Is religion good for your health?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
I've been reading a recent review in a medical journal called Primary Care Clinics entitled "Role of the Social Milieu in Health and Wellness." It reviews what's known about the relationship between health, spirituality (by which they appear to mean religious observance, although I disagree with that), economic status, and educational level. It's long been known that poor people get sicker more often and die sooner than do rich people, but the interesting aspects of the article to me were about religion and spirituality. I can't link the article because you need a subscription, but I have a pdf file of it I'll gladly send to anybody who's interested. Here are some highlights:
  1. A study of 21,000 adults showed that persons who never attended any religious exercises at all had a 19-fold higher risk of death over the 8 year period of the study.
  2. A meta-analysis (a way of combining many studies) of both Judeo-Christian and Eastern traditions showed decreased levels of stress hormones and harmful blood cholesterol, as well as overall improved health.
  3. Meditation (which need not be a religious exercise, of course) causes increases of useful neurotransmitters in the brain.
In fairness, several studies showed negative stress effects for religious observances that were characterized by heavy criticism of those who deviated from strict practices -- no surprise there.

The question is, of course, what precisely is this "religion" being studied? Here are the authors' conclusions:

"A straightforward explanation of religion’s health effects might be as simple as religious participation encouraging better health habits, social support, self-esteem, and self-efficacy. Spirituality is negatively correlated with drug use. Stress or, more accurately, an individual perception of stress has a significant impact on health through modulation of cardiovascular and immune system primarily through alteration of the sympathetic nervous system. Religious or spiritual beliefs and practices are related to well-being, hope, optimism, purpose, meaning, and social support. Through reduction in stress perception, spiritual practices result in reduction in heart disease, hypertension, morbidity, and mortality and improve immune and endocrine function."
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
There have been a lot of these studies (e.g. here and here). Usually what is being counted is attendance at religious services -- though what is measured may have nothing to do with the root cause of differences. One such study says that if you're African-American, regular church attendance is a predictor of much greater longevity improvement than if you're an Anglo-American -- which makes me wonder whether insulation from disadvantage may not be one of the key benefits here.

Please note too that there are other studies to show that pet-owners live longer, married people live longer, and that moderate drinkers and gardeners live longer.

I think that the emerging picture is quite a complex one, but perhaps our prolonged health benefits from companionship, community, exercise, relaxation, moderate indulgences, comfort, reassurance and a sense of purpose. And perhaps too, strong social networks help to protect us from our worse personal crises and some of our personal excesses.

As a secular humanist I can only applaud the fellowship and support so often shown in sectarian institutions. I must also wonder whether the health benefits of religion would be much different without all the mythic dogma -- given that poodles, roses and the odd glass of tokay give freely of their benefits without asking for your belief.

Or maybe my grandmother has the right of it. Now 93 and agnostic, she was once an organist with the Anglican church, but fell out with them because of some ignorant and intolerant behaviour by the church leaders. As she's put it, 'You don't actually live longer if you do what the ministers tell you. It just feels longer'.
 
Last edited:

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
It reviews what's known about the relationship between health, spirituality (by which they appear to mean religious observance, although I disagree with that), economic status, and educational level.

I imagine that if you looked at a population that practiced Yoga intensely you would find they lived longer and better than most of mankind, even if they only have a BA and an excessive amount of cash. Anyway, that is my firm belief or at least my fond hope.

I should also add that I am a diligent observer (wait...if we meta-analyzed all diligent observers) of any rituals I come across...

PLUS...I played basketball for my soul one time. As you might expect, it was a "near sudden death" experience. Both players (God's representative and the meat-analyzed personage in the "study" or just me) came out covered with blood: I won.
 
Last edited:

Monkey

Is me.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
9,119
Reaction score
1,881
Location
Texas, usually
As a married, pet-owning, religious gardener, I'm liking these studies very much, thanks. :D

I think that the emerging picture is quite a complex one, but perhaps our prolonged health benefits from companionship, community, exercise, relaxation, moderate indulgences, comfort, reassurance and a sense of purpose. And perhaps too, strong social networks help to protect us from our worse personal crises and some of our personal excesses.

