CLARKSON AND STEAK-GATE

Jeremy Clarckson is one of those people, that you love to hate. His political-incorrectnes, his borderline insulting remarks and all-round man-child demeanour is something you either love or hate.
I can understand why he appeals to the no-nonsense people who are frustrated with this whole poltical correct world.
The guys in the pub talk like this and even though they know it lacks every form of nuance and socially accepted standards it's a way to vent their frustration of a world that changes into something they never wanted it to become.

Personally I see a lot of myself in Jeremy, I love to provoke people with political-incorrectness and harsh comments; because it seems that this is the only that way you can get into a viable firy discussion and be able to actually point out where the problem is. People are emotional animals even though we think we act on reason, it's that sudden rush of emotion (anger, bewilderment, offence) that really triggers us and then starts the cognitive processes. A character like Jeremy Clarkson who say's civil servants should be shot in front of their families, never actually intends to do so. But really wants to shock people and think about the uselessness of most civil servants; and let's be honest he has a point there.

Physical attacks are inexcusable

However punching someone, let alone a colleague! Is inexcusable! You can call someone a fucking-useless-Irish bastard for all I care, because Jeremy is a Right-Wing-Stiff-Upperlip-Tommy-Bully but you keep your 'mittens' of of that person.
And somehow I think Jeremy agrees with that too, but why did he let go of his self control over something as trivial as a steak dinner at 9:30pm?

Speculation about poor BBC Management

Well this is where I get into the realm of speculation. We seem to forget that being an A-Lister carries an extremely heavy burden. You need to be always on your toes wherever you go. You always need to be aware what you say. Even the slightest vanilla-insult is measured out in depth. Add a divorce to that and the fact that people wait on your every move and you create a recipe for disaster.
These people need very good managing. They should have a P.A. who has direct access to the brand managers to keep them in the clear and present and grounded.
I think the BBC overlooked this aspect, these people became stars pretty much overnight and then it's even harder to cope with this pressure than when you slowly grow in to it.
And some people are more loose lipped (like Jeremy) compared to others (James May and Hammond) so even more prone to getting the world shocked by their uncensored yet often not as ill meant remarks.
Having a brand manager and P.A. who makes sure that there are no paparazzi available in a restaurant, keeping fans guessing where the person is and at bay. And guiding them during public events is a must. Political people have such "brand managers" why not celebrities.

Also I think that the BBC didn't show any of their cards concerning the ending of the contract of the 3 presenters. This uncertainty for performer and especially people like Jeremy who created this product "Top Gear" is something we easily underestimate. It comes with doubt and frustration and this producer happened to be in the way. And a person like Jeremy with a "Tank mentality" just happened to waltz over him, but if it was someone else he'd ran over them.
As a company you need to be very timely by saying whether you extend the contract or terminate the contract and not wait till the last 2 weeks or so.

As a freelancer myself, I can say that if I don't know whether they contract will be extended that I get very doubtful of my performance; especially as with Top Gear's last two seasons when you know you didn't perform the best you could.
So I think BBC would need to have a look at their management processes and probably restructure them with Brand Managers and strong minded P.A's.

What would the BBC need to do?

If BBC would be as daft as to fire Clarkson and think they can go at it without him, they will be seriously mistaken. Clarkson with all it's faults is Top Gear. Especially when you'll try to keep Hammond and May on. A new program created by Clarkson under whatever name it would have would be an instant success with millions of fans around the world.

So what would be the way to keep Clarkson and Top Gear on? Because going around slugging a producer (no matter how incompetent) is not the way forward.

Well I think the answer is simple if Clarkson would want to continue Top Gear, he would need to apologize on air to the producer in question, shake his hand and admit that punching someone, no matter what has occurred is inexcusable and wrong. I think this is a message that needs to be send to the younger Top Gear viewers. And I think that Clarkson would need to sign up for mandatory anger management classes.
The BBC would do smart as to assign a Brand Manager for the 3 presenters and good reliable P.As.

