Evidence-based Witchcraft

In this blog post I will explain, how my spiritual practise – or “craft” as I call it – is informed by scientific research and employs magick, spellcraft and ritual as forms of placebo. These practises collectively form the cornerstone of my personal brand of atheistic spirituality, which I sometimes refer to as “Weatherwax Witchcraft” due to its resemblance to headology, the magick applied by the fictional witch, Granny Weatherwax, from Terry Pratchett’s Discworld witches series. This post is written for the sceptic, the academic, or the scientist, as such I have drawn from peer-reviewed research in formulating the blog post, and I use scientific jargon that may be abhorrent to those operating from the esoteric paradigm. Before I begin, I wish to clarify that use of this jargon it is not intended to diminish or offend those applying a nonscientific paradigm, on the contrary I believe this conservative approach is merely applying a different lens, and arguably adds legitimacy and validity to the concepts of which I speak.

The placebo

The placebo is an inert substance that has no therapeutic value, meaning that any changes observed in a patient who has been treated with a placebo act through a psychological mechanism. This is thought to be due to the top–down neural control of physiology (the role of the brain in determining the physical health of a patient). In light of this, double-blind placebo-controlled studies are considered to be the gold standard for clinical trials. Thus, the very foundation of modern medicine depends on the placebo: its efficacy is scientific dogma. The placebo has been described as “it works because they believe it works,” yet even belief of the patient in the efficacy of the placebo appears to be dispensable, as it works even if the patient is aware that they are taking a placebo, albeit to a lesser extent (Beecher, 1955; Blease et al., 2019; Charlesworth et al., 2017). Interestingly, children are more susceptible to placebos than adults (Rheims et al., 2008).

What determines the strength of a placebo?

It has been found that the more a placebo resembles a medication known to the patient, the more efficacious it is – for example, if a sugar pill closely resembles aspirin it will be better at reducing headaches than, say, giving a patient an M&M and telling them it will cure their headache. In addition to this, various other stimuli can also impact the strength of a placebo effect including the colour, shape and taste.

A meta-analysis found the colours of drugs was correlated with different efficacies, however a consistent trend could not be detected: for example in one study the placebo that worked best was the one that was in the colour the patient preferred, while another study found that red, orange and yellow medications have a stimulant effect, whereas blue and green have a tranquillising effect (de Craen et al., 1996). A brightly coloured pill works better than a white pill, two pills work better than one, capsules works better than pills, and injections work better than pills or a capsules (Droulers & Roullet, 2005). In addition a placebo that is administered in a hospital setting is more efficacious than one that is not, thus the more convincing the placebo and the environment, the larger the placebo effect (Benedetti et al., 2011).

The placebo can also have a greater effect if it is administered after an effective medicine, for example if a painkiller is administered at one point followed by a placebo that is similar to the painkiller at another time, the placebo will be more effective at reducing pain than if it was the first time it was administered (Amanzio & Benedetti, 1999; Amanzio et al., 2001; Batterman, 1966; Batterman & Lower, 1968; Colloca & Benedetti, 2005; Colloca & Benedetti, 2006; Herrnstein, 1962; Laska & Sunshine, 1973; Sunshine et al., 1964). Consequently, it has been suggested in the field of psychology that placebos have a learned component, likely due to Pavlovian conditioning, reinforced expectations and social learning (Meissner et al., 2011a).

What can Placebos do physiologically?

Placebos cause changes in neurobiological signalling pathways (Marchant, 2016) and have measurable physiological effects (Meissner, 2011) on:

• heart rate
• blood pressure: including effecting coronary blood flow and vasovagal syncope (fainting)
• gastrointestinal tract: including contractions, nausea, motion sickness, bowel motility, functional gastrointestinal disorders, the pulmonary system (especially asthma)
• immune responses: such as psoraisis, allergic rhinitis, lupus erythematosus.

It is no surprise, then, that there are those who argue that placebos should be prescribed by clinicians as a part of routine medical care (Marchant, 2016; Stafford, 2011) and, indeed, it seems that most doctors in Germany already do (Meissner et al., 2011b).

Criticisms of the Placebo Effect

At this point, it is important to mention that there are some dissenters challenging the dogma of placebo efficacy (Hróbjartsson & Gøtzsche, 2010). Alternative explanations have been suggested including regression to the mean, conditional switching of placebo treatment, spontaneous improvement, fluctuation of symptoms, additional treatment, scaling bias, answers of politeness, irrelevant response variables, experimental subordination, conditioned answers, neurotic or psychotic misjudgment, misquotation and more (Kienle & Kiene, 1997). If we were to take the conservative approach and conclude that the jury is still out on the efficacy of the placebo, it’s important to note that even dissenting authors themselves admit to the existence of psychosomatic effects for some diseases such as asthma (Kienle & Kiene, 1996).

