Old man spends 70 years without food or water, annoys scientists
<a href="http://www.physorg.com/news192690076.html" target="_blank">Article</a>
<a href="http://www.physorg.com/news191743491.html" target="_blank">Precursor</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-Article+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Article)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->An 83-year-old Indian holy man who says he has spent seven decades without food or water has astounded a team of military doctors who studied him during a two-week observation period. During the period, he neither ate nor drank and did not go to the toilet.
...
"We still do not know how he survives," neurologist Sudhir Shah told reporters after the end of the experiment. "It is still a mystery what kind of phenomenon this is."
"If Jani does not derive energy from food and water, he must be doing that from energy sources around him, sunlight being one," said Shah.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you say, interesting?..
<a href="http://www.physorg.com/news191743491.html" target="_blank">Precursor</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-Article+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Article)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->An 83-year-old Indian holy man who says he has spent seven decades without food or water has astounded a team of military doctors who studied him during a two-week observation period. During the period, he neither ate nor drank and did not go to the toilet.
...
"We still do not know how he survives," neurologist Sudhir Shah told reporters after the end of the experiment. "It is still a mystery what kind of phenomenon this is."
"If Jani does not derive energy from food and water, he must be doing that from energy sources around him, sunlight being one," said Shah.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you say, interesting?..
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I also don't see why they need all this MRI and testing. For the first test all they should be doing is verifying or falsifying his claim, and focusing very intently on that test. If he passes that test <i>then</i> they should be working to ascertain why. Those extra tests don't actually shed any light on whether he's drinking any water, they just un-focus the test.
What they should be doing is <i>locking</i> him in a room with several cameras and some sealed containers of water. If he opens the containers or tries to leave, then the test fails. If he makes it two weeks or maybe a month, then they should be scanning him under the same conditions.
They they should do, is surgically enter his stummick and check what is there, I strongly doubt they wont find signs that this guy have been eating.
Also, the sealed chamber test would be good to.
Well, duh, we won't have anything scientifically certain until they publish the findings, release the tapes and so on. The study itself sounds legit so far otherwise (my worst point of contention is relatively short testing period).
I can say from experience that blood, urine, MRI, weight and other test can be and are used to objectively determine nutrition (and obviously health condition). If you've ever submitted fluid samples, you'll know there are nutrition, time of day and other requirements on them.
I foresee dozenfold more problems than hydrocarbon or water nutrition alone here, human body just isn't built to go on on its own.
<!--quoteo(post=1770664:date=May 11 2010, 01:06 AM:name=sherpa)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sherpa @ May 11 2010, 01:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770664"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><img src="http://media.strategywiki.org/images/6/63/SFA3_Dhalsim.gif" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Win.
Extensive tests are fine, but they aren't necessary to determine whether or not he was actually taking in any food or water. All that's needed to do that is something like the protocol I suggested above. Their protocol seems anything but watertight.
Not drink it, of course. Assuming all possible sources of nutrition were monitored and subject constantly surveiled, it's very proper standard for any non-sample medical testing.
The requirements are suspiciously arbitrary though, yes, but are also common for most studies, so nothing new there. I'm sure skin water absorption will show to have played a role.
<!--quoteo(post=1770670:date=May 11 2010, 01:33 AM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 01:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770670"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Extensive tests are fine, but they aren't necessary to determine whether or not he was actually taking in any food or water. All that's needed to do that is something like the protocol I suggested above. Their protocol seems anything but watertight.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Come to think of it, assuming he was hiding something in his beard or whatnot, they are. They are also useful in determining the minute details of metabolism, which would much more certainly suggest food or water intake, hunger, digestion, pre-nutrition, etc. Incidentally sealed chamber would do nothing to avert smuggled goods or super-nutrition.
Didn't follow the story enough to get a real opinion though.
Thank you for handling this like adult. Seems to me, not many do.
Again. Before testing, find out if there is anything <i>to test</i>.
No, I tried it, it just hurts.
I read the whole article and it's not nearly as inflammatory as you'd believe from the title. Here's some quoted parts
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Indian Rationalist Association says Mr Jani’s survival is down to nothing more mysterious than trickery. Sanal Edamaruku, the association’s secretary general, told the Mail: ‘I asked to be allowed to send an independent team to survey the room where this test is taking place, but I was repeatedly turned down. ‘Dr Shah has been in charge of three similar investigations over the past ten years, and he has never allowed independent verification. 'In 2000, he was asking for funds to investigate a man he claimed got his energy from the sun, just like plants do. ‘In 2003, he even approached NASA for funds to investigate Mr Jani, claiming astronauts might benefit from the research. This particular hospital, led by this particular doctor, keeps on making these claims without ever producing evidence or publishing research.’ Mr Edamaruku is convinced that Mr Jani must have had access to food and water at the hospital, and does not believe that he was kept under strict supervision around the clock.