And at the same time let the presenters be the politically incorrect blokes in the pub. Top Gear isn't P.C. and it doesn't need to be! This constant weighing of your words is for a presenter very frustrating and inhibiting. So what if they offend certain people?! Then those people won't watch the show, that is their choice! If the presenters alienated the majority of their public than they have no show, as simple as that.

And whatever they say on Top Gear doesn't reflect to the BBC. This is an idiotic mindset and idea! People should know that the BBC makes programs for all of the British people. So the BBC may not share the opinion of the Presenter(s) of Top Gear and they don't need to. So whatever is said on Top Gear should only reflect on Top Gear and not the BBC. But for some weird reason the BBC keeps reprimanding Clarkson for things he said. If the BBC had their management in order they would've forwarded complains to the Brand Manager or Executive Producer who could explain that the person has the right to feel offended but this is the opinion of the presenter and whether you like it or not, it will remain his opinion. But instead the BBC loves to censor their talent and this frustration will grow in the talent.

If you don't like the talent and their views, don't sign the talent or don't renew the talent but the BBC wants the money the talent brings in and keep all the viewers happy so therefore they want to censor their talent. And that is as we've all seen a recipe for disaster and in this case some innocent Producer who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time boar the full grunt of a frustrated, troubled middle aged presenter's man's right hand.

A frustrated troubled middle aged presenter who is loved by millions and I hope comes to his senses and publicly admits he was wrong for doing this and hopefully gets on and makes some more great documentaries and the best darn car show..... IN THE WORLD.

Disenchantment apparently hurts people

I do this show on youtube where I more or less take the mickey out of some weird pseudo-scientific stuff or stuff that is still in the fringes.

So far I've debunked magnet therapy:

and binaural beats (iDosing):

What still is in the pipe line is homeopathy and these new "brain games like, mind flex".


The reactions I get on these videos are two fold: Either people love it (usually my mentalist/magician friends) or people hate it (the floaty/crystal hugging bunch). I am most interested in the latter reactions, not in the least because they make me laugh and I understand why they feel so "assaulted".


We all have this strong psychological ability to enchant our world. Making things look more mystical more mysterious is what we all do -- even the skeptics among us. It makes us feel like a child again and it gives us hope. These "miracles" instill in all of us by simple "cause based thinking". For example, when you told your boss you were sick for work and 2 days later you are indeed sick. This can easily instill the thought that you "think yourself sick". Or that when you accidentally wore your socks inside out and you had the most luck in your life that day, you may think its your socks. So the next day you purposely turn them inside out and you still have luck. Not as much as the previous but still enough to keep you wearing your socks inside out. What you don't know is that you may actually have suffered unbiased interpretation of your "luck".
So when you put magnets against your sore head and the pain relieves it's easy to pull the cause-and-effect conclusion that it was the magnets -- though it may well be the fact that you believe it would work and cause the placebo effect or even just sitting down and relaxing.


But as you can see little "superstitious and pseudo-scientific" things are easily instilled as an anecdotal truth in people. When you debunk those pieces of nonsense for what they are, nonsense. Then you touch these people hard in their comfort zone. It's like telling a 6 year old that Santa Claus doesn't exist, it's the same shock and disbelieve.


Now recently I got a very nice PM as a reaction to the Fringe/Weird science videos, I quote:
"I am Matt I'm a Christian and I believe in God, what gives you the god given right to piss on everyone's believes! You're a dick!"


This really made me laugh first of all: "I am Matt I'm a Christian" made me crack up, I heard in my head when I read this: "I am mad I'm a Christian".
Then he states the obvious: "I believe in God", well that's what being a Christian is all about isn't it?
Then the words: "gives you the god given right" made me cough the sip of water back into the glass.
Now the irony was that I did not even talk about atheism but I think Matt is a clever guy and applied my conclusions to his being religious. And righty so because if you believe you will experience God in some way your brain will also manifest that sooner or later.


My reaction to Matt was: "Well Matt, I am an atheist I do not believe in God, though I don't see the connection between magnet therapy, iDosing and God... But since I don't believe in a God I do not need a 'god given right' to send out content into the free world. 