Agreed.
 

TerzaRima

Absinthe O'Malice
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 20, 2008
Messages
3,340
Reaction score
892
Location
the foulest in the land
A meta-analysis (a way of combining many studies) of both Judeo-Christian and Eastern traditions showed decreased levels of stress hormones and harmful blood cholesterol, as well as overall improved health.

Could religious observance be correlated with medical compliance--in other words, is there something intrinsic to the people who reliably attend church/temple/mosque that makes them more likely to follow medical recommendations?
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
Could religious observance be correlated with medical compliance--in other words, is there something intrinsic to the people who reliably attend church/temple/mosque that makes them more likely to follow medical recommendations?
Religious observance is linked to Myers-Briggs personality types, which links to just about everything else too -- including how we eat, how we exercise, how we learn, what tasks we enjoy or don't. However, I don't know of any study that predicts longevity based on personality type.
 

Lyv

I meant to do that.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
1,934
Location
Outside Boston
This might be of interest:

Patients with strong faith more likely to get aggressive end-of- life care


The patients who leaned the most heavily on their faith were nearly three times more likely to choose and receive more aggressive care near death, such as mechanical ventilators to breathe for them or cardiopulmonary resuscitation to revive them when their hearts stopped beating. They were less likely to have advanced care planning in place, such as do-not-resuscitate orders, living wills, and healthcare proxies or power of attorney arrangements so others could speak for them at the end of life.

"These results suggest that relying upon religion to cope with terminal cancer may contribute to receiving aggressive medical care near death," the authors write in tomorrow's Journal of the American Medical Association. "Because aggressive end-of-life cancer care has been associated with poor quality of death and caregiver bereavement adjustment, intensive end-of-life care might represent a negative outcome for religious copers."

There is more to the article.
 

Monkey

Is me.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
9,119
Reaction score
1,881
Location
Texas, usually
That certainly seems counter-intuitive.

I feel that I am not my body. If my body is too screwed up to support life, I'm going to ditch it...and once ditched, I don't care what happens to it. I mean, sure, I hope that whatever happens to it doesn't upset my family too much, but if it were, say, eaten by vultures I'd be cool with that. And I hope they would be, too.

I've written a will and talked to people about what I want. No life support if there's not a very good chance I'll recover. If I'm brain dead--or even mostly so--let me go. Donate my organs...and do whatever you want with the rest. My preference is for my body to be buried in a biodegradeable cardboard coffin and to have an oak tree planted over my body.

I would think that I hold these views because of my religious beliefs, not despite them.
 

Sean D. Schaffer

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 18, 2006
Messages
4,026
Reaction score
1,433
I think religion can be good for your health IF the said religion is right for you. In my own case, when I followed the ways of my former Pastor, I had no end of stress and condemnation building up in my mind and body. At the present time, I have a heart condition caused by that stress building up over the last three or four decades.

I believe the religion I followed for such a long time was not good for my health. However, when I picked up on the religion I'm participating in now, a lot of my stress levels have been substantially lowered.

Thus, it is my opinion that if a religion or belief is right for you, it would be more beneficial to your health than if it is not. YMMV.
 
Last edited:

Fulk

Occasional Contributer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
571
Reaction score
40
Location
Illinois
This might be of interest:

Patients with strong faith more likely to get aggressive end-of- life care


The patients who leaned the most heavily on their faith were nearly three times more likely to choose and receive more aggressive care near death, such as mechanical ventilators to breathe for them or cardiopulmonary resuscitation to revive them when their hearts stopped beating.

There is more to the article.

This is peculiar, considering that most of the major religions have a belief in life after death. Why would they cling to their mortal body if it was clearly failing? (Note that I mean this as an honest and well-intentioned question, not as an attempt to be a smartass. It just seems contradictory to what would be expected, in some ways.)

