(Close Window)
Topic: Injuries myth
Message: Posted by: JonChase (Sep 25, 2010 05:59PM)
Injuries etc...

There's a lot of hypnosis about now. Way more than a decade or so ago, and I get a lot of people writing to me asking just how dangerous hypnosis physically.

There is only one verifiable case of a broken leg occurring on stage in the UK during a stage hypnosis show in 1994 in Corby in Northamptonshire in the UK. Admittedly it was a particularly nasty one, a reticular fracture of the femur. That's a corkscrew of the bone and with the femur bleeding to death with such a break is a real possibility. And it was bad trust me I know. It was my show!

I also had a young lad once split his nose open with a hand-bell when he was being Quasimodo. Bleed like a stuck pig but after being cleaned up he shrugged, said it was about typical for a Saturday night and came back on stage with a plaster on his nose. [Bandaid]

When the British government down graded stage hypnosis from being mildly worrying to no more dangerous than walking down the street in it's review of the 1952 hypnotism act, a Government funded research group found about 12 reports of headaches after a show and, apart from the odd scrapes and grazes you are bound to get when hundreds of people are on stage every week, nothing more or as serious as the above leg bust could be found.

Now in another post there is mention of all this bad stuff happening to physically harm people but, if it's that bad then why is it impossible to actually find the cases of hypnotists being sued or banned? I am aware there was something recently in the states but if we look at the record hypnosis is easily as safe as fire eating or knife throwing.

And if you want to know what happened with the femur, just ask.
Message: Posted by: catweazle (Sep 25, 2010 06:08PM)
What happened with the femur?

Its a good reason to enrol on a first aid course, including CPR, if you want to be professional about things, and get insurance
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 25, 2010 06:09PM)
As safe as fire eating? Wow our newest guru has spoken.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 25, 2010 06:23PM)
Your not very well informed Jon. Robert Halper in the early 90s had no insurance when a volunteer fell off stage and broke her hip. The venue got sued for around 90k.

At the time I was performing another well known hypnotist was being sued for an incedent whereby someone dived off a table believing to be a world champion swimmer. They seriously damaged their neck.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Sep 26, 2010 11:20AM)
Jon, there's very little occurrences of physical injury maybe simply due to the simple fact that the WORKING hypnotists are mostly (if not all) properly trained? Most if not all of them in the US also have some kind of accreditation from some hypnosis training group for insurance purposes. Even with the most basic and introductory training, they do emphasize safety measures one should take when hypnotizing. If this "injuries discussion" was brought up in reference to that other post in which the question was if one could go out and hypnotize without properly learning about hypnosis and instead just run around "zapping" people, then you would remember that it wasn't a question of if hypnosis is truly dangerous and more so a question of is it safe for people to go out hypnotizing others without having a full grasp of all the what ifs that comes with hypnotizing. Better safe than sorry.

As for the safety of fire eating and knife throwing, do you have ANY idea how hard these performers have worked to PREVENT accidents? Do you honestly think they just go out one day, learn how to eat fire in an hour and then go around deeming themselves a fire eater booking shows? There's no shortcuts for it, you work for your goal. Yes of course it's relatively safe for what fire eats and knife throwers do but then again, they've also went through proper training and practice.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (Sep 26, 2010 04:07PM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-26 12:20, kissdadookie wrote:
As for the safety of fire eating and knife throwing, do you have ANY idea how hard these performers have worked to PREVENT accidents? Do you honestly think they just go out one day, learn how to eat fire in an hour and then go around deeming themselves a fire eater booking shows?
[/quote]
That's fairly much how I did it. Siphoned petrol from my car, and did a big blow-out on a stage at a variety show. After the show a fire-eater with more experience told me the pros use paraffin rather then petrol, and that ended my formal training.
I have had a few burns, but nothing serious. But I agree fire-eating and knife-throwing (I haven't done that yet) are more dangerous physically than hypnosis.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 26, 2010 04:09PM)
Only if you forget to spit ans swallow!
Message: Posted by: catweazle (Sep 26, 2010 04:19PM)
I thought fire eating and fire breathing were too different techniques, hate to get it mixed up.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Sep 26, 2010 05:30PM)
Tony, you learned it on the spot and went out to perform it? That's ballsy.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 26, 2010 05:55PM)
Tony is mental..... whatever you do don't volunteer for his first knife throwing attempt..
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Sep 26, 2010 06:14PM)
Well, fire eating I guess the only person you're most likely to hurt is yourself but fire breathing definitely has some additional precautions one needs to learn and understand. Much of it falls into the realm of common sense but common sense as we know is really not that common.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 04:50AM)
Here just a few documented physical injuries sent to me by Alex Leroy

01) Documented by UK National Press - Ann Hazard Fell off stage and broke her leg at Glasgow Pavillion during one of Robert Halpherns Shows when he told her to go to the toilet the quickest way possible and she just walked off the stage (hence his negligence)

02) Andrew Newton had someone fall off stage and break their leg at Liverpool Royal Court Theatre in the 80's.

03) Peter Powers had someone blow their thumb apart after using a powerful blank firing gun in a James Bond Sketch at a Liverpool Theatre Show.

that's just the tip of the iceberg, I'm aware of many other occurences but the fact the "names" have had it occur says it all..
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Sep 27, 2010 04:56AM)
So none of the reported cases of injury have anything to do with the hypnotizing element of the show. They are just due to negligence of stage safety management and underestimation of the power of blanks.

Phew. Stop Press. Using your imagination is safe when done with help and care. Putting yourself into the hands of the unhinged is still not recommended.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 05:09AM)
They are injuries sustained while in hypnosis.
The Halpern case was a direct cause of not making a suggestion clear enough.

