felt stressed and pressured to do well. He added that prayer
on behalf of one’s loved ones does not follow scripts and is not performed
on behalf of strangers, and that STEP lacked ecological validity because it
did not model what happens in real life. He concluded that “nowhere in the
world is prayer used as in STEP” (p. 345). Nonetheless, these speculations
aside, the findings were negative.
As an example of a controlled study, Achterberg et al. (2005) spent
2 years in Hawaii integrating with the local community of healers and then
recruited 11 of them for their study. All participants were asked to select a per-
son (or recipient) they had worked with and with whom they felt an empathic
bond. Healers described their efforts in various ways, such as prayer, sending
“energy” or “good intentions,” or wishing for an outcome with the “highest
good.” Each recipient was placed in a functional magnetic resonance imaging
(fMRI) scanner and was isolated from any form of sensory contact with the
healer who sent “healing” at 2-minute random intervals. Significant fMRI
differences in the brain’s metabolic activity were reported between the experi-
mental and control (i.e., sending and nonsending) conditions. Watt and Irwin
(2010) claimed that there were two flaws in the study: The randomization
order was the same for all participants, and it was known to three staff members
as well as the participants, leaving open the possibility of accidental leakage
of this information to recipients who participated later in the study. Leakage,
however, would imply that the early participants could remember somehow
and communicate implicitly or explicitly the sequence to later participants.
Our review shows varied results as well as the complexities attending this
type of investigation, and illustrates the importance of separating an event
from an experience. A number of meta-analyses and surveys have attempted
to determine the efficacy of experimental studies of distant healing, interces-
sory prayer, and similar procedures. A meta-analysis of the empirical litera-
ture on intercessory prayer yielded small but significant results (Hodge, 2007;
but see Masters, Spielmans, & Goodson, 2006). Astin, Harkness, and Ernst
(2000) examined 23 studies of distant healing; 57% showed positive results.
Abbot (2000) conducted a meta-analysis of 22 randomized control studies;
45% suggested significant effects. The highly regarded Cochrane Library

(Wieland, Manheimer, & Berman, 2011) surveyed the data and found them
too inconclusive to guide those wishing to uphold or refute the effect of
intercessory prayer on health, but still worthy enough to justify further study
(Roberts, Ahmed, & Hall, 2009).
Therapeutic Potentials and Risks
Writers have disagreed on clinical issues and risk factors in anomalous

healing. Critics have identified what they consider to be serious fallacies in the
decision-making processes of people who invest their time and money search-
ing for an anomalous healing for their condition, rather than accepting con-
ventional medical care. Faith healing has come under special scrutiny because
there are religious dogmas that are antagonistic to physicians and medical
care (Layng, 2008). The magician James Randi (1987) investigated several
practitioners whom he described as carrying out magic acts disguised as heal-
ing miracles. Wikler (1985) saw a pernicious danger in the behavior of health
practitioners who claim that individuals should be accountable for their own
health and that health care is a matter of individual responsibility. For Wikler,
the debate is not about the concept of accountability itself, but about what
actions lead to what consequences and how clients’ responsibility can be most
effectively discharged. Practitioners can hardly be faulted if they encourage
and assist clients to adopt healthy lifestyles and attitudes. The danger arises
when a naïve or fraudulent practitioner suggests that it is one’s unconscious
resistances, lack of faith, or self-destructive tendencies that prevent recovery.
The responsible advocates of alternative approaches recognize this
danger. St. Clair (1974), for example, in his attempts to identify exceptional
healers around the world, found practitioners whom he considered fraudulent
and who “know that ill people are easy targets,” but also found others who
seemed to have a beneficent influence. However, he concluded that even the
best healers “cannot take care of a ruptured appendix, do not handle emer-
gency cases like drowning, shootings and automobile accidents,” and “are not
infallible” (p. 321).
Explanatory Models
Physiological Models
The models we discuss do not neglect psychological factors; in fact, a

more appropriate term would be psychophysiological models, but to avoid repe-
tition and to offer contrasts, the physiological aspects of these proposals have
been stressed. Weil (1995) observed that the final common cause of most

