Hi John, Interesting debate... The bottom line is that medical practitioners (oncologists etc) publish data on treatments, survival times for various cancers etc....alternative practitioners (including NLP) do not. I would be really impressed if an NLP practitioner produced a series of 100 cases of cancer treated with NLP interventions followed up over five years....with information on histological tissue diagnosis (rather than relying on what the patient says they have)...confirmation of cure...and a follow up long enough to ensure that they really did remain well. To date no-one in the field has done this... It is so easy to knock the medical profession, invoke malevolent pharmaceutical control and give myriad other reasons for why medical interventions are content and not process driven. Currently it is all academic in the sense that no-one in NLP has come up with anything other than anecdote to show that NLP processes consistently get results in cancer care. Personally I think that many in the field are shy of doing this kind of work in case the results fail to match the ideals....certainly wouldn't be good for marketing trainings! And anyway it takes a great deal of time and committment (as well as funding) to do that kind of research. As a physician I have used NLP hypnosis and conventional medicine together for a decade now. I have not had any major results in treating cancer only with NLP...however maybe that simply reflects my skills level. What I have found though is that using NLP and conventional medicine TOGETHER....synergistically...gets a better overall result for my patients in a variety of conditions. Yet truth be told...these are merely my anecdotes...At the very least however, I am stimulating my medical colleagues to further investigate NLP. Regards, Lewis.