I learned in psychology class, that religious involvement is associated with LOWER rates of cancer, heart disease, and stroke.
I don't know much more info than that.

What do you think?
Why do you think that religion would be associated it with lower rates?
It seems to me that it might be associated with higher rates.

Views: 97

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Which sounds all nice and everything until you run up against shit like "oppositional defiance disorder" which is a disease given to the fact that children (often teens) tend to rebel against adult authority. Well, have ya seen how they get treated in schools? I'd be oppositional and defiant too! That's not a disease, it's human nature.

Just one example.
Agreed, Prazzie. Some branches are... dubious. My university (where I only studied Psych as an elective, mind you) stuck completely to the hard science realm of psychology. I can assure you (Galen) that humans are far more predictable than you might think. And where our reactions our different, they are different in consistent ways.
You just try to love in a controlled and reproducible manner in a laboratory setting!

Galen, somehow I don't think most people would really be able to make love uninhibitedly in a lab situation where they knew they were being blatantly stared at orobserved. I mean, they might give it their best shot, but...for a woman to climax, it's 99% mental. And like other primates, women don't like to be gawked at while doing "bathroom privacy" related stuff (like going poop/pee, or giving birth or making love while surrounded by a herd of gawking strangers). Does that sorta kinda somewhat sound reasonable?
Jacqueline, I suspect that Galen was talking about emotional/romantic love, not the physical act of sex. Setting up a laboratory experiment for reliably reproducing that would be much more difficult, I would think, than it would to test the conditions needed for climax.
But there is no way to observe that! It's like trying to observe magnetic force fields without matter! There are various degrees and types of "love." How would each be able to be scientifically observed?

As to my faus pax in misreading Galen's post, all I can say is "Ooops!" ::hanging head sheepishly and blushing ::
Plus, what IS “love”? It’s the same problem depression has. It’s so difficult to study in a lab environment because we don’t have a clear definition. People use “love” to refer to all sorts of different things. Many of the feelings we call “love” are, in fact, tested. Attraction in its various forms, for example, has definitely had a lot of work done on it. There have also been many studies looking at trait combinations as predictors of divorce (surprise, impulsive men are more likely to get divorces than non-impulsive men).

But “love” is too abstract. It’s a word that means so much that it doesn’t mean anything at all.
what IS “love”?


(sorry, I couldn't help it)
Galen, have you been reading all those naughty X-rated Bible stories again? Tsk tsk tsk :>
Galen, you should have included the link. :D

Maybe this will answer your question:


The average Mormon is more likely to be in top physical condition than anyone on this site.

it's not because they have 'god' in them, but what the Mormon society has in common with recommended healthy living - no alcohol, no premarital sex, no risky hobbies, no caffeine, plenty of exercise, home-prepared meals, no smoking, and so on.


Of course someone looking at a demographic of Mormons (or any religious group that bases itself on what it CANNOT do rather than what it CAN) will appear to be healthier than others.


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service