Improving our health = not limiting or controlling the word evidence.

by Eunice J Minford MA FRCS Ed, Consultant Surgeon, N.Ireland


Evidenced based medicine currently dominates the Western model but who decides what is ‘evidence’? Is it being controlled and limited by academia and /or commercial interests? Is anecdotal evidence of a person’s lived experience a valid form of evidence? If a person reports that their life has changed for the better as a result of an operation, a medication or a complementary healing modality – is that in itself a valid form of evidence? We are trained in medical school that the history of the patient is most important and where the gold lies…….why is it ok to accept this personal testimony when someone is ill but to ignore the same individual’s experience when they report what assisted them to recover? This interview with Serge Benhayon, begins the conversation on these topics.



Disclaimer: The topics covered in this interview go beyond what is accepted in the current paradigm of evidenced based Western medicine and it is for the viewer to discern if what is shared is true or could possibly be true or not. Eunice Minford is a Consultant General Surgeon who works in the NHS in accordance with the principles of Western Medicine. She has a personal interest in exploring beyond the current paradigm of Western Medicine and has studied Esoteric Philosophy and Sacred Esoteric Healing with Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine.  Esoteric Medicine understands life, illness and disease at the level of energy.

245 thoughts on “Improving our health = not limiting or controlling the word evidence.

  1. Everyday we run experiments on our selves via the lifestyle choices we make. What a wealth of research and evidence we reject when we fail to take into account anecdotal evidence, a mine of information ready and waiting to inform us about so many things.

  2. I always thought the point of science was that one was always open to new ideas. It would seem in the case of evidence-based medicine it is often a case of ‘follow the money’.

    1. Very true Steve and this is what we have made the word to be in our use of it and association with research and systems of validating findings. We have made it about quantity rather than quality.

  3. I for one can definitely say that I have benefitted greatly from healing sessions and the modalities of Universal Medicine and that is my truth and I have also benefitted greatly from western medicine also in fact I would not be here without it so the amalgamation of the two can only result in a far better understanding of so much more than we know now. It is great to see Eunice asking the questions that need to be addressed.

  4. We have all the evidence we need right under our noses. Our bodies show us everything we need to know. If we heal something through dedication and love for ourselves then we know this to be the truth. This is our own true evidence. No need for confirmation from science, medicine or anywhere else.

  5. I think it’s really important not to dismiss or dis-honour our own experiences of health and what we’ve found has and hasn’t supported us. It doesn’t have to be the same for everyone, some people may find a certain food supportive and others not but that doesn’t negate what it is for each person; tuning in with our whole body more gives us a great marker for what is and isn’t working well.

  6. I love the expansion of the definition of intelligence from what we think with our mind, to the responses of our body to the actions imposed by the mind. The physical/physiological consequences of our actions are true intelligence, not how much we can recall, invent etc.

  7. It seems to me that evidence will be accepted if it aligns and agrees with the ‘received wisdom’ of the day (I use that term advisedly for it it not wisdom but regurgitation); if it is convenient and fits with the accepted norm. Anything that doesn’t will be viewed with suspicion, disbelief, ridicule etc until it can be scientifically proven. Even then some will never accept the truth.

    1. It is certainly much easier to publish something non-controversial as there is little risk for the publisher or the author.

  8. The simplicity of what Serge Benhayon is presenting is actually super enormous at the same time. What if it was approved and agreed that someone’s experience is a form of evidence. That a significant shift in someones health and wellbeing has come from making different choices and then the outcome has been transformational. Bring on the those days is all I can say.

  9. It’s a true point Serge makes, that when we go to the doctors and say we’ve experienced x, y and z in the body it is valid enough to then prescribe drugs from, yet when a group of people can claim they’ve experienced a, b and c changes and in their bodies and improvements in their health and well-being it is not accepted in the same way. We need a level and honest playing field whose purpose is to produce research and products that support us all rather than putting the bottom line before people’s well-being.

  10. It is a great point to examine who decides what is evidence and what isn’t. There are many variables in any research project and the aim is to reduce them as much as possible, but what is acceptable and what isn’t? I’m not sure I understand how the opinion from one person is greater than another. Evidence seems to change over a period of time, so is it something we should be relying so heavily on in our present day culture?

  11. When the extent of how badly off we are health wise and the actual state of our health systems is actually publicised truly and the more and more nurses and health professionals that leave the profession totally demoralised, maybe then we will take anecdotal evidence as a valuable asset to assist us out of the mess we are in.

  12. On some level there is an awareness that our current method of relying on ‘scientific proof’ to be considered evidence is not always necessary as we have gone outside of this but it is with control as to be open to this on the whole would mean acknowledging all that comes with it, including true responsibility.

