Based on the literature in some cases where the patient cannot be placed under general anesthesia hypnosis could be the treatmebt of choise. I wish it would have been a choise while giving birth, as it seems to help. On the other hand it is not always effective and suitable for everyone:

References:

Efficacy of hypnosis in adults undergoing surgery or medical procedures: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Tefikow, S.; Barth, J.; Maichrowitz, S.; Beelmann, A.; Strauss, B.; et al. Clinical Psychology Review 33.5 (Jul 2013): 623-636

Psychologische Interventionen im Rahmen chirurgischer Eingriffe: Eine narrative Übersicht über vorliegende Meta-Analysen. Tefikow, Susan; Rosendahl, Jenny; Strauß, Bernhard. PPmP: Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie 63.6 (Jun 2013): 208-216.

Hypnosis—There's an app for that: A systematic review of hypnosis apps. Sucala, Madalina; Schnur, Julie B.; Glazier, Kimberly; Miller, Sarah J.; Green, Joseph P.; et al. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 61.4 (Oct 2013): 463-474.

Antenatal hypnosis training and childbirth experience: A randomized controlled trial. Werner, Anette; Uldbjerg, Niels; Zachariae, Robert; Wu, Chun Sen; Nohr, Ellen A.. Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care 40.4 (Dec 2013): 272-280.

I agree with you Dr. Béatrice. 

These are 2 very different questions:

Hypnosis: there is a large individual variability in the "propension" to be hynotized. Most of this variability is inter-individual variability (some individuals can be hypnotized very easily others never)  but there is probably also some degree of intra-individual variability on this propension, based on "context' and other unknown factors. Albeit we all know intuitively what hyposis is, we also lack an operational definition for hpnosis and to a similar point, there are different degrees or "depths" of hypnosis which is an important facotr if one wants to use hyposis as a substitution or an adjuvant for deep sedation.  With all these caveats and unsolved issues, hyposis may be a safe and effective tool  in the hands of a qualified health professional for selected subset subjects.

Meditation: there are several studies (of varying quality) showing beneficial effects of meditation in subjects with hypertension, migraine and many other medical conditions. It is not as easy as swallowing a pill, it requires training, predisposition, and the right environment ( a quiet room and undisturbed time). Those who need meditation the most sadly are also those less likely to be able to practice it on a regular basis (think of the type A, goal-driven mid-age executive suffering from blood pressure, or the anxious mother of 3 children suffering of recurring migraine).

Both of these methods can be used for medical purposes. meditation is easier and safer than hypnosis. it seems that such methods work on the regularity (controling) ability of the brain on itself. I can say that deep breathing, specific consentration and some kind of conditioning are the common tools which cause the outputs we acheive by meditation, hypnosis or other mind-body methods. 

I agree with the other answers received to date. In addition, be aware that not all "meditation" is the same. Methods, goals, and effectiveness can be very different from technique to technique.

Transcending, such as is taught in Transcendental Meditation (TM), is a well-studied type of meditation that produces dramatic and consistent effects in almost all subjects, due to its basis in the removal of stored stresses through deep rest. Mindfulness, available in several forms, while not so well studied because its results are less dramatic, has also shown good effects, such as reduction in anxiety.

To David Spector: I would disagree on only one point and that is the abundance of research on Mindfulness. This area is blowing up right now. You can barely open a conversation on complementary and alternative medicine, or mediation in general, without Mindfulness quickly taking the lead. Most of this research is focused around Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction a la Jon Kabat-Zinn.

Backing up to the original question -  hypnosis and meditation both have the potential for medical applications; however, this cannot be said to be universal. As they say: everything works for somebody but nothing works for everybody.