He says that whenever the Rationalist Association has investigated individuals making similar claims, all have been exposed as frauds<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why this Sanal Edamaruku guy cares so much:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->‘These claims are very dangerous, because people try to follow these holy men and can end up hurting themselves'<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But, yeah, thanks. The turning down of independent investigation is a rather ###### move, not entirely unexpected, but that's what peer review and replication is for if they plan to publish.
<!--QuoteBegin-Article+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Article)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We may never know the truth, but until he is exposed as a fraud, perhaps we should enjoy suspending our disbelief and give Mr Jani the benefit of the doubt. After all, wouldn’t life be boring if everything was rational?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hah.
Gah! There go my plans for... Ehm... Hmm, I forget...
or
Tremendous holes in an already shaky scientific investigation.
I think Occam's razor solves this one pretty quick.
It's a very poor standard for the purposes of this test. They're testing whether or not he's taking in water, but he's allowed to <i>put some in his mouth</i>. He could easily be taking in small amounts at a time. There's no real need for him to be gargling, and yet he's been allowed to do it. This is a massive hole in the protocol, and quite straightforwardly discredits it as a thorough investigation of the man's claims.
<!--quoteo(post=1770673:date=May 10 2010, 10:37 PM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ May 10 2010, 10:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770673"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Come to think of it, assuming he was hiding something in his beard or whatnot, they are. They are also useful in determining the minute details of metabolism, which would much more certainly suggest food or water intake, hunger, digestion, pre-nutrition, etc. Incidentally sealed chamber would do nothing to avert smuggled goods or super-nutrition.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I forgot to include the detail that the man would obviously be thoroughly searched before the experiment began. All this expensive machinery is useless if the test doesn't rule out the possibility of deception. This one has clearly done a poor job of that.
I like Sanal Edamaruku, and I'm not surprised to see he's had something to say. He does a good job in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/mar/23/surender-sharma-tv-ritual-edamaruku" target="_blank">exposing these frauds</a>.
<img src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/the_data_so_far.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
I think Occam's razor solves this one pretty quick.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's a pretty rubbish way to use the razor. By that token we'd have to reject every single new finding in science.
<!--quoteo(post=1770733:date=May 11 2010, 12:07 PM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 12:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770733"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's a very poor standard for the purposes of this test. They're testing whether or not he's taking in water, but he's allowed to <i>put some in his mouth</i>. He could easily be taking in small amounts at a time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even if they're frauds, they're not idiots: the amount of mouthwash dispensed is stated to be carefully monitored before and after the procedure. I mean, I know it sounds rubbish, but have you actually read the articles?
Incidentally, he *will* be taking in a small amount by gargling, you can test that for yourself. Quenching the first with a few drops, however, is still a notion all anatomy would strongly oppose.
<!--quoteo(post=1770733:date=May 11 2010, 12:07 PM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 12:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770733"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's no real need for him to be gargling...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's called "hygiene". Test subjects are not prisoners. I'm sure skin absorption of water will show to have played a role myself, but I also doubt it can do much.
<!--quoteo(post=1770733:date=May 11 2010, 12:07 PM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 12:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770733"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I forgot to include the detail that the man would obviously be thoroughly searched before the experiment began.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So did I. I don't see it stopping a professional smuggler myself, especially with complicity of the researchers. Fluid tests, however, are impossible to fake, which is the reason for their use in the first place. Both methods used in tandem would definitely be better, of course, but they're not a requirement for any other study, so what the hell.
<!--quoteo(post=1770733:date=May 11 2010, 12:07 PM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 12:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770733"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->All this expensive machinery is useless if the test doesn't rule out the possibility of deception. This one has clearly done a poor job of that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The whole *point* of all this expensive machinery is to objectively rule out the possibility of deception, and as I have outlined before, that is exactly what it does. Indeed it has been used successfully before in such cases, including the one before with that same guy.
<!--quoteo(post=1770733:date=May 11 2010, 12:07 PM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 12:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770733"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I like Sanal Edamaruku, and I'm not surprised to see he's had something to say. He does a good job in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/mar/23/surender-sharma-tv-ritual-edamaruku" target="_blank">exposing these frauds</a>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indeed. You'll notice this test uses some of the methods he had used to expose those frauds.
Speaking of, I can't help but think that skeptic societies would do a much greater service to the people by exposing frauds in the conventional industries. Otherwise it's less caring about truth of the claims, and more about concentrating on already on the brink of social acceptance...
...
Now then, what the hell is this? Why are you making me defend likely frauds? Is it really so much of a bother to think skeptically rather than inventing excuses so as to not even consider it? I know you're smarter than that.