Cheers, Dick err Ray"

Disenchantment is a painful experience for believers, whether they are hypnotherapists or NLP practitioners thinking that goal oriented visualization works; Even though experiments have proven the opposite. Or when you believe in crystal therapy in which several experiments have shown that the crystal therapist could not sense the healing vibration when the crystal was put in a tiny black cloth bag and mixed with 4 pieces of coal.

You then see the interesting: "toddler response" -- like Matt's reaction. Where they verbally attack the person who disenchants his believes. 

Or you get the "excuses", the black cloth bag interfered with the crystal's vibration. The cameras send out interference... blah blah blah....

These people get more fierce when you challenge their ridiculous excuses, like for example: "the cloth bag interfered with the crystal's vibrations." When you point out to them that during therapy they placed the crystals on places of the body that are fully covered with multiple layers of clothing. You get reactions like: "Science doesn't know every thing! This works I've seen it work! You are just an ignorant skeptic what do you know!"

At some level they realize that their reasoning is off but their psychological processes cannot admit to it. This frustration (and anger) is spilled towards the skeptic.

We as skeptics will never be loved because most people hold deep believes based on enchantments. When we challenge these (faulty) believes we disenchant their world and it's so much nicer to live in a world where miracles can happen. Then again, that would be to live in a lie. The choice is your really but don't attack us because we do not follow you blindly into your enchanted, twisted forrest.

Europe is no democracy

How is it possible, you wonder. That the majority of the French, German and Dutch citizens are against the Euro the European Union and now especially against the bail-out of Greece and possibly Italy too?

Europe is ruled in a very undemocratic way. Back in 1999 Duisenberg, Prime-minister Kok and Minister of Finance pushed through the Euro for us Dutch people without a referendum.

Their statement: "The Euro and European Union is good for us." After the introduction of the Euro inflation soared for the Dutch and Germans. Even though Zalm says it's not the case, the proof is there. A simple beverage at a cafe went from 2,50 guilders to 1,80 the first year and 1.5 years later 2,80 euro. That's a 110% increase.

Then in 2008 the credit crunch hit, basically the error of bankers worldwide overrating value of properties and stock. It hit us very hard in Europe and just as you think things can't get any worse. A rogue corrupt state as Greece gets 100 billion as a bail-out in 2010.

Now anno 2011 the Greeks still managed to create an even bigger mess (how don't ask me!) Now a new bail-out needs to be setup a.s.a.p. Though the citizens of Germany, France and Holland do not condone this, they want to get out of the EU or let Greece rot away in the sewer that they themselves created.
Merkel en Sarkozy have interests in Greece because their banks lended a lot of money to this Mediterranean cesspool.  They want to present the bill to their voters without even explaining what and why.

The Dutch Minister of Finance De Jager he shouted that Greece would go bankrupt -- something that I shouted during the first bail-out already and with me many other intelligent voters who did not study economics.
Though as ignorant naive as he is, he still thinks that even if Greece would default that all the loans will be paid back. I wonder from what money they should do that and I think he believes in fairytales.

So to make a long story short. We as voters in countries who have their finances at least 'somewhat' in order will have to bleed for the stupidity of banks lending money to countries who even the commoner knows can't pay them back. In a Eurozone that we did not vote for nor do we want.
How far is the Europe away from the Fascist Nazi regime where things were done without listening to the common people?

I would love to see that Germany, Holland, Scandinavia and perhaps the UK would make their own alliance and let those southern countries with their huge deficits sing away in their own debt.

Psychology and Economy in Eurozone crisis

The Eurozone is under an extreme pressure due to the fact that several of its member states lied and cheated about their financial status. Especially Greece's national deficit is so high that they are border lining bankruptcy eventhough last year a large financial injection has been given to this country.

When Greece would slide down into a bankruptcy where they can no longer pay of the interest of their massive loans it will cause investors to withdraw and doubt to invest in European stock. Causing a major recession in the Eurozone. So having to bail out Greece is a necessary evil in order to damage control but certainly no solution when Greece doesn't reorganize its country.
The best solution economist think is to provide remission of debt to Greece. It would indeed help Greece and the Eurozone but here's where the psychology (rightly so) comes into play.