healing is the body’s self-regenerative system; when treatments work, they do
so by activating the body’s innate healing mechanisms. Stefano, Fricchione,
Slingsby, and Benson (2001) added that human immune, vascular, and neural
systems maintain health, and that these systems can be enhanced by health-
related cognitive processes. The transdisciplinary field of psychoneuroimmu-
nology (PNI) studies the interaction of the body’s central nervous system (in
both its neurological and psychological aspects) and the body’s immune and
endocrine systems. It has identified a variety of neuropeptides that enhance
immune functioning, leading to the conjecture that mental and emotional
conditions can both cause and cure various ailments, making PNI important
for understanding the mechanisms underlying anomalous healing (Krippner,
1994). For example, PNI is used by Rossi (2002; Rossi et al., 2008), whose
theory suggests that there is no gap between mind and body, and that neuro
peptides are a previously unrecognized form of information transduction
between mind and body that may be the basis of many hypnotherapeutic,
psychosocial, and placebo responses, as well as folk, shamanic, and spiritual
healing. However, many questions remain unanswered. Auld (1996), for
example, asked for direct evidence that hypnotic therapy changes biochemis-
try and that “biochemistry in turn changes experience and behavior” (p. 74).
In offering an explanation for his collection of instances of anomalous
healing, Barber (1984) identified several possible contributing factors. He
began with the example of how cognition, imagination, and emotions affect
blood supply to the genital areas during sexual fantasizing. If these thoughts,
images, and feelings can produce variations in blood supply, Barber proposed,
it is likely that the blood flow to other parts of the body is continually affected
by what people are thinking, imagining, and experiencing (p. 105). By being
deeply absorbed in imagining a physiological change, some individuals can
evoke the same experiences that are present when an actual physiological
change occurs, hence stimulating the cells to produce the desired physio-
logical change (p. 118). Other examples include g Tum-mo meditation, in
which, under controlled conditions, some Tibetan lamas, following a tra-
ditional training regime, were able to produce enough body heat to melt
snow (Benson, 1982), and also under controlled conditions, an Indian swami
was able to produce a significant difference in skin temperature between the
two sides of his palm (Green & Green, 1977). Through biofeedback, volun-
teers can attain a remarkable amount of finger temperature control (Taub
& Emurian, 1976). Barber (1984, p. 106) called for additional research to
determine if local changes in blood supply are related to alterations in immu-
nological functions. He also proposed that the ability to alter bodily processes
thought to be unchangeable is related to the practitioner–client relationship
and to individual differences such as the degree of fantasy proneness a person
or a culture manifests.

For Barber (1984), the meanings and ideas embedded in words spoken
by one person and deeply accepted by another can be communicated to the
cells of the body and to the chemicals within these cells; the cells then can
change their activities to conform to the meaning or ideas communicated.
These communications can change microphysiological processes, especially
when the practitioner and client have a close personal relationship, when the
client’s maximum cooperation has been elicited, when the client’s expecta-
tions have been enhanced, and when distracting thoughts and extraneous
concerns have been reduced, allowing the client to be absorbed in the sug-
gestions to think, imagine, and feel along with the practitioner (p. 117).
Barber did not limit his explanatory model to hypnotic suggestion; unusual
changes can occur in informal circumstances when someone is talked to in
an especially meaningful way (p. 117). From our perspective this process is an
example of how an experience such as a healer–client interaction may bring
about desirable bodily changes.
Psychological Models
The most widely promulgated psychological model that supposedly

accounts for anomalous healings is the placebo effect. The word placebo
means “I shall please” in Latin, and for any model to be taken seriously it
must take the placebo effect into account, as it is an integral part of evalu-
ating conventional biomedical practices. At its best, this effect is a simple
nontoxic, noninvasive, and often effective method of stimulating and facili-
tating the client’s own intrinsic healing process. Technically speaking, a bio-
medically inert substance or procedure given in such a manner as to produce
relief is known as a placebo, and the resulting patient effect is called the
placebo effect. This effect is often so strong that it produces improvement
even when patients are told that the substance they are taking was simply
“something like a sugar pill” with no active ingredients (Frank & Frank, 1991,
pp. 144–154; Kaptchuk et al., 2008).
Wager (2005) suggested that placebo effects go beyond demand charac-
teristics and the desire for relief: Placebo expectancies appear to increase acti-
vation of the prefrontal brain areas and decrease activation of the amygdala;
disease-specific brain activity and behavioral outcomes have been demon-
strated when placebos are used for pain relief and to treat Parkinson’s disease
and depression (p. 175). In addition, placebos activate a patient’s sense of
efficacy and motivation, “including the expected costs and benefits of stra-
tegic effect” (p. 178). Kirsch (2010) made a compelling case for the power
of placebo expectancy effects in relieving symptoms of migraine headaches,
osteoarthritis, and coronary heart disease, as well as such mental disorders as

