Actually, we generally CAN discount natural processes as a possibility, enki. As I've already pointed out, the terms are generally used when all the natural processes have been exhausted or non-functioning - be those the body's own mechanisms or medical science's best provisions. To say that there is somehow a further reserve of natural processes beyond these is to suggest that there is another dimension (for want of a better term) of natural-ity that science isn't able to probe. Could this be the very thng that we're dealing with in this debate - the spiritual element to the natural world?
I accept that miracles don't necessarily follow prayer - but then, questions need to be asked about the motivation of that prayer (was it honest, was it really putting the best for person concerned first - or was it simply selfish on the pasrt of the persdon praying, etc. etc.). Similarly, as with ordinary human situations, NO is a perfectly legitimate answer to requests - they don't all have to be answered in the affirmative, if a 'No' is actually better for the asker. (The famous 'want' v 'need' dilemma).
Incidentally, since so few miraculous healings are reported, not least because of our confidentiality rules, how do you know how many (or few) take place? I woulodn't be able to tell you how many such events have occurred in the UK over the past - say 5 years, simply because they aren't reported by the medical or secular press; however, I can say that I have known upwards of a dozen people who have been healed - in direct contravention (to coin a phrase) of highly authoritative medical opinion - as a result of prayer over the last 2 or 3 years alone.
Again, this is something that has to be experienced, either personally (or at least within a family or close community), before it can be appreciated.
In finishing, I'd fully agree that we need "... to look at the natural world. At least we know that that world exists." It just seems to me that some people understand the term 'the natural world' in different ways to others.
I haven't been able to access R&E until now, but I see any points you have made have been dealt with perfectly adequately by others.
Here are some of my thoughts:
I disagree completely that natural processes can be generally discounted. Present hypotheses for this particular healing effect include the immunological response, increased apoptosis and necrosis, hormonal responses, the role of epigenetics, psychological mechanisms, and, particularly in cases of spontaneous regression of cancer, the role of oncogenes and tumoral suppressors. All these are being examined, all of these are potentially natural explanations and if any of these, for instance, was found to play a part then this could well lead to great advances in medical care. There is not the slightest evidence that any actual 'spiritual element' plays any part at all.
As far as prayer motivation is concerned, you are simply suggesting that it is possible that the 'right' kind of prayer may not have been followed in cases where no spontaneous healing occurs, and all this without the slightest evidence to back this up. Also, if the response to even the 'right' kind of prayer is sometimes in the negative,(presumably because the god prayed to has other ideas), and as this is no different to spontaneous healing seemingly being totally erratic in nature, then this is no evidence at all that the act of praying has any effect on the healing process.
As regards the frequency of spontaneous healing, I must disagree with you again. Some unreported cases might well be because the physician assumed misdiagnosis or the patient felt better and didn't carry on with the treatment. And then there is some evidence, for instance, that in patients with solar keratosis, roughly a third underwent spontaneous remission. Another study had these words, that "either regular screening caused breast cancer, or a large percentage of invasive breast cancers simply regressed without treatment." On the other hand, it is rare for a person who has pancreatic cancer to experience spontaeous remission. Incidentally, I use the words 'spontaneous remission' and 'spontaneous healing' interchangably here. One is used by the medical profession, the other is simply more a layman's term.
Incidentally, I totally reject as any sort of solid evidence the anecdotal cases that you present here, just as I reject any of the anecdotal cases that my wife has suggested where prayer did not seem to be an important factor.
Appreciation and personal experience are valuable assets, but they do not necessarily comprise valid evidence at all.