For countries like my country where we have to work till age 67, where we pay extreme amount of taxes and extra charges it feels highly unfair that another country where the civil servants earn vulgar salaries have sorts of ways to avoid paying taxes and have been lying and cheating to provide remission of debt to them. It doesn't do any moral justice to hardworking, Dutch, German, Belgian, Finnish and Austrian people. When you provide a remission of debt then the necessity to Greece to restructure their country and take all sorts of unpopular measures far less stressing and we will be in the same problem 5 to 10 years from now.

The psychology form the Greeks is also understandable they have been living like this for decades and suddenly their pension age goes up, VAT is increased significantly, if that would happen in my country as a company I would pack my bags and move out.
They will all probably get sever tax audits and be sure to made to pay. So suddenly for the Greeks its a lot harsher and they will obviously fight against these impopular (but necessary) changes.

Another option which we do not really hear a lot about is for either the European member states to kick Greece out of the Eurozone or for rich member states like The Netherlands, Germany and Finland to get out of the eurozone. Ironically the fines you have to pay for leaving the Eurozone come painfully close to actually giving the money to Greece.

From a social point of view saying to Greece: "Hey buddy, too bad but you are on your own!" would be the only good thing. That is after all what tax offices and countries say to their citizens who can't pay their taxes as well. It is weird that when economy and politics get a hold that the method of linear and social thinking is disrupted.
This causes extra grieve with the citizens of the major countries (Germany, Holland and Finland) having to provide the bail out because their government will put extra tax measures or savings on their people.

I would be in favor to chuck politics over the wall and simply kick Greece out on the bases of gross misconduct and let them fence for themselves. You got yourself into this mess, we helped you once, now get out yourself out of this mess. Simply because this is how sociology and psychology it would work with individuals as well. Sure the matter is more complex and we do not know what would happen economically when you kick a member state out of the eurozone -- the great unknown is a big fear for politics. However it is ironic that as a whole country you can misbehave more than a single individual is allowed to.

It is ironic to see that politics and economics are mere games that rub against the normal moral structure of sociology and psychology perhaps in a world of reason there's no place for economics because after all, when Greece goes bankrupt the funds in the rest of europe are still stable its all psychology that makes investors think otherwise. Pushing in more money actually gives private sectors a lot more to lose when Greece falls over -- which it will because their social psychological structure can not be changed in mere years.

This will be a problem that will continue to reoccur as long as there are no impopular measures being taken by politicians against nations who's national deficit is too high.

Excessive reactions of believers in mischief artists

Recently my ex-girlfriend posted on FaceBook that she's been to Derek Ogilvie. Derek Ogilvie is a Scottish charlatan, sorry 'Ghost Whisperer' who entertains the gullible Dutch (mainly female) audiences with bullshit readings.

Initially Derek Ogilvie was the infamous Baby Whisperer and the only 'psychic' who dared to step up to the Randi's JREF challenge; Which in itself is admirable because most psychics are too smart to disclose themselves as hobbyist magicians, which suggest to me that back then he was an unconscious-coldreader. An unconscious-coldreader is someone who unconsciously uses coldreading techniques and picks up on body language and changes their story based on those reactions. In doing so, they seemingly create correct statements as if they knew them from the start.
Derek failed the scientific test that Randi had devised as a Baby Whisperer.

After that Epic fail he returned (like most charlatans do) now as someone who does 'psychic readings' by taking to Ghosts and gullible people wanting to know how it is with their deceased loved one or whether they will make that trip to Africa one day flee to the theatres where they pay 37.50 euros to go see his stage show--conveniently backed and represented by RTL4 (Dutch commercial TV station). Where on Derek's site there's a disclaimer stating this is for entertainment purposes only -- basically saying in not too many words: "People this bullshit and nothing more than a lovely magic show."

As a mentalist I look straight through the bullshit but I am amazed how many people become fierce when you ask them: "couldn't he just be cheating? After all it says he's an entertainer" Words like: "You don't know until you've seen him! The details he tells people are unbelievable! This must be real!", "He uses energy but you don't understand that as a skeptic non-believer", "What do you know? Are you psychic?"