depression. The placebo effect may share its mechanisms with spontaneous
remissions, hypnosis, and self-regulation.
Brody’s (1980) model of the placebo effect encompasses a symbolic–
cultural dimension, a consideration of the ethical issues involved when a
practitioner deliberately introduces a placebo treatment; the belief system of
the client, who needs to believe that he or she is in a healing context; as well
as that individual’s capacities for taking advantage of the placebo. Hence,
the dialectic between the “person-as-bearer-of-symbols” and the “person-
as-bearer-of-rights” is an important philosophical issue, especially when one
realizes that placebo effects can be negative as well as positive (as is the
case in “voodoo death”; see Lester, 2009). Kirsch (1990, 2010) has under-
scored the role played by expectancy in the placebo effect. People become
more involved in their treatment if they expect it to be effective, and this
increases the sense of mastery that is essential in various types of healing
(Torrey, 1986). Kirsch coined the term response expectancy to describe the
way that people’s experience depends on what they expect to happen. This
expectation may underlie the placebo effect, successful psychotherapy,
response to hypnotic suggestions, and a host of related phenomena (Lynn
& Kirsch, 2006).
Kirsch and Lynn (1999) observed that culturally based experiences and
response sets are influential in the production of novel behavior, including
the motivation to experience suggested effects. These response sets are appar-
ent in the anomalous healings at religious shrines such as Lourdes. Frank and
Frank (1991) carefully traced the steps that may have resulted in such a phe-
nomenon. First, the supplicants find themselves plunged into a milieu where
accounts of previous healings are on everyone’s tongue, and pilgrims see the
piles of discarded crutches that validate the shrine’s power in a way analogous
to the shamans’ recitals of their previous successes in tribal healing ceremoni-
als. Although most of the sick do not experience a cure, most of the suppli-
cants seem to benefit psychologically from the experience (Frank & Frank,
1991, p. 105). Under our terminology, there are many healing experiences
but very few healing events. The reported frequency of healings for advanced
organic disease varies widely, but “fully documented cures of unquestionable
and gross organic disease are extremely infrequent—probably no more fre-
quent than similar ones occurring in secular settings” (Frank & Frank, 1991,
p. 105). Frank and Frank wrote that the healing process at Lourdes is con-
siderably accelerated and strengthened, as evidenced by reports that “gaps of
specialized tissues such as skin are not miraculously restored, but are filled by
scars” (p. 106). Although some cures occur on the way to Lourdes or months
after the visit, most occur at the shrine itself “at the moments of greatest
emotional intensity and spiritual fervor—while taking communion, during

immersion in the spring, or when the host is raised over the sick at the passing
of the sacrament during the procession” (p. 107).
Parapsychological Models
Although the origins of parapsychology lie in spontaneous anomalous

experiences, as well as in the activities of mediums and healers, parapsychol-
ogy has developed into an experimentally oriented field of research focusing
on events rather than experiences (Schouten, 1993, p. 375; see also Chapter 9,
this volume). Tart (2009) listed parapsychology as having “hundreds of well-
controlled experiments supporting its existence” (p. 169), affirming that
“humans are the kind of creatures that we might describe as having qualities of
a spiritual nature” (p. 13). In response, Alcock (2010) maintained that “there
is no coherent, well-articulated theory against which particular observations
stand in contrast and . . . there is no body of reliable observations that would
demand revision of any such theory” (p. 37). Most relevant parapsychological
studies attempt to explore anomalous healing effects such as those designed
by Braud (e.g., Braud & Schlitz, 1989), which used participants that ranged
from bacteria to humans.
Tiller’s (1977) explanatory model of such anomalous healing, as well as
an earlier proposal by Walker (1971), another physicist, are based on quan-
tum mechanics. Krippner and Villoldo (1986) applied Walker’s model to
anomalous healing, suggesting that quantum effects occurring in the brain
of both the healer and the healee provide the healee information needed to
initiate self-regulation. Stalker and Glymour (1985) rejected the claims that
quantum physics can be used to explain parapsychological phenomena such
as anomalous healing. They asserted that (a) in most standard interpretations
of quantum physics, the effect of consciousness is minimal (p. 116); (b) Bell’s
theorem, describing similarities in two photons’ measured activity even when
they are separated, has nothing to do with consciousness (p. 117); (c) quan-
tum theory plays no role in the subjectivity of diagnostic medical judgments
(p. 119); and (d) there is no quantum mechanical calculation that contra-
dicts conventional biomedical findings (p. 124). On the other hand, Levin
(1996) maintained that hypotheses that invoke such concepts as nonlocal
healing are no less naturalistic than mechanisms proposed by biomedicine.
Citing over 150 empirical studies of anomalous healing in human beings and
other biological systems (e.g., Benor, 1992, 1994; Solfvin, 1984), Levin pro-
posed that transcending space and time, as it is currently understood in the
West, is not the same as transcending nature.
Carpenter (2010) agreed, stating that parapsychological phenomena are
part of the basic nature of an organism, participating actively, continuously,
and unconsciously “in an extended universe of meanings” (p. 1), characterize

all living organisms, and are continually ongoing. Carpenter (2008) held that
these phenomena, far from being anomalous, function harmoniously with
other processes, such as subliminal perception, that have been more deeply
studied and accepted. Moreira-Almeida and Santana Santos (2012) also
attempted to place anomalous healing phenomena within a larger psycho
biological framework (but see Nickell, 2007).
Methodological Issues
The topic of methodology is crucial. Benor (1992) observed that Western