  13. It is an important point that doctors accept and solicit anecdotal evidence in individual patient encounters and generally reject it when it is published. The difference may be that in a one-on-one treatment, the only person affected is the patient while in a publication it could be many patients. However, the point holds that doctors accept anecdotal evidence all day long.

  14. Wise words that examines evidence based medicine and asks some profound questions about its veracity in its current form. Is there a truer form of evidence based evidence? The simple answer is yes.

  15. I was in a healthcare organisation many years ago and they were interviewing for a healthcare professional – they had young people on the panel of interviewers and one of them asked the healthcare professional ‘I know my body and I know what works and what doesn’t – what would you do if your medical/clinical training suggested you give me a certain treatment, but I know that that treatment would not work for me – would you honour my feelings – or not?’ – very incite-full question – which brings to the fore the possibility that any medical or clinical consultation is a partnership – one of equality – not one where the expert tells the ‘patient’ what they need.

    1. An important observation Jane ‘any medical or clinical consultation is a partnership –– one of equality – not one where the expert tells the ‘patient’ what they need’ And this requires a change on both sides: patients empowered to consider themselves equal to medical practitioners and work with them and doctors who relate to patients as partners, open to listen and learn from them..

      1. I agree – I have been a patient and sat there feeling disempowered and left the consultation feeling deflated – I learnt from that and decided not to do that again, and when I have a medical/clinical consultation nowadays I greet them as though they are the same as me – as they are, and, feel empowered to be me and ask questions or challenge as needed – as in the end it is my body that we are talking about.

  16. ” if you say you have benefited from a healing session and that is your truth, we cannot dismiss that, because, so long as that sustains itself ”
    The key part to remember with true healing is that it does sustain itself and therefore the evidence is on going. Due to the truth of real true healing sessions which universal medicine modalities provide. I am living evidence of this.

  17. Medicine can be so contradictory… on the one hand accepting evidence from our bodies when one is being diagnosed but not accepting the same evidence from our bodies when we recover.

  18. Just because something doesnt fit our ‘model’ doesnt mean it never happened… and to accept it did happen means we have to then look at our ‘model’ – and perhaps realise that the ‘model’ is not true and we have been fooled into investing in something that is not only not true but irresponsible.

  19. When we look at statistical evidence we are looking at numbers that fit the question, not a representation of lived experience.

    1. and health related statistics often seem to be so out of date by the time you get them/they are published things have already moved on, and, they only represent what has been reported e.g. with some illnesses and disease such as depression, or sleep issues – much of this is not reported so we don’t really know the true numbers.

  20. A great question from Serge Benhayon – “Does money buy truth?” and from where I sit, it sure seems that in many cases it does. Yes, we need to have the “Gold Standard” when it comes to testing medicines that people will be taking, but why isn’t the amazing anecdotal evidence of many people turning their health and well-being around considered to a standard of equal value? Meanwhile humanity misses out on the truth.

  21. Great to now openly challenge entrenched beliefs about ‘evidence based medicine’ as the only form of medicine that is valid. Being overly respectful of science-based statements dis-empowers, blocks innovation and openness to alternative approaches to medicine. Let’s look at all evidence not just evidence-based ones. Established scientific norms paraded as fact, can be openly challenged in the face of truth.

  22. Shouldn’t this form of evidence be included in all research? How can we exclude the feelings and experience of the people involved and doesn’t it make the research and methods behind it of more importance than people if we do?

  23. We are shooting our selves in the foot when we attempt to manipulate evidence in favour of our economical investments in health. So far the world has not developed a pill or potion that heals lack of self worth or disconnection from our delicate bodies, so it is in our interests to ensure that we have resolutions for these ills too. This type of healing has to be delivered via another modality and in my experience the Universal Healing Modalities are key players in this field, offering modalities that consistently enable people to heal these issues with resounding results.

  24. ‘why is it ok to accept this personal testimony when someone is ill but to ignore the same individual’s experience when they report what assisted them to recover?’ Yes it doesn’t make sense if our history is taken seriously and into account but if health improvements are shared this isn’t taking into account and be evidence for the healing that has taken place. It seems very one sided and out of balance.

  25. It stands out that to have a full and true relationship with medicine, it comes down to how we are willing to be open to look not only at the doctors or medical system but to the quality and depth of care that we take with ourselves.

  26. Having listened to this inspiring interview I feel to reflect on where I have given more sway to scientific based evidence over the evidence I receive from inside my very own body’s laboratory.