Magick as placebo

Placebos have been described as comprising meaningful symbols, words, actions and settings – ‘elements that actively shape the patient’s brain’ – thus optimising language, visual cues, expectations and beliefs may increase the efficacy of placebo effects (Benedetti et al., 2011; Raz & Harris, 2016). The placebo effect is not thought to be due to the substance itself (e.g. saline solution or a sugar pill), but rather due to the psychosocial context surrounding the administration of the placebo to the patient (Price et al., 1999).

Therefore, given that placebos (a) work, (b) can have different strengths depending on their aesthetic, the environment and their associations and (c) have detectable physiological effects, I employ placebo in my daily life. However, instead of “placebo” I refer to it as “magick, spellcraft or ritual” – components of a complete spiritual path that I walk called “witchcraft.” For example, if I am having difficulty with dissociation, I may cast a grounding spell and a healing spell – in this case the spell is a placebo that is dressed in a particular aesthetic that appeals to me and has deep, ingrained meaning for me – the ‘witchy’ aesthetic. The spell itself employs equipment drenched in symbolism that I’ve enriched over time through study, repetition, expectation, learning, conditioning and association. Whether I believe the spell will work or not is irrelevant to me as I use belief as a tool, thus I suspend my disbelief for the purposes of achieving the magickal goal.

It is a paradox, as I do not believe in magick in a supernatural sense, yet I do believe in magick in my own way. I know that magick will work at least as well as a placebo, which does work:

(a) even if you don’t believe it,

(b) although it works better if you do believe it,

(c) and it works even better than that if you make it convincing,

(d) and if you dress it up in a way that appeals to you in terms of your personal preference and symbolic language.

My approach to magick is coloured by my scientific nature and my background in psychology, and that’s what works for me. If we operate from the paradigm that magick is a placebo then by definition the efficacy of magick will depend on the extent to which the act has meaning for the practitioner. I believe this to be true for all forms of spirituality – in my view, there is no single form of spirituality that befits all the peoples of our planet. As a consequence, spiritual anarchy and spiritual sovereignty for every being in this world is an integral part of my personal ethos. I believe that those of us who are interested in walking a spiritual path must find a flavour of spirituality that speaks to our specific souls, and context, cultural relativity, aesthetics, personal preference and experience are some considerations in choosing (or being called by) a particular path.

My Magickal Guidelines

My magickal paradigm has implicit guidelines that I’ve developed, borrowed, refined and apply to my craft.

1. Magick has an effect on me, the practitioner, but I do not claim efficacy beyond that. I may not be able to have an effect on my environment, but I can have an effect on myself, allowing me to cope better with my environment or empowering me to change the environment through direct action.
2. Magick is personal.Something that works for me may not work well for someone else: another’s personal preferences and language of meaning and symbolism including cultural context will be different. Therefore, as a rule I do not perform magick for another person. I may do something as a gesture (e.g. light a candle/cast a spell for a friend who’s going through a hard time), but I make no claims of efficacy beyond myself (e.g. making myself feel better – if I tell the friend I lit the candle then maybe it’ll have some kind of an effect, but I try not to overstep).
3. I study existing spiritual paths, esoteric associations, correspondences and dogmas. Despite the fact that I believe symbolism must have personal meaning and efficacy will thus be variable between individuals, I study existing traditions as (a) I find this enriches my own symbolic language, (b) it allows me to communicate effectively with practitioners operating from other paradigms by using the appropriate jargon, (c) I have found anecdotally that other traditions have accumulated wisdom over the years (and, in some cases, centuries, not that this is necessary), (d) I feel a need to earn idiosyncrasy credit – I like to know the rules before I break them or at least know which rules I’m breaking and (e) it’s damn fun. Therefore, it’s my jam to study tarot, charm casting, candle magick, colour and elemental associations, astrology, crystals, herbs, numerology, mythologies, folklore, pantheons, fairytales, deities … you name it, I’ll learn it.
4. Personal experience trumps dogma. I study existing spiritual paths, but at the end of the day if something doesn’t work for me then it’s not for me – plain and simple. For example, I loathe casting a circle during spellcraft (I like to get on with things) so most of the time I do not bother. If, hypothetically speaking, I did not feel rose quartz had a healing quality but felt like stormwater does, you can guess which I’d use in a healing spell.

A final word

In modern medicine, placebo effects have been regarded as a nuisance that must be controlled for or avoided entirely. In my opinion, the actively unfolding research on placebos may ultimately result in the medical profession and scientifically-educated medical practitioners eventually accepting that so-called ineffective materials (placebos) are in actuality, if not by definition, effective (Scriba, 2012). I do not advocate that placebo, magick or spirituality be used as a replacement for demonstrably efficacious interventions, but I do think there is room for these practises to enrich and improve individual lives where appropriate. I do however believe spirituality to be absolutely essential in maintaining my personal mental health and wellbeing in the areas where modern medicine has failed me. My craft is a repertoire of practical tools that help me to thrive (sometimes) and function (most of the time) despite the many challenges I’ve faced. Most importantly, I believe in the right of all people to embrace a path that appeals to them as long as no harm is caused to others.