medicine, in its attempt to avoid strengthening Type I research errors, accept-
ing something as true that is not, sometimes fails by committing Type II
research errors, rejecting as useless treatments that actually are of value (p. 17).
In addressing these issues, Solfvin (1984) pointed out the difficulties in trying
to establish a causal link between a specific treatment and a lasting effect, given
biomedicine’s definitional and methodological constraints (p. 59). As long as
anomalous healing, by definition, implies that there is no easily determined
cause, it will be caught in a bind: Experimental case-effect methodology can
tell researchers little about the nature of causal agencies. There can be a veri-
fication that something anomalous has occurred, but it is difficult to eliminate
the healer’s personal characteristics, demand characteristics, placebo effects,
and patients and researcher’s expectations from the equation (Kirsch, 1990).
Krippner and Villoldo (1986) emphasized the importance of including
a sleight-of-hand specialist on the team whenever spiritual surgery is inves-
tigated in a field setting. This procedure was adopted in a 1974 excursion
to the Philippines when the magician David Hoy joined a group of physi-
cians and therapists who observed a variety of sessions in which the healers’
hands seemed to enter their clients’ bodies, purportedly extracting a number
of organic and nonorganic materials. At the end of the trip, Hoy wrote that in
every case he witnessed, he detected techniques, moves, and the use of props
that “are reproducible by talented professional magicians. . . . I was able to
reproduce several of the effects with the very simplest materials which I pro-
cured from a Manila drugstore and an art supply store” (Meek & Hoy, 1977,
p. 110). Krippner and Villoldo noted that when legerdemain is used, it may
actually enhance the placebo effect in treatments of this type and stimulate
the client’s self-healing capacities.
Schlitz (1995) proposed that people’s intentions interact with their
body’s self-regulation, but the associated methodological issues are serious
and complex. For example, how can a subjective experience that is intimate
and personal be understood and communicated in experimental language
while still honoring the deeply individual nature of the experience? What

are appropriate ways to evaluate outcomes in laboratory and clinical studies?
How do alternative treatment modalities interact with intentionality?
Research in anomalous healing would do well to avoid simplistic terms
and those that tend to reify causation. Turkheimer (1998) deconstructed
many of these unsophisticated terms, commenting that “all human behav-
ior that varies among individuals is partially heritable and correlated with
measurable aspects of brains” (p. 782). We agree with his position, and we
feel that his deconstruction can help advance an understanding of anoma-
lous healing events and experiences. Turkheimer’s emphasis on studying the
“measurable aspects of brains” can be combined with phenomenological
studies, producing group profiles of those whose anomalous healing experi-
ences are matched by anomalous healing events, and compared with those
who report experiences only. As anomalies of healing are better understood,
they may also provide practical information for those who are seeking to
restore their health.
References
Abbot, N. C. (2000). Healing as a therapy for human disease: A systematic review.
Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 6, 159–169. doi:10.1089/
acm.2000.6.159
Achterberg, J. (2002). Lightning at the gate. Boston, MA: Shambhala.
Achterberg, J., Cooke, K., Richards, T., Standish, L. J., Kozak, L., & Lake, J. (2005).
Evidence for correlations between distant intentionality and brain function in
recipients: A functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis. Journal of Alter-
native and Complementary Medicine, 11, 965–971. doi:10.1089/acm.2005.11.965
Achterberg, J., Matthews-Simonton, S., & Simonton, O. C. (1977). Psychology of
the exceptional cancer patient: A description of patients who outlive predicted
life expectancies. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 14, 416–422.
doi:10.1037/h0087514
Alcock, J. E. (2010). The parapsychologist’s lament. In S. Krippner & H. L. Friedman
(Eds.), Mysterious minds: The neurobiology of psychics, mediums, and other extra
ordinary people (pp. 35–43). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Andreescu, A. (2011). Rethinking prayer and health research: An exploratory inquiry
on prayer’s psychological dimension. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies,
30, 23–47.
Appelbaum, S. A. (1993). The laying on of health: Personality patterns of psychic
healers. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 57, 33–40.
Astin, J. A., Harkness, E., & Ernst, E. (2000). The efficacy of “distant healing”:
A systematic review of randomized trials. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132,
903–910.