Everybody makes that mistake ocasionally. Without proper training it is far more likely. And more dangerous in a public place. If you dig around you will find lots of incidents related to hypnosis. But if you want to argue its totally safe and anyone should just jump in without even knowing how to manage hypnosis which is what Jon is saying then I guess there is nothing anyone can say to change your point of view so I'm not going to bother.

Go ahead.

I know personally over the years I have had a few frightening moments. Especially when I first started.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 05:22AM)
As for accidents etc in USA, Chase clearly does not keep up to speed either check out http://www.thehypnosiscompany.com/safety/

Justin James (with help form Richad Nongard and Tom Silver an others) sorted this site out.

BECAUSE it became next to impossible for them to get insurance due to the large number of successful claims for injury that had been brough against USA based hypnotists.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 05:33AM)
I think this email I recieved is of interest to the thread....


Stage & Street Hypnosis are indeed potentially VERY DANGEROUS, even Andrew Newton (The Man Who Taught Paul McKenna) admits and explains such in his book "All In The Mind".

In the book "Investigating Stage Hypnosis" by Traccie O Keefe and Katrina Fox there are numerous cases dicsussed of people suffering both Physical, Psychological and Emotional Harm at the hands of Stage Hypnotists.

Read "Investigating Stage Hypnosis" first and then read Andrew Newtons book and you'll no doubt agree that essentially according to Newtons information, the vast majority of the cases discussed in Tracie O Keefes book were indeed most likely caused as a result of stage hypnosis.

And everyone involved in the current trend of impromtu/street should be aware that these were mainly psychological, physical and emotional injuries caused by being hypnotised and/or the actual post hypnotic suggestions given by the hypnotist.

Read Andrew Newton's book and then honestly tell us that Stage/Street Hypnosis is not potentially very dangerous.

Indeed another book you'd be well advised to read is "Practising Safe Hypnosis" by Roger Hambleton. He is now A Hypnotist who once worked as a Barrrister and knows what he is talking about, read it and discover the TRUTH about the Paul McKenna versus Chris Gates Schizophremia case.

Essentially the Court ruled that MOST LIKELY THE HYPNOSIS DID INSTIGATE MR GATES SCHIZOPHRENIA...

However All people seem to know and remember is that McKenna was found NOT GUILTY of negligence which is indeed True, h was not guilty and so coud not be prosecuted as he'd done all required in law and ensured suggestions were cancelled out, pre-talks given all health and safety laws followed etc.

However Read "Practising Safe Hypnosis" and then take a look at videos by the growing band of UK Street Hypnotists and it becomes clear that had one of them been in McKennas position then they most likely would have been found GULITY of negligence, as they don't do the correct pre-talk, are unlicensed, unisured, don't abide by the Health & Safety Executives Laws (eg proper risk assesments and such like) and in the main are not trained to a high enough standard..

Yes indeed Stage/Street Hypnosis is potentially very dangerous, especially in the hands of those with no regard for the laws, licensing, insurance or legal health and safety obligations etc.

Oh and Remember Phil Daemon (Phillip Green) another example of a Hypnotist being found guility of Negligence and causing harm through hypnosis - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-49284/Woman-wins-damages-hypnotist.html
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Sep 27, 2010 05:33AM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 06:09, mindpunisher wrote:
They are injuries sustained while in hypnosis.
The Halpern case was a direct cause of not making a suggestion clear enough.
[/quote]

Yes. 'You will use the steps'. Nothing to do with hypnosis just stage management. That is why I have an assistant take them to the steps just in case they are too busy looking out for their friends to note where the steps are.

All the inherent dangers of any act on stage or the street need to be catered for. I have always maintained that. As the goverment review made clear upon consultation with the busiest hypnotists in the country at the time the dangers are mostly the same for any stage act.

Anthony
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 05:37AM)
Guns aren't dangerous either. Its the people who use them.

Here is a frightening story from an ex stage hypnotist that could happen anytime anywhere.

"Once at a Butlin's holiday camp, right at the start of a show I dropped this man into instant trance. A few minutes later I said, "Wakey wakey, what are you doing down there lying on the floor?"
The young man, around the age of 30, leapt to his feet, turned to the person next to him, and put his hands around the person's throat in an attempt to strangle him! I quickly intervened with the word "Sleep", and the subject fell back to the floor in a trance. I quickly gave suggestions of inner confidence, ego hypnosis causing psychosisboosting, and suggestions of peace-of-mind and well-being. I then awoke him and he returned back to the audience. All this happened within a few minutes, the audience didn't really know what was happening and I had a show to perform. Unfortunately the story doesn't end there. Immediately after I had finished the show there were further problems with this individual. He had turned insane, and was acting like a madman thinking he was a soldier. He was out to kill, and not to be captured.
Due to the strong emotional content I would rather not recall this story in detail, but will say that it was a very frightening experience for myself and the other people involved. Luck being on my side the situation was resolved, and the young man concerned spent the night in a local hospital.
He had already been bordering on the verge of psychosis, and the hypnosis had acted like a trigger. That night driving home, I was in a state of shock. Nothing had ever happened like this before. My main concern was for the young man, and also how could I avoid something like this ever happening again? The answer was, I couldn't. There is no way that you can tell whether a volunteer is bordering on a level of psychosis or neurosis. If a person is bordering on the level of psychosis, then hypnosis can be the trigger that fires them into insanity. I have hypnotized thousands of people, and fortunately have had only a few casualties that I am aware of. Even one casualty is one too many."


http://www.dangers-of-hypnosis.co.uk/hypnotist_dangers_of_stage_hypnosis.html

Its clear that there are dangers associated with hypnosis. Even if its not the hypnosis directly itself. If something like the above happens in a public place theres a good chance it will make the press. And if you don't have the correct insurance license etc... You better get a lawyer.
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Sep 27, 2010 06:14AM)
He wasn't in a trance. His psychosis was unrelated to his hypnosis he could just as easily have gone bonkers in a traffic jam. Can you show me any evidence that 'hypnosis can be the trigger that fires people into insanity'?