The applications of hypnosis go far beyond a substituting for general anesthesia. Studies (and as mentioned before the quality of research varies) indicate that hypnosis can sometimes be useful in weight loss, smoking cessation, alcoholism, managing chronic pain, inflammatory bowel and Crohn’s disease, sexual dysfunction, recovering from severe burns, relieving the anxiety and side-effects of cancer treatment, and even reducing warts. Hypnotic susceptibility, of course, plays a large role in the effectiveness of these treatments.

Meditation (and also as mentioned that is a broad field with not all forms being equal) can also be used in a number of these same applications and more but is not as contingent on pre-disposition. It seems, based on the research, very likely that the primary mechanism behind the effectiveness of meditation is stress-reduction (rather than suggestion as with hypnosis). Stress is one of the primary drivers in most chronic conditions today. If not always the cause, it is an ever-present contributor. Through regular meditation, one can gain a certain level of control over stress reactions and thus reduce its effects. Even though there are many forms of meditation, it is possible that there is no effective difference as long as the practice produces the same level of relaxation. Perhaps mindfulness reduces stress for one person while TM does it for another.

One important point that I would like to add is that no treatment is without risks. CAM, and especially energy-based or relaxation-based, treatments are often sold as having no side effects or potential of harm. This is not true. Hypnosis and meditation can be very dangerous for people with certain mental conditions, past trauma, dissociative tendencies, etc. Hypnosis has also been shown to carry the potential risk of implanting memories, which then creates the experience of trauma even in the absence of actual trauma. Medical administration of these modalities requires training and practice just like any other medical modality.            

Dear Dr. Alexzandria well said, "everything works for somebody but nothing works for everybody". True, there isn't much literature available on this upcoming topic. 

While it certainly seems that each person has their own likes and dislikes, and so will find that only one method of meditation will work best for them, this assumes that meditation must work on the level of likes and dislikes, that is, the level of the mind (where decisions, thoughts, feelings, sensations, and the ego have their home).

However, some forms of meditation, particularly neo advaita and transcending, do not primarily work on the level of the mind, and hence they are relatively immune to likes and dislikes and other individual personal differences.

Neither of these kinds of meditation require concentration, avoidance, or other manipulation of the mind. They are experienced as "natural" or "automatic", rather than something that must be worked at until it succeeds.

In my many years of experience first as a teacher of Transcendental Meditation and then as a teacher of Natural Stress Relief I have found that transcending works for anyone who is able to follow instructions in English, is able to think a thought, and will seek support when they have questions or problems with their practice.

In this observation, "works" means produces the unique state of transcendental consciousness (restful alertness, or samadhi) and brings benefits to daily life, such as peacefulness, happiness, freedom from drug dependency or other bad habits, and productivity, which are based on dissolving and eliminating deep-rooted stresses from the nervous system.

As a teacher, I have seen close to a 100% success rate according to the definitions I have just provided, and this includes those with typical outpatient mental illnesses and disorders, such as diagnosed depression and severe anxiety. For this reason, we have several physicians and psychiatrists who have not only learned transcending themselves, but regularly refer selected patients for instruction in NSR.

It is important to note that I'm not claiming cures to mental disorders. Any cures or remissions happen only when the patient complies with prescribed interventions such as medication and talk therapy.

Although transcending is not a panacea, it is also not a placebo. Carefully designed and peer-reviewed studies have established that the effects of transcending techniques are not imagined or just the result of expectation: physiological markers and psychological benefits have been measured in hundreds of published studies.

It is also true that mindfulness, particularly the two standardized forms of mindfulness, are of great current interest among researchers for the significance of their effects and for the ready availability of teachers and practitioners.

I'm currently doing a systematic review on meditation for anxiety in OCD.

Christine, best of luck in your work! Maybe let us know when it is published? The world needs lots more natural (no side-effects) help for those who are suffering, no matter what form of meditation is selected for study.