Auld, F. (1996). Bringing hypnosis into psychology’s big tent. Contemporary Psychol-
ogy: APA Review of Books, 41, 73–75. doi:10.1037/002638
Barasch, M. I. (1993). The healing path: A soul approach to illness. New York, NY:
Putnam.
Barber, T. X. (1965). Experimental analysis of “hypnotic” behavior: A review of recent
empirical findings. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 70, 132–154. doi:10.1037/
h0021930
Barber, T. X. (1984). Changing “unchangeable” bodily processes by (hypnotic) sugges-
tions: A new look at hypnosis, cognitions, imagining, and the mind–body prob-
lem. In A. A. Sheikh (Ed.), Imagination and healing (pp. 69–127). Farmingdale,
NY: Baywood.
Benor, D. J. (1992). Healing research: Vol. 1. Research in healing. Munich, Germany:
Helix.
Benor, D. J. (1994). Healing research: Vol. 2. Holistic energy medicine and spirituality.
Munich, Germany: Helix.
Benson, H. (1982). Body temperature changes during the practice of g Tum-mo yoga.
Nature, 298, 402. doi:10.1038/298402c0
Benson, H., Dusek, J. A., Sherwood, J. B., Lam, P., Bethea, C. F., Carpenter,
W., . . . Hibberd, P. L. (2006). Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory
Prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients: A multicenter randomized trial of
uncertainty and certainty of receiving intercessory prayer. American Heart Jour-
nal, 151, 934–942. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2005.05.028
Braud, W. (2000). Wellness implications of retroactive intentional influence: Explor-
ing an outrageous hypothesis. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 6(1),
37–48.
Braud, W. E., & Schlitz, M. (1989). A methodology for the objective study of trans
personal imagery. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 3, 43–63.
Brody, H. (1980). Placebos and the philosophy of medicine: Clinical, conceptual, and ethical
issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Byrd, R. C. (1988). Positive therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer in a coronary care
unit population. Southern Medical Journal, 81, 826–829. doi:10.1097/00007611-
198807000-00005
Cardeña, E., & Cousins, W. E. (2010). From artifice to actuality: Ritual, shamanism,
hypnosis and healing. In J. Weinhold & G. Samuel (Eds.), The varieties of ritual
experience (pp. 315–329). Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz.
Carpenter, J. C. (2008). Relations between ESP and memory in light of the first sight
model of psi. Journal of Parapsychology, 72, 47–76.
Carpenter, J. C. (2010). First sight: A model and a theory of psi. Mindfield, 2(3), 1, 3.
Chang, B.-H., Casey, A., Dusek, J. A., & Benson, H. (2010). Relaxation response and
spirituality: Pathways to improve psychological outcomes in cardiac rehabilita-
tion. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69, 93–100. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.
2010.01.007

Clark, P. E., & Clark, M. J. (1985). Therapeutic touch: Is there a scientific basis for
the practice? In D. Stalker & C. Glymour (Eds.), Examining holistic medicine
(pp. 287–296). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Cooperstein, M. A. (1992). The myths of healing: A summary of research into
transpersonal healing experiences. Journal of the American Society for Psychical
Research, 86, 99–133.
Cox, P. A. (2000). Will tribal knowledge survive the millennium? Science, 287,
44–45. doi:10.1126/science.287.5450.44
Cranston, R. (1957). The miracle of Lourdes. New York, NY: Popular Library.
Dossey, L. (1995). Who gets sick and who gets well? Alternative Therapies in Health
and Medicine, 1(4), 6–11.
Dossey, L. (2008). Healing research: What we know and don’t know. Explore: The
Journal of Science and Healing, 4, 341–352. doi:10.1016/j.explore.2008.09.009
DuBreuil, S. C., & Spanos, N. P. (1993). Psychological treatment of warts. In J. W.
Rhue, S. J. Lynn, & I. Kirsch (Eds.), Handbook of clinical hypnosis (pp. 623–648).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10274-027
Edwards, H. (1953). The evidence for spirit healing. London, England: Spiritualist Press.
Ewin, D. M. (1978). Clinical use of hypnosis for attenuation of burn depth. In
F. H. Frankel & H. S. Zamansky (Eds.), Hypnosis at its bicentennial: Selected
papers (pp. 155–162). New York, NY: Plenum Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-
2859-9_14
FitzHerbert, J. (1971). The nature of hypnosis and paranormal healing. Journal of
the Society for Psychical Research, 46, 1–15.
Fotoohi, L., & Hussein, J. (1998). The deliberately caused bodily damage phenom-
enon as exceptional human experience. Journal of Religion & Psychical Research,
21, 14–21.
Frank, J. D., & Frank, J. B. (1991). Persuasion and healing: A comparative study of
psychotherapy (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
French, C. C. (2010). Reflections of a (relatively) moderate skeptic. In S. Krippner
& H. L. Friedman (Eds.), Debating psychic experience: Human potential or human
illusion? (pp. 53–64). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Furmark, T., Appel, L., Henningsson, S., Åhs, F., Faria, V., Linnman, C., . . .
Fredrikson, M. (2008). A link between serotonin-related gene polymorphisms,
amygdala activity, and placebo-induced relief from social anxiety. Journal of
Neuroscience, 28, 13066–13074. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2534-08.2008
Galton, F. (1872). Statistical inquiries into the efficacy of prayer. Fortnightly Review,
12, 125–135.
Glik, D. C. (1986). Psychosocial wellness among spiritual healing participations.
Social Science & Medicine, 22, 579–586. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(86)90025-0
Goodwin, J. S. (1997). Chaos and the limits of modern medicine. JAMA, 278,
1399–1400. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03550170029013