Anthony
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 06:42AM)
Its not up to me to find evidence...or get you to my point of view. There is more than enough evidence in this thread if you want to pursue it. If you want to ingore it that's your choice. Im not going to attempt to change your mind.

Put yourself in the hypnotists shoes above but on the street with no licence no insurance and not adhering to the guidellines.

There are prominent experts who believe that the above is "likely to have connection with hypnosis". While I agree with you about going bonkers anywhere it is likely that you will be sued for neglegence.

Plus it would make a nice media story. And things would change regarding hypnosis and enforcing the law after.

Come to your own conclusions.
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Sep 27, 2010 07:00AM)
I am interested in evidence that will back up or negate absurd claims. Suggesting hypnosis is a trigger for psychosis is such a claim until there is any evidence. Currently even the anecdotal evidence is not backing that up. That is why I would like you to type the names of the prominent experts you mentioned who can back it up. What are they experts in and are they qualified to reach that conclusion?

I do not understand why you can be bothered to type in the claim but not be bothered to type in the names of those people. I will pursue it and am not asking you to do the work for me, just point me at those experts so I can get started? I am alwys interested in reading expert opinion.

Anthony
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 07:09AM)
It could be something that will never be proved. Its easy if you you read the above posts you will find the experts. Even Heap the recognized hypnosis expert defending Mckenna case thought that there was probably was a connection with hypnosis and the triggering of schizophrenia. Its all there if you "want" to find it.

It might never be provable one way or another but a lawyer with the intent to go after you will find solid ammo for those that are uninsured not licensed not trained and don't follow the guidelines. That is simply a fact.

But like I said I only put this stuff up come to your own conclusions. at the end of the day we all follow what we believe to be right.

Back to the original thread to say injuries are a myth is a myth.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 08:33AM)
It was wagstaff not heap. You are right Ant I can't be arsed. So I can't give specifics. I read the articles years ago. Heap was involved in the case of Sharron Tarbarn. I remember reading something where he said although there was "no direct evidence that stage hypnosis caused her death he couldn't prove it didn't. And he also contradicted himself on numerous occasions about the safety of hypnosis and the possibility of hypnosis bringing on fits..

Its up there http://www.tracieokeefe.com/sharrontabarn.htm

There is loads of stuff up there for those that can be bothered. I can't be.

Its pretty heavy stuff. Im sure you will enjoy it.

The only conclusion I take from all this is nothing is clear cut one way or another. And that being the case we should err on the side of caution.
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Sep 27, 2010 08:37AM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 09:33, mindpunisher wrote:
And he also contradicted himself on numerous occasions about the safety of hypnosis and the possibility of hypnosis bringing on fits..
[/quote]

Thanks.

So which one of his opinions should we call the 'expert' view?
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 08:59AM)
If you read the paper there are loads of experts that make contribution for and against.

I think you have to make up your own mind. But one thing is for sure its not clear cut. One of the aspects was finding a chemical in her blood to suggest she took a fit. Heap talks about a certain type of hypnosis being able to induce a fit and then talks about there could be no direct connection.

I am sure somewhere in there he says he can't dismiss that there was a connection.

If we go down your route by questioning "expert" then you have to concede that its possible that hypnosis had a connection. Or do you only believe the "experts" that support what you want to believe?

There are weeks of study in this thread if you want to go down that route. I have read some of it. But personally Ive seen to much doing shows myself to know hypnosis is not totally safe. There is always a risk. Even recently someone jumped off the stage instead of taking the steps on one of my recent shows despite being told to take the steps. And Ive seen it a few times at other shows.

You believe what you want to in the end we all do anyway. All I am doing is showing you there are varying opoinions from recognised "experts". Its not clear cut. And that there is indeed injuries and legal cases against hypnotists. Instead of arguing why not check them out?
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Sep 27, 2010 09:26AM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 05:56, Anthony Jacquin wrote:
So none of the reported cases of injury have anything to do with the hypnotizing element of the show. They are just due to negligence of stage safety management and underestimation of the power of blanks.
[/quote]

I think that's the bulk of the "training" or "education" that should be noted and enforced when hypnotizing. I think the suggestions themselves are relatively harmless but the common sense aspects of how to treat ones subject and be prepared for different types of reactions and responses are the kind of nitty gritty details that one should be familiar and comfortable with. After all, common sense is usually not so common for some reason :P

I think someone should come up with a stage management course so that performers don't end up learning these things through experience with actual faux pas on stage during their acts.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 10:22AM)
>>>I think someone should come up with a stage management course so that performers don't end up learning these things through experience with actual faux pas on stage during their acts.<<<

What about streets? Potentially more hazards I would've thought.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Sep 27, 2010 10:48AM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 11:22, mindpunisher wrote:
>>>I think someone should come up with a stage management course so that performers don't end up learning these things through experience with actual faux pas on stage during their acts.<<<

What about streets? Potentially more hazards I would've thought.
[/quote]

I would think that stage safety management would be similar to street safety management. The bulk of it really ends up being making sure your subject/audience member doesn't run smack dab into physical obstacles (like the steps for a stage or even the edge of a stage and on coming traffic in the streets, etc.) or fall near sharp objects, sharp corners, etc. Another thing specifically for hypnosis I would think is knowing when a suggestion is too much because you don't want to drive the person being hypnotized into a panic (different people have different reactions when let's say you make yourself invisible and start floating objects around them). Common sense really but I guess common sense is so common that many a times people forget about it.
Message: Posted by: bobser (Sep 27, 2010 12:42PM)
I think that much of Tracie Okeefe's work is flawed. She cites statements from Tom Dick and Harry and by her very own words she takes a biased view before even writing this diatribe. She gets close now and again to coming to a proper conclusion but doesn't quite get there. It's kinda' like she is an academic but only just. And another thing: I'm not really sure if I think a doctor of hypnosis can ever be a proper doctorate. She's a sex therapist for Chrissakes. I assume she simply shakes their hand and listens intently for the moaning to start. Who said SHE should be wearing the white hat?
Look we all know the answer to this question; hypnosis is extremely safe, unless you get a twit of a hypnotist. And by their fruits (or stories) ye shall know them. They tell you of how the 'hypnosis' went wrong whilst seemingly having total amnesia to the fact that THEY were the bloody 'hypnotist' who told their client/audience: "I'll take good care of you!"
No, hypnosis is fine. It's just that it attracts some eejits who are quite simply not fit for purpose.