David,

I really believe on a basic level we are in agreement. In your original post you do say that TM is effective for almost all subjects. Perhaps, in your experience you have seen a 100% success rate but that is not conclusive data. You are also referring to success in achieving a transcendent state, not lowering blood pressure or improving QOL in cardiac patients. (This site offers some meta-analysis of studies in those areas: http://www.tm.org/national-institutes-of-health). When I say “it works” for people I am not using your definition but rather the more colloquial meaning as in “floats your boat”. You generalize that anyone can do TM as long as they are “able to follow instructions in English, is able to think a thought, and will seek support when they have questions or problems with their practice” but that assumes a willingness to follow instructions, think a thought, and seek guidance. One who is not attracted to the philosophy and technique of TM is not going to read the instructions, much less follow them. In this case it does become a matter of choice. It is something you seek out and choose to learn – otherwise there would not be certified instructors. When this packaging is not attractive to a patient then other options to the same ends must be offered. (On a side note, I am curious why with as long as TM has been around, is it still only available in English?)      

You also mention success with people experiencing depression and anxiety but in my post I was referring to mental conditions that strain one’s relationship with reality such as psychosis, dissociation, and schizophrenia. I have first-hand experience in observing the dangers that various forms of meditation and introspection hold in these areas, though again this is not empirical data.

 Is your operational definition of "natural" that it carries no (as in 0%) side effects? On this point, I absolutely cannot emphasis strongly enough my disagreement. Unfortunately, I see this opinion with many practitioners. It may be true that the risks are very low and that the side effects may not be the same as more traditional treatments but nothing that brings about an effect can be 100% benign.    

Remember that hemlock is “natural” too.

Dear Alexzandria Baker,

Thank you for your interesting comments, and for your questions.

"In your original post you do say that TM is effective for almost all subjects. Perhaps, in your experience you have seen a 100% success rate but that is not conclusive data."

You are correct that this is not conclusive. But it is a start. Motivation is certainly a factor, and I have found that my Natural Stress Relief (NSR) clients seem to be highly motivated, especially the few who admit to mental illness. It is important to note that this is not necesarily characteristic of mentally ill people in general, many of whom are lacking in motivation due to their particular disorder, and some of whom have given up on traditional medicine. Programs meant to address the whole public health issue of mental illness may need to be more concerned with motivating the public than in selecting the most effective techniques and teachers.

"You are also referring to success in achieving a transcendent state, not lowering blood pressure or improving QOL in cardiac patients."

Yes, and this is another important point. The effectiveness of a meditation program or technique can only be measured by selecting a goal for the program. What might work best for someone with a high risk of CVD might not be best for someone with a diagnosis of depression. That is why in recommending transcending for a specific cardiovascular patient it is important to look at the published research in this area. TM has impressive research in this area, and is currently funded by NIH for (I believe) several larger studies. Bear in mind that for CV patients, TM appears to be free of unwanted side effects.

"(This site offers some meta-analysis of studies in those areas: http://www.tm.org/national-institutes-of-health)."

The Ospina metastudy is controversial; it has been criticized for its stance in devaluating all the health research done on all meditation methods. It appears to use a methodology that excludes most of them.

There have been 8 metastudies published comparing TM to other forms of meditation (each performed at least in part by researchers who practice TM), and these are all quite dramatic in preferring TM over placebos and other techniques in a wide variety of benefits.

One reference is:

Eppley, K., Abrams, A., Shear, J. (1989). Differential effects of relaxation techniques on trait anxiety: a meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45 (6): 957–974.

Let me know if you would like the other references.

"When I say 'it works' for people I am not using your definition but rather the more colloquial meaning as in 'floats your boat'."

A more rigorous definition than merely a personal preference is required if we are to provide evidence that any meditation technique is worth doing. Some people enjoy drinking to intoxication on a weekly or daily basis, but, of course, this is no evidence that drinking is beneficial in any way.

"You generalize that anyone can do TM as long as they are...but that assumes a willingness to follow instructions, think a thought, and seek guidance."

Correct. I agree that an unmotivated person will probably not be able to learn transcending or to practice it in such a way as to receive benefits.