I'm of a similar thought to Ruv: I believe community, comfort, sense of purpose, social interaction, etc. are what provide for a longer, healthier life. All of the studies Ruv cites, such as pet-keeping and gardening, are what I imagine to be very therapeutic, and result in a longer, healthier life. I've even occasionally heard stories where those who got a pet or took part in an activity like gardening have successfully fought off serious illness, such as cancer. Whether there's any validity in those statements, I haven't a clue.
 

semilargeintestine

BassGirl 5000
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
4,763
Reaction score
1,034
I haven't done a study, but in my small experience, those who are fairly religious are less likely to want to hold on to life (or refuse to let a loved one go). I know that's completely in the face of that paper, but I can't think of a time where someone in my family or a friend's family wanted aggressive care.
 

billadam

Registered
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Location
United States
Website
ihatechurch.com
A book review in this week's BMJ (p 1043) examines the link between religion and health or, rather, psychoneuroimmunology and faith. Although unconvinced by any such link, the reviewer concedes that this is an area in which much serious research is being done, and a quick internet search confirms this. What seems the latest trend in a world that feels a deep need for more than just technological and scientific progress may be a revival of historical tradition (in which medicine and religion even had the same proponents), as explained in an analysis assessing prayer, faith, and health (www.davidmyers.org/religion/faith.html).
 

Shadow_Ferret

Court Jester
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
23,708
Reaction score
10,657
Location
In a world of my own making
Website
shadowferret.wordpress.com
I'd be curious if any SCIENTIFIC studies have done with control groups, say Catholics, athiests, Budhists, etc. all with the other factors being identical: education, economics, nutrition, exercise, etc.

That would determine to me the validity of all this.

Because otherwise, I think its just so much hooey.
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
I'd be curious if any SCIENTIFIC studies have done with control groups, say Catholics, athiests, Budhists, etc. all with the other factors being identical: education, economics, nutrition, exercise, etc.

That would determine to me the validity of all this.

Because otherwise, I think its just so much hooey.

Who would fund this research and why? How would you validate the existence of their beliefs? How could their educations be the same?
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
Usually what they do is sample statistically, then check median values and standard deviations for those groups, then do some statistical analyses to see whether there's a variance that can't be explained by other variances in the groups.

I don't think it's hooey to do such analyses but I do think it's hair-splitting. The sort of variances being discussed here fall well short of 'miracle'. People who fear nasty diseases sometimes do turn to religion -- but generally when they or someone they know already have a nasty disease. Alas, there's no shred of credible evidence that such belief prevents or cures nasty diseases, but there's plenty of psychological evidence to show that we turn to superstition when we're profoundly scared.
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
Usually what they do is sample statistically, then check median values and standard deviations for those groups, then do some statistical analyses to see whether there's a variance that can't be explained by other variances in the groups.

I don't think it's hooey to do such analyses but I do think it's hair-splitting. The sort of variances being discussed here fall well short of 'miracle'. People who fear nasty diseases sometimes do turn to religion -- but generally when they or someone they know already have a nasty disease. Alas, there's no shred of credible evidence that such belief prevents or cures nasty diseases, but there's plenty of psychological evidence to show that we turn to superstition when we're profoundly scared.

Studies like this aren't hooey, but they are retrospective observational studies and they use (I would expect) regression to find what factors "predict" where a person ends up on whatever the result variable is. The real problem is what is called "confounding" which is where a variable (such as religion or more exactly checking the religion box on some form) is really reflecting some other behavior (such as being very careful in filling out forms). Perhaps care in filling out forms has a health value and that is what you are really measuring with retrospective observational studies of this kind.
 

icerose

Lost in School Work
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
1,646
Location
Middle of Nowhere, Utah

My guess is it's actually opposite of what you would think. They aren't worried about death so they don't think to prepare for it properly, such as signing the DNR. I don't think it would even occur to most people, it didn't occur to my mom though she in no way wants to linger, she's in far too much pain, but she didn't have one signed either when she got Spinal Menegitis and her brain started swelling and landed in a nursing home for a few months. If she had known she was going to get this sick she would have signed it in a heart beat, but it's not like someone just stops at your house and says "Hey, these are important papers, why don't you look over them and have them ready in case of emergency."
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
Studies like this aren't hooey, but they are retrospective observational studies and they use (I would expect) regression to find what factors "predict" where a person ends up on whatever the result variable is. The real problem is what is called "confounding" which is where a variable (such as religion or more exactly checking the religion box on some form) is really reflecting some other behavior (such as being very careful in filling out forms). Perhaps care in filling out forms has a health value and that is what you are really measuring with retrospective observational studies of this kind.