Green, E., & Green, A. (1977). Beyond biofeedback. New York, NY: Delacorte Press.
Greenfield, S. M. (2008). Spirits with scalpels: The cultural biology of religious healing in
Brazil. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Harvey, D. (1983). The power to heal: An investigation of healing and the healing experi-
ence. Wellingborough, England: Aquarian Press.
Haynes, R. (1977). Faith healing and psychic healing: Are they the same? Parapsy-
chology Review, 8, 10–13.
Hirshberg, C., & Barasch, M. I. (1995). Remarkable recovery: What extraordinary heal-
ings tell us about getting well and staying well. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
Hobohm, U. (2005). Fever therapy revisited. British Journal of Cancer, 92, 421–425.
Hodge, D. R. (2007). A systematic review of the empirical literature on
intercessory prayer. Research on Social Work Practice, 17, 174–187.
doi:10.1177/1049731506296170
Kaptchuk, T. J., Kelley, J. M., Conboy, L. A., Davis, R. B., Kerr, C. E., Jacobson,
E. E., . . . Lembo, A. J. (2008). Components of the placebo effect: A randomised
clinical trial in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. British Medical Journal,
226, 999–1003. doi:10.1136/bmj.39524.439618.25
Kidd, C. B. (1966). Congenial ichthyosiform erythrodermia treated by hypnosis.
British Journal of Dermatology, 78, 101–105. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1966.
tb12182.x
Kirkpatrick, R. A. (1981). Witchcraft and lupus erythematosus. JAMA, 245, 1937.
doi:10.1001/jama.1981.03310440037021
Kirsch, I. (1990). Changing expectations: A key to effective psychotherapy. Pacific Grove,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Kirsch, I. (2010). The emperor’s new drugs: Exploding the antidepressant myth. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Kirsch, I., & Lynn, S. J. (1999). Hypnotic involuntariness and the automaticity of
everyday life. In I. Kirsch, A. Capafons, E. Cardeña-Buelna, & S. Amigó (Eds.),
Clinical hypnosis and self-regulation: Cognitive-behavioral perspectives (pp. 49–72).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Krieger, D. (1979). The therapeutic touch: How to use your hands to help or to heal.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Krippner, S. (1994). Psychoneuroimmunology. In R. J. Corsini (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 228–231). New York, NY: Wiley.
Krippner, S. (2002). Stigmatic phenomena: An alleged case in Brazil. Journal of
Scientific Exploration, 16, 207–224.
Krippner, S. (2004). Hypnotic-like procedures used by indigenous healing practitio-
ners. Hypnos, 30, 125–135.
Krippner, S., & Villoldo, A. (1986). The realms of healing (3rd ed.). Berkeley, CA:
Celestial Arts.

Krippner, S., & Welch, P. (1992). Spiritual dimensions of healing: From tribal shamanism
to contemporary health care. New York, NY: Irvington.
Krippner, S., Winstead, C. W., III, & White, R. A. (2002). Phenomenological analy-
ses of first-person reports of “healers” and “healees” in unexpected recoveries.
Exceptional Human Experiences, 17, 64–80.
Layng, A. (2008). Expanding on “When faith kills.” Skeptical Inquirer, 32(6), 65.
LeShan, L. (1974). The medium, the mystic, and the physicist: Toward a general theory
of the paranormal. New York, NY: Viking Press.
Lester, D. (2009). Voodoo death. Omega: Journal of Death and Dying, 59, 1–18.
doi:10.2190/OM.59.1.a
Levin, J. S. (1996). How prayer heals: A theoretical model. Alternative Therapies in
Health and Medicine, 2(1), 66–73.
Lynn, S. J., & Kirsch, I. (2006). Essentials of clinical hypnosis: An evidence-based approach.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11365-000
Lynn, S. J., & Rhue, J. W. (1988). Fantasy proneness: Hypnosis, developmental ante-
cedents, and psychopathology. American Psychologist, 43, 35–44. doi:10.1037/
0003-066X.43.1.35
Marnham, P. (1981). Lourdes: A modern pilgrimage. New York, NY: Coward, McCann
& Geoghegan.
Masters, K. S., Spielmans, G. I., & Goodson, J. T. (2006). Are there demonstrable
effects of distant intercessory prayer? A meta-analytic review. Annals of Behav-
ioral Medicine, 32, 21–26. doi:10.1207/s15324796abm3201_3
Meek, G. W., & Hoy, D. (1977). Deception and sleight-of-hand. In G. W. Meek
(Ed.), Healers and the healing process: A report on 10 years of research by 14 world
famous investigators (pp. 97–114). Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing.
Melton, J. G. (1996). Finding enlightenment through Ramtha: The emergence of Gnosti-
cism in the West. New York, NY: Paragon House.
Mielczarek, E. V., & Engler, B. D. (2012). Measuring mythology: Startling concepts
in NCCAM grants. Skeptical Inquirer, 36(1), 34–43.
Moreira-Almeida, A., Moreira de Almeida, T., Gollner, A. M., & Krippner, S.
(2009). A study of the mediumistic surgery of John of God. Journal of Shamanic
Practice, 2(1), 21–31.
Moreira-Almeida, A., & Santana Santos, F. (Eds.). (2012). Exploring frontiers of
the mind–brain relationship. New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-
0647-1
Nickell, J. (2007). “John of God”: Healings by entities? Skeptical Inquirer, 31(5),
20–22.
O’Connor, B. B., Calabrese, C., Cardeña, E., Eisenberg, D., Fincher, J., Hufford,
D. J., . . . Zhang, X. (1997). Defining and describing complementary and alter-
native medicine. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 3(2), 49–57.
O’Regan, B., & Hirshberg, C. (1993). Spontaneous remission: An annotated bibliogra-
phy. Sausalito, CA: Institute for Noetic Sciences.

