There is an interesting complaint that has been filed against a church in New Zealand that touches on an issue that we previously discussed. In the United States, it is common for religious figures to claim to faith heal and recently we have seen some religious business suggest that they have divinely inspired products or services to sell. We have discussed whether such pitches constitute false advertising. Now the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God is the subject of a formal complaint for advertising a prayer session to heal health problems including “incurable diseases.”
The Church put out an advertisement that “For people who suffer with constant pain, deteriorating health, can’t work due to illness, incurable disease, doctors don’t know what’s wrong, dependent on pills, recovering from injury, weight problems, sick children.” That did not sit well with Mark Hanna of the Society for Science Based Healthcare who complained that the advertisement is in violation of the Therapeutic Products Advertising Code Principles 2 and 3 that govern the supply of health services.
The Church has responded that it does not provide therapeutic, medical or health services or services but rather simple good old fashioned prayer meetings.
What is different is that in this complaint, the Board upheld the charges and found that the church had presented its religious beliefs in faith healing as an absolute fact and that “it may mislead and deceive vulnerable people who may be suffering from any of the illnesses listed in the advertisement.”
The board previously upheld a similar complaint against the church for an advertisement for olive oil as part of a religious cure-all treatment for everything from tumours and schizophrenia to relationship problems.
It is difficult line to draw between protestations of faith and false advertising. Some would challenge the very essence of prayer as falsely advertising that God will answer such requests for benefits great or small. How does one draw that line? Conversely, I previously discussed the double standard applied to fortune tellers who must give a disclosure and warning to customers that they are not really telling fortunes, even though many clearly believe that they are.
However, unlike fortune tellers (which at most have been accused of taking money under false pretenses or delusions), the American Cancer Society has warned that faith healing has killed people who could have been saved by modern medicine:
… available scientific evidence does not support claims that faith healing can actually cure physical ailments… One review published in 1998 looked at 172 cases of deaths among children treated by faith healing instead of conventional methods. These researchers estimated that if conventional treatment had been given, the survival rate for most of these children would have been more than 90 percent, with the remainder of the children also having a good chance of survival. A more recent study found that more than 200 children had died of treatable illnesses in the United States over the past thirty years because their parents relied on spiritual healing rather than conventional medical treatment.
In addition, at least one study has suggested that adult Christian Scientists, who generally use prayer rather than medical care, have a higher death rate than other people of the same age.[3]
However, virtually all major religions have some faith healing passages or beliefs. Many believe that such powers are true and proven. How does one distinguish such protestations of faith from false advertising, particularly when no money is demanded to attend?
Source: NZ Herald
Karen,
Google Wilhelm Reich and you’ll get your answer to “healing boxes”.
randyjet – I think that selling products advertised as cures would fall under the jurisdiction of the FDA.
I know that vitamins and herbal supplements have to have a disclaimer on the label because they have not gone through FDA trials. There are occasional efforts by the pharmaceutical lobby to ban vitamins and supplements unless by prescription. But a supplement manufacturer cannot afford the many millions of dollars it takes to drag its product through an FDA trial. At best, there will be a thousand years of traditional use. But no one does a trial on a natural product that cannot be patented.
The majority of people do not want natural products to be banned, so they settled on the disclaimer label. And there are strict rules about any claims on the label.
I think these products would be subject to the same disclaimers and limits on what they can advertise.
Can the lawyers here answer a question for me? Let’s say an unscrupulous pastor makes a simple box in his garage, and starts selling them as healing boxes. He has the disclaimer on the label, but he advertises them as healing. It’s not simply using the power of prayer but in snake oil territory. Could he be sued for false advertising, or for selling a product that doesn’t work, or would he be protected by freedom of religion? I am not sure how that aspect works . . .
Religion has ALWAYS been fortune telling, among other disreputable occupations. We seem to just be recognizing that now, given how easy it is to debunk the verb “to believe” in the modern era.
There are so many issues here. On the one hand, I would not want children with treatable diseases having to forego cures that are almost guaranteed, to join that list of treatable kids who died.
On the other hand, faith can indeed help with issues such as depression, addiction, and stress. There has been studies on quantum healing where the body heals itself. People should be allowed to follow their faiths.
My question is what should the line be with children? Should children be taken away from Christian Scientists at birth, for example, since they will not provide Western medicine? The Amish do go to doctors, but they do not believe in insurance. So the community pools its resources if a major operation is needed. But many everyday medical practices are taken care of at home, with sometimes disastrous results, such as home dentistry. Some Amish get all their teeth pulled when some fillings would have done. Should people have the freedom not to vaccinate, or to customize a vaccination schedule?