My guess is it's actually opposite of what you would think. They aren't worried about death so they don't think to prepare for it properly, such as signing the DNR. I don't think it would even occur to most people, it didn't occur to my mom though she in no way wants to linger, she's in far too much pain, but she didn't have one signed either when she got Spinal Menegitis and her brain started swelling and landed in a nursing home for a few months. If she had known she was going to get this sick she would have signed it in a heart beat, but it's not like someone just stops at your house and says "Hey, these are important papers, why don't you look over them and have them ready in case of emergency."

Maybe that's more evidence that retrospective observational studies tend to measure behavior in filling out forms more than anything else. So the religious might be very good at checking boxes, but not so good at plans involving future-oriented narratives with multiple contingencies.
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
The real problem is what is called "confounding" which is where a variable (such as religion or more exactly checking the religion box on some form) is really reflecting some other behavior (such as being very careful in filling out forms).
Yep. The quality of the survey depends on the quality of the survey questions. That depends in turn on what assumptions the surveyor made and why.

This is no different to laboratory experiments really. Scientists try to isolate all variables other than the ones under test, but the variables they isolate depend on what they think the variables are. Science is full of discoveries of new variables -- like wind-born mold making penicillin, or weird exposures on film showing that rocks sometimes emit X-rays. They don't happen every day, but they happen.

I don't know that this has occurred here though. As an atheist I'm quite happy to believe that religious practice may offer minor health benefits. Why not? Lots of other activities do too. What I'd object to are claims that the benefits come from the magical power of deity X. Against such a claim it's sufficient to point out that deity X has the same healing power as a poodle and a glass of tokay. ;)
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
. As an atheist I'm quite happy to believe that religious practice may offer minor health benefits. Why not? Lots of other activities do too. What I'd object to are claims that the benefits come from the magical power of deity X. Against such a claim it's sufficient to point out that deity X has the same healing power as a poodle and a glass of tokay. ;)

You're assuming the variables are resolvable in uncontrolled studies. They may be, but it is worth speculating about what kinds of things can cause apparent linkages in studies where the data collection is not only not rigorous, but not even collected with the aim of resolving the issue the study addresses.

In fact suppose there is a supernatural healing agency. How would one isolate the impact of this agency? Is there any reason to think the supernatural agency is activated by checking various check boxes? You would have to find a way to be sure that the agency was involved with some particular case and the testimony of the patients seems to be something that would have to be verified somehow. For example, a decent protocol would have to exclude any suggestion that the agency was expected to be at work on the subjects of the study. And it would be best to start with healthy subjects and somehow inform the agency that he/she/it was going to have to work against a placebo or even that some subjects were simply going to pretend to be ill. Could the supernatural agency cure people of pretended illnesses? Surely not a very high bar for an all-powerful being. Perhaps the agency has a pretend mode itself and can pretend to cure people who are pretending to have a disease. That would be a useful finding.
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
suppose there is a supernatural healing agency. How would one isolate the impact of this agency?
In fairness, the original article made no magical claims. When these claims are made it's typically not by scientists, but rather by evangelists trying to make political points, often drawing on science or pseudoscience in poorly-understood ways.

But if you wanted to demonstrate miraculous behaviour convincingly then I think you need a miracle that's predicted, specific (in time, place, person or objects involved), dramatic, contra-indicated (i.e. it's the opposite of what we'd expect), repeatable (so you can test what causes it), reliable, independently verifiable and only invoked in response to prayer, ceremony or genuine religious affiliation. There's a fairly good discussion of this here and here.
 

dadburnett

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
111
Reaction score
13
Location
Oregon
"Is religion good for your health?"
Here in Oregon a jury is debating that question - the religion of the parents prevented them from getting medical help for the child and the child died.
Religion can be a terrible, a deadly thing ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.