Aromatherapy

[Guest guest]

Certainly a lot of what constitutes aromatherapy

as a facet of Alternative Healing is little more than New Age

hucksterism. However, even if working solely on a psychosomatic

level, if the alleged properties of an oil [without peer reviewed

proof] enable the entering of a beneficial state then that's

not an entirely bad thing surely - iirc there is enough evidence of the

placebo effect on performance to create some level of

cross-correlation?

I reckon that Alternative Healing like aromatherapy is going to be one of those

areas where strict science and personal experience are going to disagree in

certain areas. The question is, where do you draw the line, where science

'proves' that there is the potential for an effect or if someone tells you so.

For example:

I remember Poliquin recounting that on returning from a trip to NZ

he was given a little aromatherapy kit to beat jet lag, sounds plausible

enough....would you consider it equally plausible if Madame Zelda

passed this little tidbit on? Does either constitute a reputable source?

Finally, do you think that sometimes in areas like this we outscience

ourselves in our scepticism?

Farmer

Wellington New Zealand

[Guest guest]

Farmer wrote:

<I remember Poliquin recounting that on returning from a trip to NZ he was

given a little aromatherapy kit to beat jet lag, sounds plausible

enough....would you consider it equally plausible if Madame Zelda passed this

little tidbit on? Does either constitute a reputable source?>

*** Equally implausible. Neither of them has conducted any physiological

research into the nature of jet lag and for all we know, Madame Zelda may

have been a Russian secret coach! If either of them had been subjected to

thorough laboratory or field testing, then we might conclude that the

aromatherapy " worked " . On the other hand, such testing would not

eliminate the possibility of a placebo effect. Remember that my article

addressed both the physiological and psychological issues involved.

Incidentally, I have used transcranial microcurrent to combat jet lag and

physiological tests of heart rate, reaction time and blood pressure have

actually shown a change of state. I have also found that the use of high-low

temperature contrast swimming also helps to adjust one to different time

zones. I also regularly use different types of incense (much cheaper than

most aromatherapy essential oils) to alter my olfactory environment and often

“feel†that this enhances certain mental states, but have never found any

noticeable change in physical performance.

Anyway, as anyone who has attended my Supertraining Camps will attest, my

sleep hours are very confused and do not follow any predetermined pattern, so

I nowadays have no idea if I suffer from jet lag or not whenever I travel

internationally. I have been wondering if this sort of lifestyle happens to

prepare one to cope far more easily with jet lag.

<Finally, do you think that sometimes in areas like this we outscience

ourselves in our scepticism?>

*** The skepticism here addressed a much wider variety of claims, including

" cures " for very serious or terminal disorders. I even included a long series

of academic studies which showed that aromatic essential oils indeed can

exert definite physiological effects, but also showed that research like that

should not be taken to validate ALL outrageous claims that are made by many

" aroma-terrorists " . Anyone with an even vague familiarity with the basics

of health and medicine should be able to notice that many of the claims being

made for AT are very exaggerated and implausible. The scientific references

were included to satisfy the harshest critics that AT may have certain

genuine applications.

My critique was designed to offer a fair balance of pros and cons, facts and

fallacies - it even criticised scientists who too broadly condemned all

aspects of AT without studying all available evidence - did you read through

some of the links and studies that I cited in both of letters that I wrote?

Dr Mel C Siff

Denver, USA

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/

[Guest guest]

Mel Siff wrote:

> My critique was designed to offer a fair balance of pros and cons, facts

and

> fallacies - it even criticised scientists who too broadly condemned all

> aspects of AT without studying all available evidence - did you read

through

> some of the links and studies that I cited in both of letters that I

wrote?

I actually agree with what you wrote and yes, I did read the studies

included in your critique and don't disagree with the thrust of your

critique - BTW novel concept being balanced, something I wish some of my

professors had encountered

What I was suggesting [poorly, I was half asleep] was that with things such

as AT [irrespective of the aroma-therrorists ] there potentially is an

affect line that's not scientifically measurable and that in our quest to

understand things through

empirical observation/ scientific method etc we can exclude things that

don't yeild

quantitative results. As to whether this is placebo or psychosomatic

*shrugs*

I think Einstein said: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence " .

Somehow I don't see unsubstantiated AT claims up there with the meta

questions like; Is There a God??? Similar idea though...

Farmer

Wellington New Zealand