For me, it comes down to live and let live.

References

Amanzio, M., & Benedetti, F. (1999). Neuropharmacological dissection of placebo analgesia: expectation-activated opioid systems versus conditioning-activated specific subsystems. The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 19(1), 484–494.

Amanzio, M., Pollo, A., Maggi, M., & Benedetti, F. (2001). Response variability to analgesics: a role for non-specific activation of endogenous opioids. Pain, 90(3), 205–215.

Batterman, R. (1966). Persistence of Responsiveness with Placebo Therapy Following an Effective Drug Trial. The Journal of New Drugs, 6(3), 137–141.

Batterman, R., & Lower, W. (1968). Placebo responsiveness-influence of previous therapy. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp, 10(3), 136-43.

Beecher, H. K. (1955). The powerful placebo. Journal of the American Medical Association, 159(17), 1602–1606.

Benedetti, F., Carlino, E., & Pollo, A. (2011). How placebos change the patient’s brain. Neuropsychopharmacology : Official Publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 36(1), 339–354.

Blease, C. R., Bernstein, M. H., & Locher, C. (2019). Open-label placebo clinical trials: is it the rationale, the interaction or the pill? BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, bmjebm-2019-111209.

Charlesworth, J. E. G., Petkovic, G., Kelley, J. M., Hunter, M., Onakpoya, I., Roberts, N., … Howick, J. (2017). Effects of placebos without deception compared with no treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 10(2), 97–107.

Colloca, L., & Benedetti, F. (2005). Placebos and painkillers: is mind as real as matter? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(7), 545–552.

Colloca, L., & Benedetti, F. (2006). How prior experience shapes placebo analgesia. Pain, 124(1–2), 126–133.

de Craen, A. J., Roos, P. J., de Vries, A. L., & Kleijnen, J. (1996). Effect of colour of drugs: systematic review of perceived effect of drugs and of their effectiveness. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 313(7072), 1624–1626.

Droulers, O., & Roullet, B. (2005). Pharmaceutical Packaging Color and Drug Expectancy. Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 164–171.

Herrnstein, R. J. (1962). Placebo Effect in the Rat. Science, 138(3541), 677 LP – 678.

Hróbjartsson, A., & Gøtzsche, P. C. (2010). Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1.

Kienle, G., & Kiene, H. (1996). Placebo effect and placebo concept: a critical methodological and conceptual analysis of reports on the magnitude of the placebo effect. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2(6), 39–54.

Kienle, G. S., & Kiene, H. (1997). The Powerful Placebo Effect: Fact or Fiction? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(12), 1311–1318.

Laska, E., & Sunshine, A. (1973). ANTICIPATION OF ANALGESIA, A PLACEBO EFFECT. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 13(1), 1–11.

Marchant, J. (2016). Placebos: Honest fakery. Nature, 535(7611), S14–S15.

Meissner, K. (2011). The placebo effect and the autonomic nervous system: evidence for an intimate relationship. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 366(1572), 1808–1817.

Meissner, K., Bingel, U., Colloca, L., Wager, T. D., Watson, A., & Flaten, M. A. (2011a). The Placebo Effect: Advances from Different Methodological Approaches. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(45), 16117 LP – 16124.

Meissner, K., Höfner, L., Fässler, M., & Linde, K. (2011b). Widespread use of pure and impure placebo interventions by GPs in Germany. Family Practice, 29(1), 79–85.

Price, D., Milling, L., Kirsch, I., Duff, A., Montgomery, G., & Nicholls, S. (1999). An analysis of factors that contribute to the magnitude of placebo analgesia in an experimental paradigm. Pain, 83(2), 147–156.

Raz, A., & Harris, C. S. (Eds.). (2016). Placebo Talks: Modern Perspectives on Placebos in Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rheims, S., Cucherat, M., Arzimanoglou, A., & Ryvlin, P. (2008). Greater Response to Placebo in Children Than in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Drug-Resistant Partial Epilepsy. PLOS Medicine, 5(8), e166.

Scriba, P. (2012). Placeboaspekte der Arzt-Patienten-Beziehung (Placebo and the relationship between doctors and patients). Bundesgesundheitsblatt – Gesundheitsforschung – Gesundheitsschutz, 55, 1113–1117.

Stafford, N. (2011). German doctors are told to have an open attitude to placebos. BMJ, 342, d1535.

Sunshine, A., Laska, E., Meisner, M., & Morgan, S. (1964). Analgesic studies of indomethacin as analyzed by computer techniques. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 5(6part1), 699–707.