No I am not a psychic! Nor do I pretend to be one, I (much like Derren Brown) am honest about my dishonesty. I always say in my shows that even though it may seem paranormal I can assure you it is not and that everybody can learn this -- that is when you prefer 40k of college load and an in inspiring job on a podium. All I do is take my 5 senses (lovely line from Banachek) and combine them with my knowledge of: psychology, misdirection, science, suggestion and hypnosis (borrowed and reshaped from Derren's disclaimer); Banacheck and Derren Brown have been the biggest influence on me. Nothing I do is mystical and even then after the show people still ask me if that last effect did have something to do with the paranormal.... It goes to show you how vulnerable people are into believing in extraordinary things! Even when you tell them the truth they tend to believe in their mental concoctions.

In case of Derek Ogilvie what he does is a mere and simple Question and Answer (Q&A) routine. Its been around since the Victorian ages and probably before that. Basically what a Q&A is, is creating a dual reality. Some people have provided information about themselves (knowingly or unknowingly) and this information is basically fed back -- with a lot of showmanship (though Derek lacks that in my opinion as well) and great added cold reading phrases. To the people who have not provided any information (or have forgotten they did) it seems enormously magical -- well that's the purpose of magic and mentalism. For people who provided information and are aware of it for them its still wonderful because they did not see the performer read their information or even get close to it.

There are different methods of having some audience members provide information, usually cards are filled out in advance by a hand full of people. They provide their questions they want to have answered and some personal details only they could possibly know. The suggestion posed is that this information never gets to the performer -- after all if it did it would not be very impressive.
Many church faith healings have a collection box with lock that has those cards in them (most often with a generous donation as well, so that god hears you requests).

A TV priest in the USA would sell tickets for his sermons. When buying tickets its very common (and owe so convenient for the mischievous charlatans) to leave your phone number and/or address when you purchase tickets. His henchmen would call or visit these people and pose themselves as someone doing research- or as a friendly person giving out small comps. During this chat information was obtained about the person -- often 2 or 3 weeks before the show. This has long been forgotten by that time. Then a third method is that there are so called 'plants' in the audience. When things are rough and you cannot get proper hits with all the standard cold and warm reading techniques --or you are just flat out lazy-- you pick your stooges (who are more than happy to play a long for a wealthy paycheck) and low-and-behold we created another miracle.  A good performer (because that's what these people are) can combine any of these methods with proper cold reading techniques and create seeming miracles.

Why is it that when you ask those believers: "Wouldn't it be possible that he may have stooges in the audience?" They (much like religious people) instantly react: "No!!! What do you know?! He's an honest and sincere human being, he's there to help people." -- I mean honest and sincere charging you 37,50 for a ticket to a magic show without huge props and illusions? My second question is: "Then why are you there? Do you need help?" most decline or say that they've some questions. I look and I say those questions involve: health and relationships don't they? But since they see me as a skeptic they dig their own grave by saying: "Yes but that's not impressive". Whereas I would do this claiming to be a psychic they would gasp slightly and confirm.
It is very simple all people have questions for involve: Relationship, Health, Travel, Money, Education, Ambition -- depending on the age of the person you can make educated guesses.

I bet you that 99% of the people in that theater with Derek are people who are believers in religious and/or therapeutic stuff like: hypnotherapy, crystal therapy, theta therapy, religious people believing in spirits whatever. I bet you there's not a single person there (unless he's there to see through the tricks) that are firm skeptics. Someone who has somewhat of an ability to disassociate herself of the proceedings could come up with ways to make this happen. Yet they don't.... very interesting.... When you provide them with obvious solutions they become fierce because its to them the same as blasfemie.

So why are people (especially females) so impressed with a supposed psychic who is nothing but a story teller and amateur magician? It truly is beyond me except that perhaps women are a fool for a good sob story. See it for what it actually is, entertainment with the emotions of people nothing more than that.

Visualization in Hypnotherapy and NLP

Today the weather here in San Diego was horrible, so I went to a restaurant took my book and sat, read and drank.