Bob
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 02:02PM)
That's no true Bob there are plenty of Medical doctors that believe stage hypnosis is dangerous. There are plenty facts cited in the paper above. Not just her beliefs. that's just one source. She has as much authority as you to put together a "case".

>>>No, hypnosis is fine. It's just that it attracts some eejits who are quite simply not fit for purpose.<<<< that's very true that's why we are having this conversation. you could say the same about guns.

But based upon your mental makeup you will believe what you want anyway and ignore anything that says different. One day perhaps we will see an untrained uninsured and unlicensed street hypnotist in court. If it continues to grow in popularity the chances are its going to happen. I find it puzzling why the street/impromtu league seem to think they are immune or have better practices? Lets hope your not the eejit.

And that paper I like the fact it makes no conclusions. how can you honestly put your hand on your heart and not be cautious. No one knows for sure the real truth.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Sep 27, 2010 02:10PM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 15:02, mindpunisher wrote:
That's no true Bob there are plenty of Medical doctors that believe stage hypnosis is dangerous. There are plenty facts cited in the paper above. Not just her beliefs. that's just one source. She has as much authority as you to put together a "case".
[/quote]

On the flip side of the coin, how many Medical doctors (or people in general) actually know how hypnosis works and has actually worked with it? Even hypnotists can't agree on how this stuff actually works (thus we are having this discussion).
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 02:12PM)
Which is why I can't be sure one way or another.
Message: Posted by: bobser (Sep 27, 2010 02:53PM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 15:02, mindpunisher wrote:
That's no true Bob there are plenty of Medical doctors that believe stage hypnosis is dangerous.
[/quote]
Yeah but I've spoken to many of them and they don't know diddlyshite. Read what kissdadookie said.

[quote]
But based upon your mental makeup you will believe what you want anyway and ignore anything that says different.
[/quote]

On the contrary Bri, it's got very little to do with my mental make-up as I am a bonafide social scientist. In fact the one thing I am absolutely more interested in than anything is 'your' belief structure and/or why that is, or anyone else I am having the argument/discussion with. I am totally open to having my opinion changed as I am constantly seeking knowledge. There are many in here like me.
ie: if you watch that Jacquin lad you'll notice that all he's ever really saying to you is: "Show me."
When you reply: "I can't be arsed" the discussion dies right there.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 03:09PM)
The discussion hasn't died we are still having it aren't we? "show me" and "prove it" can be applied to both sides. And that doesn't do anything does it? There is a lot of proof in this thread and a lot of refrences its up to you if you want to explore them.

Its a bit like playing tennis and having one person do all the running while the other stands there. There are loads of references in this thread. Do you really need for me to show you every one of them. If you feel you want to read them yourself.

And the doctors I was refering to belong to the Medical and Dental Hypnosis association. I think they know something although you might not agree with their conclusions.

There's no way you will change your perspective about hypnosis either about the dangers or the legal aspects or whatever until perhaps a new reference emerges specific to you. Time will tell. If things grow by chance one will appear.

And I doubt mines will change either. Apart from that I don't totally disagree with you or Ant I just don't totally agree either. you can't be sure one way or another no one can.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 27, 2010 03:28PM)
And I really can't be arsed just now... I think its lack of light. If Im honest I am really struggling to do anything just now. For what its worth I think the Doctors at the Medical and Dental Hypnosis association are mostly wrong. But they can't be all wrong. I was on TV with one of them in the 90s. He made claims of someone addicted to eating onions after being on stage and losing their relationship and their job because of it.

But he also had a list of people he saw who had physical injuries which sounded more convincing. Remember way back then there wasn't the no-win-no-fee culture there is now. Things might be different if someone gets injured now as in legal proceedings.

The street/impromtu wave is such a new development. But just like the stage if it continues to grow chances are it will have its own cases eventually.
Message: Posted by: dmkraig (Sep 27, 2010 08:26PM)
MP--I have no doubt that here in the litigious U.S. there will be cases. Of course, they will be totally bogus and an attempt to make some money off of some poor slob. It will make all the news media. Of course, when it's thrown out of court after the "victim" admits to fraud, nobody will cover it and decades from now people will be quoting it as if it had some value.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 28, 2010 04:02AM)
I think there are bogus cases but there are also genuine ones to. Broken bones aren't fraud. And people on the verge of a breakdown and not knowing it could be pushed over the edge by an experience on stage. I believe that's possible. Although cannot be blamed soley on hypnosis it may be proved that the hypnotist was neglegent. Which has been successfully prosecuted in this country already.

Hypnosis is no different from most things if used wrongly. And even with care there are risks.
Message: Posted by: Nongard1 (Sep 28, 2010 03:59PM)
THE IS NONE!

[quote]
On 2010-09-27 07:14, Anthony Jacquin wrote:
He wasn't in a trance. His psychosis was unrelated to his hypnosis he could just as easily have gone bonkers in a traffic jam. Can you show me any evidence that 'hypnosis can be the trigger that fires people into insanity'?

Anthony
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Nongard1 (Sep 28, 2010 04:00PM)
This is a large part of the course we wrote at http://www.SafeOnStage.com for the liability insurance. Stage managmenet is a HUGE part of this course.