For instance, I’m allergic to the flu shot, and so is my father. It’s the only shot I can’t tolerate. But I have met many doctors who tell me that’s not possible. They have never read the package insert, and I’m not willing to show them my reaction at their office just to prove it to them.
If children died because they did not receive medical treatment, that seems like negligence. But there is so much grey area before that extreme.
I don’t think we’ve answered where the line should be drawn, but it is a hot topic right now.
I think that there is no basis for prosecuting for claiming prayer will cure, unless it is a minor who is the victim. Once they pass from simple prayer to making actual products that they advertise as cures, that is the bright line that cannot be crossed. So as long as there is an intangible thing that cannot be sold, except as making funny noises or waving a wand, it is up to the individual to make their own decisions because they know what is being done and they do not have to take an unknown substance that may or may not be safe or efficacious.
Sure. Some people believe in faith healing. Some people believe in Bigfoot. For every, fraudster there are those who believe in the fraud. Surely there were those who swore by the efficacy of whichever snake oil was “the cure” of the day.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t prosecute the fraud. Prosecuting the fraud also in no way unfairly imposes on those who use a god in their schemes. They should have the same standards as any other snake oil salesman.
If the “cure” works, prove it.
Just had a faith healing miracle. Needed new balls. See you at the tennis court.
We criminalise the making of false medical claims primarily because they are harmful. It shouldn’t make any difference whether the person making the false claim believes it. Freedom to practice a religion should not encompass the freedom to indulge medical misrepresentation.
Wasn’t it P.T. Barnum who said “There’s a sucker born every minute.”?
You can’t write laws protecting someone’s right to be stupid, but I know lawmakers surely try to the detriment of the public. Now fraud is another issue.
Actually, it wasn’t P.T. Barnum who made that statement but rather his rival David Hannum.
The spoils goes to the victors.
Paul:
If you have mythical illnesses, you can have mythical cures.
nick:
I don’t know any reputable scout that relies on aluminum bat averages. They inflate the BA by at least 20 points.
As for Strawberry et ux, we all know that Jesus is good business. Selling invisible services with the onus on performance being on the purchaser? Tax free, too. What a business!
PS, I’ll need the blood work before I believe the Holy Spirit is moving in crack-free ways.
This raises some interesting issues. The biggest problem is that are there are incidences of faith-healing on record. However, not necessarily from this church. Faith does powerful things to the mind. Still, I am not sure you can guarantee that faith healing will work on any particular individual.
I saw a piece on Bryant Gumbel’s HBO show last night on Darryl Strawberry. He found God and is doing faith healing w/ his wife. They are both “ministers.” They met in rehab. They have both been clean for 10 years so @ least it’s keeping them off the crack pipe.
It’s Mespo day here @ the Turley Blog. JT is throwing batting practice fastballs and the Atheist Assassin, Mark Esposito, will be putting on a show, hammering them into the upper deck.
On a sad note. In Madison we have a Northwoods League team. This is a summer league for college baseball players. The Cape Cod League gets A list players, this league gets a few A’s, but mostly B list. Good baseball though and they use wood bats. MLB scouts hate trying to evaluate hitters or pitchers w/ aluminum bats, a pox on our culture. Our local team has all types of promotions. A couple years ago they had Pete Rose Day, but the degenerate gambler, liar, didn’t show. On Saturday, they had Jose Canseco Home Run Derby Day. Now, that’s another great role model for aspiring MLB players. Few people know Jose has a twin brother, Ozzie. He was also in the Oakland A’s system. I saw him play AA ball for the Madison Muskies, the same ballpark where his disgraced brother was hitting homers on Saturday. Sad irony. I wonder how much Jose got for the appearance?
And they criticize Ernest Angley, too, I bet:
https://www.ernestangley.org/miracles
Very little of our communications are truthful, primarily because truth is elusive, but also because we thrive on hope not reality. Much of what we learned in school turned out not to be true. Better ideas over-ruled old ideas. We try to decipher truth from evidence, but never know for sure. We plan the future based on the past even though we don’t really have entirely accurate information about the past and conditions are constantly changing.
Are promises of faith healing any worse than promises that god exists?
Is a religious rite a religious right when dangerous to practitioners of that rite?
Can a parent submit a child to a religious rite instead of medical care?
Which rite? Which religions’ rites. All the major religions of the United States? All the major religions of the world? How about the Wiccans? Native American Nations rites? Or don’t minority rites have rights?
The US Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, but it does not guarantee that speech must be true. If it did it would probably hurt the US capitalist system because then businesses would have to market their products truthfully.
Reblogged this on BLOGGING BAD w/Gunny G ~ "WE CLINGERS".