A person came in and looked at the title of my book and asked if I was a psychotherapist. I explained I wasn't and told him what I did and what my credentials are.

He turned out to be an NLP practitioner, so he joined the table and we chatted.

Soon the discussion (much like yesterday with the non-smoking) came to visualization. I explained that the science is not backing NLPs visualization techniques. Visualizing yourself in that size 32 jeans, looking your best is not going to make you any thinner. HELL, science even proved that it can actually make you thicker. 

The argument was friendly but heated! I'd definitely stepped on his 'religion'!

He claimed that NLP had solid proof that visualization does work and is a very good force to self-motivate and make you feel happy. I explained that the latter is true, when you visualize yourself in that size 32 jeans, it does make you feel happy... Briefly but happy but it doesn't help at all with the goals.

I quoted a nice piece of social-psychological studies at Harvard where they asked one group of students to visualize getting a good grade for an upcoming test and the control group to not visualize. What happened was, that the visualization group had significant lower grades than the non-visualization group and the rest of the class. It reaffirmed the fact that when we visualize a goal we actually start to believe we've reached that goal and become lax. As shown in the study journals that the two groups were instructed to keep. The visualization group actually studied 15-23% less than the control, obviously a direct cause of the lower test scores!

So I asked the guy to proof his statements. He took out his blackberry tablet (very nice!) and showed some unaccredited junk from several NLP training institutions, claiming 'scientific research has proven'. But no references to the research, I actually have my study book with me and got it from my room and showed the many chapters with detailed studies and why visualization doesn't work on a cognitive level.

Soon the defense went to the fact that you have to do visualization in a "trance" state.... *sigh* So I asked him to define a trance state, sitting with your eyes closed completely absorbed in a mental image is a trance like state in most hypnotists handbook.

He then put a nail in his coffin by saying: "No! A skilled hypnotists has to induce a trance state that's the only way you get into a real trance." So I laughed and mockingly said: "So all those NLP self help books and trainings about self change are nonsense because you can not do it by yourself?"

Well here came the struckling: yes, no not quiet etc etc etc

Soon the discussion shifted (sign that he did not have any counter arguments) to modalities. I explained that working with modalities is indeed a first step but not a cure in itself. I also explained that actually pushing against a table or wall as you get rid of a negative image will engage the natural "push off" patterns we all have but that the mental image is still in the brain and that the 'reduced' negative feelings can help with actual therapy but that most stable people do not have very emotive reactions.

He was amazed to hear about the 'push pull' theory and conditioning, priming. I actually performed my old lecture effect, Prime Time on him completely ungimmicked to show how easy it was to slow a person down.

So why do people still teach these ridiculous visualization techniques? Especially in multi-thousand dollar courses?

NLP and Hypnotherapy has nothing todo with science and therapy any more but how to earn money from ignorant students who want to learn but simply choose the wrong institutions to learn. NLP and Hypnotherapy has become nothing short of religion in its most basic form.

Shouldn't science rule? Where bold statements and questions are actually tested and retested before making a definite conclusion?

Derren Brown's special Faith Healer and my opinion on these practices

Derren Brown has been a major influence on me! There's no denying that, when I've learned so much from his inspiring last 10 years on television. It was Derren's work that finally led me into the world of mentalism.

In his newest special Derren Brown Miracles for Sale -> Derren Brown Faith Healer, Derren picks an ordinary man from the street and turns him into a Faith Healer.
Faith healings are especially big in the US Bible Belt, where the word of God is seemingly the only valid word. Faith healings are a collection of psychological and magical trickery to temporarily instill pain relieve for witch people of to dig deep into their pockets.
It always struck me as odd that people would actually need to pay to either see a healing or donate in order to be healed. If I had this gift I would do it for free, especially when it's seemingly so simple and quick! I would sacrifice my lunch hour to go out and heal people.

The best message in Derren Brown's show was at the end of Nathan -- which did a bang-up job -- says that: "The Lord doesn't need your money, in order to heal you!"
That does make sense doesn't it? Why would you need to pay the Pastor/Minister or Church in order to receive support from Jesus or God?