[quote]I think someone should come up with a stage management course so that performers don't end up learning these things through experience with actual faux pas on stage during their acts.
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 28, 2010 04:08PM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-28 16:59, Nongard1 wrote:
THE IS NONE!

[quote]
On 2010-09-27 07:14, Anthony Jacquin wrote:
He wasn't in a trance. His psychosis was unrelated to his hypnosis he could just as easily have gone bonkers in a traffic jam. Can you show me any evidence that 'hypnosis can be the trigger that fires people into insanity'?

Anthony
[/quote]
[/quote]

There is no evidence to prove it doesn't either!
Message: Posted by: bobser (Sep 28, 2010 06:10PM)
Ah, but everyone would agree that in the history of philosophical argument, not one person, ever, has been able to prove a negative.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 28, 2010 06:36PM)
Everyone? Anyway you still miss the point. It can't at this moment be proved one way or another which suggests at least morally we have a duty those in our "influence" to do everything we can to make the experience as safe as possible. There are medical and psychiatric experts who do believe its possible. Personally I don't know one way or another for sure. NO ONE CAN. But I am always concerned that someone may just react badly to hypnosis.

The person who started the "Myth of injuries", ended up with a volunteer breaking their leg! What has to happen before he and others with a similar mindset wake up and realise their are real risks to hypnosis. If NOT the "process" then the activity. Either way its hypnosis.

I never had you down as a philosopher Bobser? I'm impressed in a twisted way.
Message: Posted by: dmkraig (Sep 28, 2010 11:35PM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-28 19:10, bobser wrote:
Ah, but everyone would agree that in the history of philosophical argument, not one person, ever, has been able to prove a negative.
[/quote]

So you can't prove that you're not Winston Churchill.
Fascinating.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Sep 29, 2010 04:39AM)
Bobser can't prove 2+2 = 4
Message: Posted by: RobertTemple (Oct 12, 2010 08:33AM)
Alright, so this thread is called 'Injuries Myth', so with that in mind I'd strongly advise that anyone who wants to learn more about this subject (and its related issues such as Laws, Licensing, Insurance, Risk Assessments etc) would be well advised to check out the thread which has now been locked here on this forum entitled “The Dangers of Hypnosis” as per:
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=383196&forum=22&218

There is some seriously good information at that link especially if you pay particular attention to the postings from MP, Simon Warner, myself and a few others who clearly do know what they are talking about.

There are however a few major points which are extremely misleading in the thread (http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=383196&forum=22&218) which as yet have not been addressed and I feel that now is the time to make a few things clear, which when considered in connection with all of the postings should help to give you a fuller understanding of the true potential Dangers and connected Legal/Insurance Issues which do indeed Surround Stage & Street Hypnosis around the world and especially so in England (UK)

I shall discuss these points (and raise new issues) by posting each individual relevant issue as a separate forum post here in this thread, so lets begin at the logical place, namely the beginning:

01) In the thread of http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=383196&forum=22&218 – Bobser States and I quote…

“Yes, Martin Taylor does a great 'non-hypnosis show' which arguably is a full hypnosis show of course. But here's the thing. I don't NEED a license (still need public liability) for a NON-hypnosis show”.

That's wrong, Bobser... if you take a look at Martin Taylor's own personal website (http://www.hypnotism.co.uk) and pay particular attention to the page on his site of http://www.hypnotism.co.uk/about-hypnosis.html whilst Martin is claiming that his show does not need a License to perform the fact is that under the UK 1952 Hypnotism Act is does as he openly admits that he uses The Power of Suggestion…

Take a look at the 1952 Hypnotism Act here: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1952/cukpga_19520046_en_1

And take a closer look at Section Six of the act which clearly states:

6 Interpretation
In this Act, except where the context otherwise requires it, the following expression shall have the meaning hereby assigned to it, that is to say:—
“hypnotism” includes hypnotism, mesmerism and any similar act or process which produces or is intended to produce in any person any form of induced sleep or trance in which the susceptibility of the mind of that person to suggestion or direction is increased or intended to be increased but does not include hypnotism, mesmerism or any such similar act or process which is self-induced.

Essentially therefore he does need a license under the 1952 Hypnotism Act which probably also explains why he is a Member of The Federation of Ethical Stage Hypnotists as proven at this link: http://www.s127815135.websitehome.co.uk/21304.html

And if you take a look at http://www.s127815135.websitehome.co.uk/21432.html you will notice that as a member Martin Taylor is obligated to hold the correct FESH Approved Insurance Cover which for the record is a policy that covers for whilst people are “In Trance” and is the type of insurance required to get licenses and permissions granted by UK Councils for shows to legally take place.

Ask yourself this, why would Martin Taylor bother to be a Member of The Federation of Ethical Stage Hypnotists and pay for expensive “in trance” hypnosis insurance cover if he truly believed that he was legally covered by the claims on his website at: http://www.hypnotism.co.uk/index.html

Further it has been mentioned on the “Dangers of Hypnosis” thread that Martin Taylor is on the Equity Stage Hypnotists Panel/Register – again why would this be the case if he truly believed that he was legally covered as per the claims on his website?

To be associated to Equity in this manner you are agreeing to a code of conduct etc which can be seen in full by downloading the document which is available from the first site shown at this link: http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&expIds=17259,26637,26792&xhr=t&q=equity+register+of+stage+hypnotists&cp=35&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=equity+register+of+stage+hypnotists&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=7b074eea587325fb

In truth there are indeed a few loopholes in the 1952 Hypnotism Act which allows “Hypnosis Style Shows” to take place without the need for applying for a license (however The Correct Insurance Cover and Risk Assessments being in place would as explained in the “Dangers of Hypnosis” thread still be a Legal Requirement.

