PDA

View Full Version : EILEEN MCKUSICK, Tuning Forks and Diagnosis


steenkh
6th January 2009, 03:39 AM
In the presentation of the protocol for the sound diagnostician Eileen McKusick (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4323221#post4323221), I am again surprised at how every care is taken to make the test as cheap as possible for the applicant. The test subjects are specifically told that "they will need to provide their own transportation to the testing site". Why not ask ms. McKusick if she is willing to pay for the transportation of some test persons if they do not have their own means?

I have no idea how easy it is to locate people with seven distinct areas of chronic pain who are willing to participate in a test like this, but I could imagine that it would help a lot if they had their expenses reimbursed.

I cannot understand how a tuning fork can be used to diagnose anything if ms. McKusick is not allowed to touch the test persons. After all, a tuning fork works by touching an object and using it to amplify the sound of the fork - but then, that is really ms. McKusick's problem!

William Smith
6th January 2009, 11:28 AM
Media profile to be found where?
Academic support by whom?

RemieV
6th January 2009, 05:58 PM
Media profile to be found where?
Academic support by whom?

We were sent scans of newspaper articles from Vermont and academic support from an assistant professor at Norwich University.

Also feel free to check out Ms. McKusick's web site at:

http://harmonicbalancing.com/

jsfisher
6th January 2009, 07:35 PM
In the presentation of the protocol for the sound diagnostician Eileen McKusick (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4323221#post4323221), I am again surprised at how every care is taken to make the test as cheap as possible for the applicant. The test subjects are specifically told that "they will need to provide their own transportation to the testing site". Why not ask ms. McKusick if she is willing to pay for the transportation of some test persons if they do not have their own means?


Actually, I am more surprised participants are restricted to only those from Vermont. Johnson, Vermont, (which I presume would be the testing location) is a bit north in the state, but it is within reasonable driving distance from much of New England, upstate New York, and parts of Canada.

paximperium
6th January 2009, 07:41 PM
In medicine, tuning forks are used for only a few diagnostics tests.

Vibration sense, in the peripheral arms or legs to determine if their spinal cord or nerves that transmit vibration sense if damaged. It is mostly done by neurologists.

Transmission of sounds to determine if hearing loss is neural or a transmission problem.

There may be others but this claim is...unique.

0m3g4
7th January 2009, 02:41 AM
1. How much time does she have for the individual volunteers?

2. How "identical" must her responses be? For example, if the source of pain is "the back" is "lower back" considered identical?

3. Shouldn't "However, if any interview between them reveals another source of chronic pain, it will not be counted as a hit, and will not affect the test." be changed to something more general like "However, the test and its outcome are not to be affected in any form by any interview."?

steenkh
7th January 2009, 04:08 AM
2. How "identical" must her responses be? For example, if the source of pain is "the back" is "lower back" considered identical?
As far as I understand, ms. McKusick is given a list of the possible areas of pain, and she has to choose which one is applicable for each test person. I assume that the list will be kept unambiguous so that "the back" and "lower back" will not both be present, but that is really something that ms. McKusick should insist on.

0m3g4
7th January 2009, 07:02 AM
Thanks, I must have missed that part.

RemieV
7th January 2009, 08:56 PM
Check the Challenge Applicants subsection for updated information on Ms. McKusick's Challenge file.

jojonete
8th January 2009, 02:54 AM
7 Volunteers who suffer from chronic pain of roughly the same height, gender and weight (where possible)
I'm surprised about the "where possible" part. The now-infamous "as far ass possible" from Carina Landin's protocol generated an awful lot of trouble. I'd expect protocols after Carina Landin's to avoid any "where possible" where possible ;)

Even though having different heights, genders and/or weights is supposed to be in favor of the applicant, I can imagine a situation in which the applicant complains (after failing the test) that she expected same height volunteers and they were very different; it goes something like this:
The first three patients where 1.80 meters high. I expected the fourth to be about the same height, but it was a lot shorter, about 1.65 meters. I sensed his head pain clearly, however his head was in the same place where the three previous patients had their neck, so I mis-identified it as a neck pain. The patient was covered so I couldn't see him, and there was a pillow under the cloth which looked to me like his head.

steenkh
8th January 2009, 04:24 AM
From the Challenge thread:Eileen McKusick has opted to cut off protocol negotiations until sometime after June, when she says she will have more time to focus on her claim.
What a bummer! If only it was because ms. McKusick has realised that there is something wrong with her claim!

William Smith
8th January 2009, 10:00 AM
And yet critics wonder why the MDC is discontinued.

Cuddles
9th January 2009, 06:19 AM
I don't think there's any need to criticise her for dropping negotiations for a while. Just think how most applicants behave, with months of dancing around, abuse and pretending to get somewhere. At least Ms. McKusick has the decency to say that she won't be doing anything for six months and save a lot of time and effort on both sides.

rjh01
9th January 2009, 09:47 PM
Anyone who knows they have the ability to win $1m should be willing to spend 6 months full time to winning that prize. If a person is not willing to spend that time then a good question is what is worth more than $1m? The answer for most applicants would be they know they do not have the ability to win the $1m.

rjh01
19th August 2009, 06:54 PM
I don't think there's any need to criticise her for dropping negotiations for a while. Just think how most applicants behave, with months of dancing around, abuse and pretending to get somewhere. At least Ms. McKusick has the decency to say that she won't be doing anything for six months and save a lot of time and effort on both sides.

See the other thread. Fixed your quote. Now it is true.