In my country The Netherlands, there are hardly any faith healings, we are not religious enough. However there are many 'hypnotherapists' and new-age practitioners who supposedly heal people.

I recently got into a hefty debate with fellow hypnotists who claim to "cure" allergies or even more far fetched PTSD, ADD and Hormonal Depression.

That little word "cure" is what stabs me. If they say, we use suggestion to assist in relieving symptoms I would be fine. But the word "cure" is different.

Claiming to "cure" something as potentially lethal as an allergy is misguiding. Most hypnotherapist who were claiming this, did not even know what caused an allergic reaction. It's the over production of a histamine; a organic nitrogene compound that acts as  neuro-transmitter. Too much histamine makes your neuro-receptors over react and causes itching, swelling and other physiological reactions. What many people do not know is that histamine can be countered by adreneline. Benadryl "an antihistamine drug" actually blocks the neuro-transmitters in the brain. So even if you can "evoke" this blocking of neuro-transmitters with suggestion (adrenaline rushes in people being hypnotized is very normal) then still you do not "cure" these people. You give relieve that lasts, God know how long but most definitely not for ever. You will never see people with severe live threatening allergies go to a minister or hypnotist...

I have suffered one severe allergy attack (cause not yet known). It was two years ago in America where I had red spots all over my exposed body parts which was annoying but not live threatening. During my drive from Lancaster PA to New Orleans it hardly bothered me because I was too focussed on the driving. The second time when I came back to Lancaster (must be something local, because in New Orleans I got better back in PA it struck again) I woke up having trouble breathing. There was NOT ONE MOMENT, I as a hypnotist thought: Let's go to hypnotherapist! I called my friends in that town and asked them for the address of their doctor's office.

In the doctor's office they told me that in these cases I should've gone to the ER even.  In the doctor's office they did not cure me from my allergy! They never claimed they would or could! 

They simply said: "We will inject predisolon, we'll put you on predisolon pills for the remaining 10 days you are here and we give you antihistamine to stop the itching..." => Those words stop the itching and the foresight of that made my itch and breathing already feel better; I know even as a psychological entertainer, that I am prone to conditioned responses, placebo and authority as any other human being.

The predisolon probably saved my life, there's no telling if the physical reaction would've continued to worsen and prevent me from breathing.

If I'd gone to a faith healer, a hypnotherapist, the local P.A. Voodoo Doctor  I may have had temporary relieve from a combination of endorphines, adrenaline and the expectation plus suggestions for the experience but I'd probably suffocated because the swelling would most likely have continued.

I know I am not cured from whatever (probably cats) evoked that allergic reaction, the doctors didn't mislead me but they did literally safe me, I paid them for the medication and treatment not for a suggestive lie. 

A faith healer, hypnotherapist,  or whatever would've gotten paid for a misleading suggestion without actually having done anything to cure the person. Putting people's life potentially at risk. Like in Derren Brown's special where he explains that some Faith Healers (I call them quacks) ask people to throw away their medicine and believe solely in the alternative therapy.

The defensive argument of these quacks is: "Modern medicine doen't know everything!" They never claim and yes they too experiment. However they do it with empirical tests. Or: "We don't know how it works but it does!" -- wel that's easy, how do you prove it actually works? You never hear quacks talk about the times that their client wasn't cured.... Even moderns medicine doesn't have a 100% cure rate.

So please when you are ill or have physical discomforts, seek medical assistance from a real doctor. You do not need to pay God to heal you, God doesn't have any use for money!

I am not religious but if I were I would see it like this: God has created mankind, mankind has used their brain --the gift from God-- to invent medicine, therefore modern medicine is God's gift. If you go and see a Quack than realize that they cannot heal you! At the most they can provide temporary relieve but when modern medicine with it's billions of dollars of research and millions of man years of experience can not cure you, what do you think the odds are that a man holding a bible asking for your money can? Let alone a man in the South American Jungle wearing a strawskirt who thinks that a radio is a little box with an even smaller man inside of it.