These loopholes are:

5 Saving for scientific purposes
Nothing in this Act shall prevent the exhibition, demonstration or performance of hypnotism (otherwise than at or in connection with an entertainment) for scientific or research purposes or for the treatment of mental or physical disease.

Yes you could claim that the show was being presented for Scientific and/or Research Purposes, however you could not have any other act or entertainment (e.g. DJ) appearing in the same venue as you on the same night otherwise you would still be breaking the law and the event must be clearly advertised as “For Scientific/Research Purposes and indeed to be legal you would have to be collecting Research Data about Hypnosis and be able to provide Legal Proof of your intention to publish the findings of your data otherwise you may just still find yourself in Legal Hot water as is illustrated by the 50 Example Replies obtained from UK Councils which can be seen at this link:

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=114103275276649&topic=51

The only other real loophole is as per section six of the 1952 hypnotism act:

6 Interpretation
In this Act, except where the context otherwise requires it, the following expression shall have the meaning hereby assigned to it, that is to say:—
“hypnotism” includes hypnotism, mesmerism and any similar act or process which produces or is intended to produce in any person any form of induced sleep or trance in which the susceptibility of the mind of that person to suggestion or direction is increased or intended to be increased but does not include hypnotism, mesmerism or any such similar act or process which is self-induced.

The key phrase of this being:

“but does not include hypnotism, mesmerism or any such similar act or process which is self-induced”

So in theory you could argue that “All Hypnosis is Self-Hypnosis” and that the volunteers hypnotize themselves and in theory you would not need to apply for a License/Permission.

However as illustrated at http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=114103275276649&topic=51 most all UK Councils Legal Licensing Enforcement Units take a very different view of this.

In any case you would still need the correct nature of Public Liability Insurance Cover and to have the correct Health and Safety Executive Approved Written Risk Assessments in place otherwise you’d still be breaking various laws (which do have CRIMINAL LAW repercussions) and could find yourself in very hot water indeed.

The truth is that even if you deny the existence of Hypnosis and Trance, even if you call yourself a “Psychological Illusionist” and claim that you are not using any hypnosis whatsoever then arguably if any accidents ever occurred to any of your volunteers on Stage or on the Streets you could still face Legal Action for Negligence and/or Criminal Assault as explained in the Wonderful Book “Practising Safe Hypnosis” by Roger Hambleton as per http://www.amazon.co.uk/Practising-Safe-Hypnosis-Management-Guide/dp/1899836942

What you call it does NOT matter in the slightest. There are still very real risks and dangers, people do still get hurt and legal claims are and will still be made against such performers on many levels.

Personally I’d advise you that its far easier, safer and more ethical in the long term to do things by the book to both cover yourself Legally and Lawfully on all levels and also to have absolutely everything possible in place to protect your volunteers from any instances of harm and to that end you’d be well advised to heed the excellent advice given mainly by MindPunisher and myself in the “Dangers of Hypnosis” thread here - http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=383196&forum=22&218
Message: Posted by: RobertTemple (Oct 12, 2010 08:34AM)
My second major point relates to the comments made by Richard Nongard in the “Dangers of Hypnosis” Thread at: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=383196&forum=22&218

With the greatest of respect Richard I am amazed that an Ethical Professional of your standing would be taking such a flippant attitude to matters of Legal Issues surrounding hypnosis and the very real dangers surrounding Hypnosis especially that of a Street Hypnosis Nature.

The truth is that anyone who spends just a short while searching the internet can quite easily find videos of far more than 50 different people doing Street Hypnosis both Illegally and Dangerously in an uninsured manner in England alone!

Indeed take a look at forums such as “Talk Magic” – “Magic Bunny” and “Uncommon Forum” and Facebook Groups relating to “Street Hypnosis” and it very quickly becomes obvious that there are way more than the figure you quote of 50 Street Hypnotist’s doing Illegal, Unlicensed, Uninsured and potentially very dangerous “Street Hypnosis” group meet ups and also solo hypnosis in England (UK) and way more than you’ve quoted as figures for USA.

Respectfully what have you got to hide? – Are you concerned that your sales to England (UK) may drop if you admit the truth that there are indeed Legal Obligations for all UK Stage and Street (and that includes hobbyists) Hypnotists to abide by?

Indeed when you know that your products sell in England (UK) and in Europe etc, why don’t you include full details of the 1952 Hypnotism Act and other laws that are relevant around the world (e.g. such as Licenses also being needed by the Hypnotist from the Government in places such as Sweden)?

The same applies to Anthony Jacquin, from what I have seen other than an on screen visual “disclaimer” saying “check the laws in your country” and a short 5 minutes or so talk on safety which does not even scrape the tip of the iceberg of the potential dangers of Hypnosis or the legal and insurance obligations Hypnotists actually do have under various “duty of care and/or Negligence” laws worldwide, and that’s even when there are no directly specific laws relating to hypnosis itself, legal obligations which they must abide by, so the big question is why not cover this in your training products?

Finally Richard, if you think the UK 1952 Hypnotism Act is such a farce, then why did you invite JR as your personal guest to attend your Manchester (UK) Speed Trance training weekend to advise you on UK Legal issues?

As you know I attended this event, and along with my colleagues Christopher Caress (UK) - Henry Leander Anderson (Norway) and Rachel Houghton (UK) we can all confirm that we witnessed you ask on many occasions during the weekend JR for his help, advice and insights relating to the UK 1952 Hypnotism Act and other Hypnosis Related Laws and Issues in Europe.

Hell we all also witnessed you thanking JR for his invaluable help, insight and advice on UK Hypnosis Laws and related issues on many occasions, so why your sudden change of tune?
Message: Posted by: RobertTemple (Oct 12, 2010 08:35AM)
Oh, and finally, in the thread of - http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=383196&forum=22&218

DJmagic4 and some other uses raised the question of “why can’t stage/street hypnosis insurance be cheaper in UK”

As you’ll realise (by looking at the other thread) that’s quite simply because UK Insurance companies consider the activities to be too high a risk to reduce premiums.