Poloma, M. M., & Hoelter, L. F. (1998). The “Toronto Blessing”: A holis-
tic model of healing. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 257–272.
doi:10.2307/1387526
Porter, C. A. (2013). Mystics, mycobacterium, and the Gospel of Matthew. Skeptical
Inquirer, 37(1), 49–51.
Posner, G. P. (1990). God in the CCU? A critique of the San Francisco hospital study
on intercessory prayer and healing. Free Inquiry, 10(2), 22–26.
Radin, D., Stone, J., Levine, E., Eskandamejad, S., Schlitz, M., Kozak, L., . . .
Hayssen, G. (2008). Compassionate intention as a therapeutic intervention by
partners of cancer patients: Effects of distant intention on the patients’ auto-
nomic nervous system. Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing, 4, 235–243.
doi:10.1016/j.explore.2008.04.002
Randi, J. (1987). The faith healers. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Remen, R. N. (1996). Kitchen table wisdom: Stories that heal. New York, NY: Riverhead
Books.
Roberts, L., Ahmed, I., & Hall, S. (2009). Intercessory prayer for the alleviation of ill
health. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2001(2). doi:10.1002/14651858.
CD000368.pub2
Rossi, E., Iannotti, S., Cozzolino, M., Castiglione, S., Cicatelli, A., & Rossi, K.
(2008). A pilot study of positive expectations and focused attention via a new
protocol for optimizing therapeutic hypnosis and psychotherapy assessed with
DNA microarrays: The creative psychosocial genomic healing experience. Sleep
and Hypnosis, 10(2), 39–44.
Rossi, E. L. (2002). The psychobiology of gene expression: Neuroscience and neurogenesis
in hypnosis and the healing arts. New York, NY: Norton.
Samek, J. (1931). Zum wesen der Suggestiven Warzenheilund [The effects of sugges-
tion on healing warts]. Dermatologische Wochenschrift, 93, 1853–1857.
Savouret, J. F., & Quesne, M. (2002). Resveratrol and cancer: A review. Biomedicine
& Pharmacotherapy, 56, 84–87. doi:10.1016/S0753-3322(01)00158-5
Schlitz, M. (1995). Intentionality in healing: Mapping the integration of body, mind,
and spirit. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 1(5), 119–120.
Schlitz, M., & Braud, W. (1997). Distant intentionality and healing: Assessing the
evidence. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 3(6), 62–73.
Schmidt, S. (2012). Can we help just by good intentions? A meta-analysis of experi-
ments on distant intention effects. Journal of Alternative and Complementary
Medicine, 18, 529–533. doi:10.1089/acm.2011.0321
Schouten, S. A. (1993). Applied parapsychology studies of psychics and healers.
Journal of Scientific Exploration, 7, 375–401.
Scott, R. A. (2010). Miracle cures: Saints, pilgrimage, and the healing power of belief.
Berkeley: University of California Press. doi:10.1525/california/9780520262751.
001.0001

Shealy, C. N. (with Freese, A. S.). (1975). Occult medicine can save your life: A modern
doctor looks at unconventional healing. New York, NY: Dial Press.
Shenefelt, P. D. (2000). Hypnosis in dermatology. Archives of Dermatology, 136,
393–399. doi:10.1001/archderm.136.3.393
Silverman, A. J., & McGough, W. E. (1971). Personality, stress and venous flow
rates. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 15, 315–322. doi:10.1016/0022-
3999(71)90043-2
Simonton, O. C., Matthews-Simonton, S., & Creighton, J. L. (1978). Getting well
again. Los Angeles, CA: Tarcher.
Solfvin, J. (1984). Mental healing. In S. Krippner (Ed.), Advances in parapsychological
research (Vol. 4, pp. 31–63). Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Spiegel, D. (2002). Mesmer minus magic: Hypnosis and modern medicine.
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 50, 397–406.
doi:10.1080/00207140208410113
Stalker, D., & Glymour, C. (1985). Quantum medicine. In D. Stalker & C. Glymour
(Eds.), Examining holistic medicine (pp. 107–125). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
St. Clair, D. (1974). Psychic healers. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Stefano, G. B., Fricchione, G. L., Slingsby, B. T., & Benson, H. (2001). The pla-
cebo effect and relaxation response: Neural processes and their coupling to
constitutive nitric oxide. Brain Research Reviews, 35, 1–19. doi:10.1016/S0165-
0173(00)00047-3
Stetler, A. (1976). Psi-healing. New York, NY: Bantam.
Tart, C. T. (2009). The end of materialism: How evidence of the paranormal is bringing
science and spirit together. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger/Noetic Books.
Taub, E., & Emurian, C. S. (1976). Feedback-aided self-regulation of skin tempera-
ture with a single feedback locus: I. Acquisition and reversal training. Biofeed-
back and Self-Regulation, 1, 147–168. doi:10.1007/BF00998583
Tiller, W. A. (1977). Theoretical modeling on the functioning of man. In G. W. Meek
(Ed.), Healers and the healing process: A report on 10 years of research by 14 world
famous investigators (pp. 186–192). Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing.
Torrey, E. F. (1986). Witchdoctors and psychiatrists: The common roots of psychotherapy
and its future. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Turkheimer, E. (1998). Heritability and biological explanation. Psychological Review,
105, 782–791. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.4.782-791
Tymn, M. E. (2012). Hither and thither. The Searchlight, 21(1), 9–10.
Van Baalen, D. C., Gondrie, M. T., & De Vries, M. J. (1987). “Spontaneous” regres-
sion of cancer: A clinical, pathological and psycho-social study. Humane Medi-
cine, 3, 1–14.
Wager, T. D. (2005). The neural bases of placebo effects in pain. Current Directions
in Psychological Science, 14, 175–179. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00359.x