    1. A great question to ask ourselves, Elizabeth – where have we dismissed our bodies signalling and wisdom for the sake of an expert’s take on what is going on? Gosh, if I applied this question in all areas of my life, there would be some very interesting moments of realisation about how much I have given my power and responsibility away.

  27. The monetisation of science and knowledge is omnipresent in so much of our society. It is an evil that caps true wisdom. I adore what Serge Benhayon exposes in this interview about the fact that the science community does not accept personal testimonials as evidence, because they can’t control them, they can’t own them, they can’t monetise them. Deeply true. But interesting to look at our responsibility in this, for that is accepting the findings of research (without investigating the source, funding, intention or parameters of that research) and yet we rubbish the evidence of the lived experience of another.

    1. So true Otto. I too deeply appreciate what Serge Benhayon exposes here, and it does call into question our readiness to accept what are very often biaised research findings that prop up certain beliefs or habits, that because of our vested interests, we don’t want disturbed.

    2. Absolutely ottobathurst, something as amazing as evidence and true observation which could really support and unite humanity to overcome its problems and ailments, is being narrowed down and owned to only serve the interests of a minority to wield power, control and to divide us. And because we as a collective race of beings do not actually want to see the real evidence or stark reality of how we are currently living, we play along with this game and allow it to go on.

      1. Well, that is an interesting point. What you are saying, I think, is that we don’t want to hear the stories of those that have turned their lives around, because that calls us to, by default, look at ourselves and the way we might be living. Is it possible that we don’t want such solutions (especially ones that are, in essence based around the very simple choice to start loving ourselves) because that means we have to take responsibility for the state that we are in. As long as we can only get ‘better’ via complicated, advanced and expensive science/medicine, then we are safe in the irresponsibility of our choices by being able to pretend that we are powerless.

  28. Instead of dismissing anecdotal evidence we would be wise to keep expanding our research methods so that we can more easily allow for such invaluable sources of information to be gathered and for humanity to reap the benefit.

    1. I agree we need evidence based science of course this is not in question, however we also need to expand our definition of the term evidence and embrace the original innocence and wide eyed open observation that was the original method of scientific discovery.

      1. I love the description of the ‘wide eyed open observation’. For period at school we were encouraged to learn through exploring, experimenting, and observing, rather than simply studying the standard text books. Science became alive at that point. We are all scientists of life and have enormous potential to observe, share our insights and support one another in deepening our awareness and understanding. A limitation on what is evidence is a limitation on science itself.

  29. The title of this blog is insightful. It suggests if medical authorities were truly concerned about health they would be open and commit to explore all routes to it, not rigidly stick to one. Another way to look at this is greed. Money rules, not a commitment to solving catastrophic health crisis we’re in. In fact, in arrogance, greed and defiance, ill-health has become a money making machine, underpinned by this chilling reality: why pursue routes to true health, when there are big bucks to be made in keeping people increasingly sick and dependent.

  30. Imagine, how far down the wrong track we’ve gone, to dismiss the evidence of everyday people, their anecdotes, and lived experience of bringing health back their bodies, is to dismiss the very people themselves. This is a damning and criminal as millions of people suffer and die, because of a refusal to accept anything but scientific evidence.

  31. This is indeed something we should sit up and take notice of – that we are gradually creeping and falling into a new modern ‘dark ages’ where information, evidence and practice of medicine is heavily censored and controlled by a few who desire absolute power over it.

  32. My body is my evidence and I trust my connection to my body far more than the sponsored science that we are bombarded with.

  33. A brilliant interview exposing the fact that money controls our evidence based research and that we dismiss anecdotal evidence because it cannot be controlled, categorised or conveniently quantified… thank you Serge and Eunice for sharing this insight.

  34. This is very eye opening in how currently a person’s lived experience is not accepted as evidence. As well as eye opening it is absolutely ironic as how on earth could we dismiss someones lived experience that is the greatest form of evidence far beyond any trials or double blinded studies. I for one absolutely do not want humanity to be in the dark ages as I am sure many many thousands if not billons of people would say the same. Is the tide starting to turn with this and lived experience will start to be accepted as evidence more and more .. trustfully yes. We have a lot to learn here.

  35. Life and our every choice has its own evidence. Yet what is clear is how we tend to twist it to suit our point of view. Is it any wonder that so many pieces of ‘research’ come out seeming crooked? The only undeniable barometer I have found is the long term way we feel in our body. Looking at Serge Benhayon, and the joy, vitality and wisdom he lives, evidently something works amazingly.

  36. The ‘dominating’ type way of thinking in Science and Medicine that says “we will cast you out if you don’t abide by our model” is obviously not working on a whole – for how can we account for brilliant surgeons and medical professionals that take their own lives, if this institution is impervious and the 100% correct model?

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s