Sources of Insurance cover are discussed in the previous thread, however for those who want to do things by the book (and abide by all laws) you can now get The Correct Nature of Public Liability Insurance Cover for just £150 UK Sterling a year.

The policy is such that it affords you Five Million Pounds of Public Liability Insurance Cover and insures you for all locations in England & Europe for both indoors and outdoor venues, yes that’s right it would even cover you for performing on the Street, which most all of the other policies currently available in the UK would not.

And should you ever wish to perform overseas in for example America or The Middle East then for a small fee you can get the policy upgraded to cover you for those specific overseas performances which are outside of England and Europe.

Best of all the insurance enables you to easily get the correct Licenses granted to legally perform your shows from UK Council Authorities and at just £150 a year there is truly now no excuse for anyone not to be correctly insured and legal in all manners.

The only catch is that in order for the Insurance Company to agree to insure you, you must provide proof that you are a Member of The Professional Organisation of Stage Hypnotists (POSH) and that you have studied their full Health & Safety and Legal Hypnosis Course entitled “The Transparency Template”, which I was a speaker at.

This is very much the same as in America whereby to be accepted to get the correct insurance you have to study a Stage/Street Hypnosis Safety course, the main one of which is http://www.thehypnosiscompany.com/safety/ run by Justin James of which ironically Richard Nongard is an advisor.

However it is my understanding that the Hypnosis Health & Safety Course and Legal Training given within the “Transparency Template” go way above the contents of the USA “Safety Courses” and that absolutely anybody considering (or who already does) add any level of hypnosis to their performances should check out these video links:

Cheap (£150 a year) Stage & Street Hypnosis Insurance for UK - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH7xyqp8oiI

For Real In-Depth Hypnosis Health & SAFETY Training which is relevant for all Hypnotists of any nature wherever you are located in the world check out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sSIenZ9tfs... you'll even get to see my glorious hair! ;-)
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Oct 12, 2010 09:51AM)
We get it, you and your buddy are the self proclaimed safest in both performing hypnotism as well as training. Now, either buy a Café banner ad and link it to a advert site or stop spamming this forum.
Message: Posted by: bobser (Oct 12, 2010 10:01AM)
Ok, I'm sure Richard will handle Robert's objections very easily in post no: 2
I'll handle 1 & 3 here.
First no: 1. Robert in all fairness is missing the main point re Martin Taylor. It's got nothing to do with him being a member of all those governing bodies (which have no power to govern anything by the way), which lets face it, are constructed exlusionist groups built to make somebody in a big room extra spondoola.
The thing is martin HAS said is that he "uses the power of suggestion". And there lies the rub. He believes in suggestion but doesn't in hypnosis, however the powers that be see suggestion and hypnosis as one, ergo: has to have a license.
However, If I rebut the existence of hypnos and also rebut trance I am NOT doing a hypnosis show and do NOT need a license.
Don#'t believe me? Here's a fact. No one, ever, in the history of 'this stuff' has ever done a non-hypnosis show, whilst claiming there is no trance involved either, but that it's just a bit of fun... yet has needed a license for a hypnosis show.
Now I said all of this earlier Robert, However, if you can give me an example (just one, that's not too dificult eh?) out of all those shows where a non hypnosis and none trance show has taken place,yet they were instructed to get a hypnotic licence, you win the argumenet. But you won't, because it's never happened and never would, because it never could.
Again as I said earlier you DO need public liability, but that's all.
As for your last post re insurance... you're not very good at listening are you? I already said it's based on actuarial assumption (I used to be an actuary) and Craig rightly reminded me (well done Craig) that it is also based on demand, which here in the UK there isn't really a lot of.
Right, now then, stop trying to win arguments based on what some one other than you (call that a guess) is saying.
By the way, I just hypnotised 2 guys in a pub at lunchtime. No insurance and no licensing. Although I don't believe in hypnosis and I didn't use any trance or suggestion. When I said the word TULIP they shouted out: "We love Bob" which was extremely dangerous!!
What's anybody gonna' do about it? What's that? Nothing? Thought so. now go away and get more insurance and extra licensing and leave us all alone. We're not listening to you anymore because it's all very boring.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Oct 12, 2010 10:11AM)
Darnit, I read the word TULIP and shouted out "We love Bob" for no reason. You're a dangerous man Bob.
Message: Posted by: bobser (Oct 12, 2010 11:56AM)
There... Proof!!!
Message: Posted by: catweazle (Oct 12, 2010 01:03PM)
O.M.G. I have just been hypnotised - on the street!!
these mind controllers are everywhere, and it seems the better the weather the more hypnotic they become, I was put in to such a deep trance by one of them that while walking along I failed to spot a lamppost and went smack bang into it, didn't half hurt, this trance business is dangerous.

I am now going to write to my local council and demand that all women in sexy revelling clothes are removed from the streets as they are a danger to men, are they insured and licensed to look that good??
I still cant get her out of my head, what kind of hypnotic spell has she put on me??
it should be illegal!!!!!!
Message: Posted by: bobser (Oct 12, 2010 02:08PM)
Today one of those blighters stuck my hand to a table in a pub called The Jolly Tar and I was thirsty and couldn't reach my advocaat. When I enquired I discovered to my dismay that the cad was devoid of insurance and was not, it would appear, insured to stick people's hands to tables and stop them from reaching their advocaats in pubs called The Jolly Tar. Grrrrrrr!!!!!
Thank goodness we have three stalwarts(two here in The Café and a kind of a doctor who is unfortunately banned from this establishment)who will save us for our own good because they know greater than we small mortals.
But pray tell, where are they at this moment?
Probably getting some stranger to intertwine with a sheep on the edge of a ten foot high stage, which is not really a problem as long as one has insurance and full licensing. So, although it may seem dangerous, it is actually not, due to said insurance and licensing. Logical hmmmmmmm?
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Oct 12, 2010 05:19PM)
Bobser you are in the right group along with the school kids and big kids running around feeling big by accosting members of the public.