<!--quoteo(post=1770741:date=May 11 2010, 02:17 PM:name=Thansal)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thansal @ May 11 2010, 02:17 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770741"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><img src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/the_data_so_far.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<3
It's also worth noting that Edamaruku's methods were nothing like this test. He didn't waste his time with expensive medical procedures and, most importantly, he assumed deception from the very start, which is vital in examining these sorts of claims.
I understand the notion, I too think the details are pretty rubbish. Maybe I'm of a bit too high opinion of yourself, but surely if I can acknowledge the involved factors, so can you.
For instance: mouthwash. Sounds rubbish because it poses danger of intake. However, it's also said to be expressly monitored, and the minuscule intake would hardly be close to physically satiating. Why would you stop at the first step?..
<!--quoteo(post=1770749:date=May 11 2010, 03:18 PM:name=Insane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Insane @ May 11 2010, 03:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770749"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's also worth noting that Edamaruku's methods were nothing like this test. He didn't waste his time with expensive medical procedures and, most importantly, he assumed deception from the very start, which is vital in examining these sorts of claims.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I added the Daily Mail article to the OP, check it out for the digest of his studies. They expressly mention camera monitoring and fluid sampling he used before.
This research sounds like a good test of claims to me, even if I'd rather it be much more rigorous. The biggest danger of deception I see is coming from researchers themselves fudging data - until that is somehow assured against, I'll personally dismiss it - not methodology.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->A number of persons have been asking me why I won't test any more of these claimants who say that they don't eat or drink anything for years on end. There are a few dozen of them out there at this time, and new ones come up every month or so. See above. Such a claim is difficult to test merely because of the time involved and the personnel necessary, and the claimants moan that they can't afford the costs involved. I've been out on a couple of these expeditions in the USA, and I get bored out of my mind sitting in a car in a parking lot waiting for the claimant to emerge from a Holiday Inn room, sneak down the stairs, and visit the local burger joint for the needed nourishment. There's no end to it. And, the claim is just so obviously silly and frivolous, and I'm a grown man — too busy with serious claimants, to spend time on these nut-cases. Yes, I'm aware that doctors — trained medical people — have observed a few of the claimants, but I've yet to see any evidence that these learned observers have the correct and necessary qualifications to detect sleight-of-hand. Until that time, those episodes remain as examples of the naive watching the cunning.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh, and I recommend reading <a href="http://polos######s.com/pb/book-review-karma-cola-by-gita-mehta/" target="_blank">Karma Cola</a>.
-Exactly how much water was absorbed with the gargling?
Now, I'm willing to believe that it's somewhere within the realm of possibility that someone could do this (hyper aggresive immune system digests skin bacteria or something). But I do not believe this example is truthful.
I think someone is capable of training themselves to go on *almost* nothing for weeks at a time. I'm sure Jani and the team of "eminent" doctors had long discussions about it over tea, on camera.
Ask yourself this. Do you believe he was blessed by a goddess? If yes, discussion over. If no, then you admit he's at least a little bit delusional. Is it really such a stretch to say that the claims of a delusional man might not be 100% truthful?
Well that's annoying. I understand he can't test all the hundreds of claims personally, but surely he has some personnel that can bother to. I'd personally love for him to test this, maybe the media attention will perk his interest in the future.
Also, yeah, your second link went ###### up.
<!--quoteo(post=1770767:date=May 11 2010, 05:03 PM:name=[WHO]Them)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ([WHO]Them @ May 11 2010, 05:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770767"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->-Camera monitoring doesn't expressly state that someone qualified (or even anyone at all) has reviewed the footage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Quite right, however it means the footage is open for review by anyone at all, as in peer review or replication. I believe it's a requirement on most studies today.
<!--quoteo(post=1770767:date=May 11 2010, 05:03 PM:name=[WHO]Them)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ([WHO]Them @ May 11 2010, 05:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770767"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->-Exactly how much water was absorbed with the gargling?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A few drops HAVE to make it through to the best of my understanding, you can easily test that yourself. Absorbing large enough quantities, however, doesn't seem to be an option here without explicit fraud by the researchers themselves, which is far from out of the question.
<!--quoteo(post=1770767:date=May 11 2010, 05:03 PM:name=[WHO]Them)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ([WHO]Them @ May 11 2010, 05:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770767"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ask yourself this. Do you believe he was blessed by a goddess?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course not. But just like proposal that lighting is sent down by gods, it has nothing to do with phenomena itself.
Except they've never published and are refusing independent scrutiny.
Except the difference here is that we've all actually seen lightning. I would be more reluctant to believe in lightning if I had heard a story about it from a guy I know reading about a guy from a faraway land that saw it. See what I'm saying?
Im not even upset, Im impressed.