Walach, H., Bösch, H., Lewith, G., Naumann, J., Schwarzer, B., Falk, S., . . . Bucher,
H. C. (2008). Effectiveness of distant healing for patients with chronic fatigue
syndrome: A randomised controlled partially blinded trial (EUHEALS). Psycho
therapy and Psychosomatics, 77, 158–166. doi:10.1159/000116609
Walker, E. H. (1971). Consciousness as a hidden variable. Physics Today, 24, 39.
Wallace, A., & Henkin, B. (1978). The psychic healing book. New York, NY: Delacorte
Press.
Watt, C. A., & Irwin, H. J. (2010). Processes underlying the phenomena of mys-
terious minds: Laboratory evidence for ESP. In S. Krippner & H. L. Friedman
(Eds.), Mysterious minds: The neurobiology of psychics, mediums, and other extra
ordinary people (pp. 45–63). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Weil, A. (1995). Spontaneous healing: How to discover and enhance your body’s natural
ability to maintain and heal itself. New York, NY: Knopf.
West, D. J. (1957). Eleven Lourdes miracles. New York, NY: Helix Press.
Weston, W. L. (1991). Healing, reason and miracles. Pickerington, OH: Advocate.
Wieland, L. S., Manheimer, E., & Berman, B. M. (2011). Development and classifi-
cation of an operational definition of complementary and alternative medicine
for the Cochrane Collaboration. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine,
17(2), 50–59.
Wikler, D. (1985). Holistic medicine: Concepts of personal responsibility for health.
In D. Stalker & C. Glymour (Eds.), Examining holistic medicine (pp. 137–146).
Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Wilson, S. C., & Barber, T. X. (1978). The Creative Imagination Scale as a measure
of hypnotic responsiveness: Applications to experimental and clinical hypno-
sis. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 20, 235–249. doi:10.1080/00029157.
1978.10403940
World Health Organization. (1946). Constitution of the World Health Organiza-
tion. American Journal of Public Health, 36, 1315–1323.
Worrall, A. A., & Worrall, O. N. (with Oursler, W.). (1970). Explore your psychic
world. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Young, L. D. (1985). Holistic medicine’s use of biofeedback. In D. Stalker &
C. Glymour (Eds.), Examining holistic medicine (pp. 341–359). Buffalo, NY:
Prometheus Books.

ANOMALOuS HEALiNg ExPEriENCES

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANOMALOuS HEALiNg ExPEriENCES

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10

Anomalous Healing Experiences

Both authors of this chapter have experienced anomalous healing experi-

274 krippner and achterberg

Events and Experiences

It is important to distinguish between anomalous healing events and

anomalous healing experiences 275

Anomalous Healing Events

Examples of what biomedicine would consider anomalous events

276 krippner and achterberg

Definition and Description

The literature is replete with reports describing anomalous recoveries.

anomalous healing experiences 277

278 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 279

Phenomenological and Experiential Characteristics

Although scantily, the phenomenology of anomalous healing has been

280 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 281

Biological Markers and Psychophysiological Characteristics

The biological markers and psychophysiological aspects of anomalous

282 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 283

Are there predisposing factors in anomalous healing? Given the prob-

284 krippner and achterberg

Aftereffects and Outcomes

Drawing on the biofeedback literature, Young (1985) listed several

anomalous healing experiences 285

286 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 287

Therapeutic Potentials and Risks

Writers have disagreed on clinical issues and risk factors in anomalous

The models we discuss do not neglect psychological factors; in fact, a

288 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 289

The most widely promulgated psychological model that supposedly

290 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 291

Although the origins of parapsychology lie in spontaneous anomalous

292 krippner and achterberg

The topic of methodology is crucial. Benor (1992) observed that Western

anomalous healing experiences 293

294 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 295

296 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 297

298 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 299

300 krippner and achterberg

anomalous healing experiences 301

You might also like