Fact is what you do is unlawful whether you like it or not. And you promote the illegal use of hypnosis and preach that its ok for someone no matter what age to go out and practice hypnosis in uncontrolable environments with no training.

Anybody with an ounce of common sense forget about the law or insurance can see the stupidity of it.

Any school kid can go out and do what you do. You try and do what I do. Go get a theatre major venue and put on a show.

Get half the reactions I get from audiences? We will soon see who is professional and skilled.

but you prefer to reman at the same level as the amauer dabblers and school kids.

Im telling you now there are a LOT more think like us on these boards they just don't dare tell it how it is.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Oct 12, 2010 05:36PM)
There's not "a LOT more think like us on these boards," it's just the few on the JR bandwagon including of course yourself.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Oct 12, 2010 05:40PM)
Well many top mentalists I have spoken to have said the same. As well as a few top hypnotists. And they said it away back when it all first started.

But of course Kissie you know everything including our laws and what its actuall like to work here.

you are a genuis right? A real mind reader.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Oct 12, 2010 05:55PM)
No point arguing with a spambot (aka, MP). You've already resulted in getting another thread locked due to your nonsense.
Message: Posted by: Shrubsole (Oct 13, 2010 06:07AM)
If someone who only uses "power of suggestion" comes under the 1952 Hypnotism Act, then why don't all advertisers as that's what they do constantly?

Buy this car = get this lifestyle. All using the "power of suggestion"
Message: Posted by: JonChase (Oct 13, 2010 07:20AM)
I love it when people get suckered in to media hype. Wspecially magicians and hypnotists who, quite frankly, should know more and better.

None. Not one of the so called hypnotist being sued is on Court Records. That was the first thing the 1996 committee reviewing the 1952 act did, had a crap load of legal eagles check. And not one. All of them were either just so much media hype or, and you guys have got to have considered this, they may well have been actually rumours started by the hypnotists themselves to get publicity.

I know one guy who hired two strippers. Trained them to look hypnotised and then anonymously rang the New of the World and got a 2 page spread showing pictures of naked women on stage.

I am well aware of safety on stage. In fact my book, Deeper and Deeper written 12 years ago now - Amazon - is full of safety tips. However there is a paranoia now that makes watching some shows like watching treacle dry. When all you need to do is tell them at the start "You will not do anything you would normally find dangerous or harmful"

Scince the review there has been one succsful case of a woman suing a stage hypnotist for having a so-called abreaction 6 months after the show and which the hypnotist in question did not defend and he got done £6000 for neglect and the woman since has had a miraculous recovery. This is the only case apparently on record. And please quote court records, all publically available, not some newspaper thing.

I had a headline in the 90's in the Daily Star, "Hypnotist gives WI [womens institute ] an Orgasm on stage"

This came from a tiny piece after an interview with a local jurno at a WI thing when he asked me what sort of stuff I did in my show. I mentioned the orgasmatron as a routine I do and he left. That night however my finalé was the Onions as the full blown orgasm was a scary prospect with the average woman looking like Shrekesses. However he thought it was god copy and it got picked up by the nationals.

Don't believe what you read in the papers. Or from people who are not well informed.
Message: Posted by: bobser (Oct 13, 2010 10:08AM)
Minpunisher, that was Jon Chase. And I do believe he entered the room and spanked you without even raising a hand. And it probably hurt him more than it did you.
But he he was only able to do that since you allowed Jonathan Royle (AKA Corky The Circus Boy)to hypnotise you and fill your head with this sh-te. He's already got wee Robert running all over Europe sending him back money, and now you.
Here's some advice. We've all had a meeting and think you should: dump Mindpunisher. Bring back the happy go lucky 'Shrink' to the family home. We've all missed him!
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Oct 13, 2010 12:14PM)
Shrink made numerous posts regarding how hypnosis is not dangerous though? Shrink expressed the exact opposite opinion of MinPunisher regarding the McKenna case on this very forum. How is that going to work Bobser?

Ant
Message: Posted by: JonChase (Oct 13, 2010 01:05PM)
I've never spanked anyone Bob. Well not under hypnosis. :-D
Message: Posted by: catweazle (Oct 13, 2010 01:29PM)
[quote]
On 2010-10-13 13:14, Anthony Jacquin wrote:
Shrink made numerous posts regarding how hypnosis is not dangerous though? Shrink expressed the exact opposite opinion of MinPunisher regarding the McKenna case on this very forum. How is that going to work Bobser?

Ant
[/quote]

yes it is a bit of a conundrum, I have read lots of posts by the sensible 'shrink' its almost like Jekyll and Hyde, in fact there is so much info you can work out that most of the recent posts by 'mp' have a 'transparent' motive or should that be 'transparency'?
seems he started his stage career around 1988-90 and ended it around 1994, something to do with being called a perv or such like by the local press, but hey I could be wrong there is a bit of in-between line reading at play, so don't quote me, just go to the oldest threads and have a look for posts by 'shrink'
seemed like a much nicer guy though.
Message: Posted by: RobertTemple (Oct 13, 2010 03:23PM)
Bobser, I'm curious by that suggestion about me 'running around all over Europe sending him (JR) back money'. Where have you got that thought from?

If anything, JR has sent me money by booking me to speak at his events, and he bought the rights to my See Saw DVD.
Message: Posted by: JonChase (Oct 13, 2010 05:00PM)
I guess it's a bit like the Hitler theory. Put enough people on to the Interweb talking and sooner or later certain names are sure to rise....