The public health issue of applying meditation instruction to society in general (or to general segments such as drug abusers) is a difficult one, and one which I have no plans to tackle.

I believe, based on my experience, that individuals with specific needs to lower anxiety and other results of stress tend to be well-motivated to follow the NSR instructions and recommendations. When it comes to specific programs of instruction in meditation, choice, preference, and motivation become very important issues.

Here, though, I'm writing mostly as a researcher, for researchers who are interested in effects and benefits of meditation programs, not the larger issue of how to motivate people to do something that will help their health or well-being.

"(On a side note, I am curious why with as long as TM has been around, is it still only available in English?)"

Transcending is available through many organizations, in many languages.

TM is available in most languages, as there are certified teachers available in almost every country. NSR, which must rely on qualified volunteers, only offers instruction in English, Italian, and Portuguese at the current time.

My requirement that someone understand English applies to my personal clients in NSR (1900 at the current time), since I can personally only communicate with ease in English.

"I was referring to mental conditions that strain one’s relationship with reality such as psychosis, dissociation, and schizophrenia."

Of these three, I have only had two clients who suffered from mild dissociation. This lasted only several days each, and then the stored stress that caused this phenomenon was dissolved and apparently has not returned. No patients with psychosis or schizophrenia have ordered the NSR course as yet. All of the patients referred to NSR so far by doctors suffer from either depression or anxiety. I can only report on people who have come to me for instruction, and so I can make only limited general statements.

I would be willing to work with the patients you describe, but only in close association with the psychiatrist or treatment team, as I am not trained as a doctor. I have refused instruction to one or two clients who were very dysfunctional in life but refused to be under the care of a mental health professional. I do not consider accepting such clients as ethical.

"I have first-hand experience in observing the dangers that various forms of meditation and introspection hold in these areas, though again this is not empirical data."

I would be very interested in finding out more. If you would be willing to share your experiences, please send me a personal message using the Contact Us form at www.nsrusa.org . I can also share with you how I achieve 100% success, even with the 0.5% of clients who have had bad initial experiences with NSR (such as headache or insomnia), if you are interested.

"Is your operational definition of 'natural' that it carries no (as in 0%) side effects? On this point, I absolutely cannot emphasis strongly enough my disagreement. Unfortunately, I see this opinion with many practitioners. It may be true that the risks are very low and that the side effects may not be the same as more traditional treatments but nothing that brings about an effect can be 100% benign."

I understand your skepticism, but I must stick by my actual teaching experience. Not one client has ever reported an unwanted side effect that survived either email or voice support. At least give me a chance to talk with you and explain why and how NSR can eliminate stresses without lasting side effects, even if it risks your having to revise your position of "strong disagreement".

"Remember that hemlock is 'natural' too."

Hemlock is and was a known poison. Transcending has been established by hundreds of studies to be healthful and beneficial. Our two published studies (with another in preparation) show that NSR reduces both state and trait anxiety by a dramatic amount in only two weeks (as measured by the standard STAI instrument), with good statistical significance. Anecdotal and unsolicited reports from NSR clients show benefits such as increased peacefulness, happiness, energy, good sleep, and better relationships to be the only reported long-term effects.

Dear Alexzandria and David thank you for the comprehensive and interesting explanations. 

In medicine /treatment  a patient generally feels a some sort of agony -uneasiness even though his treatment is not of a serious natural.

A patient who is practicing ,meditation in his regular walk of life ,it is very certain that he has with him the energy force-necessary will power & quite good balance of  mind.With this he can take his illness of any nature with the challenge & necessary faith .

When a such person having above traits can with him also the faith or spiritual healing process where with his medical treatment & the utmost faith within him can certainly recover from his illness fast .

A person of such nature to my mind should not recourse to   hypnosis   as divinity within himself will play a fruitful guideline .This is of course my personal opinion .

Dear Rohit M Parikh, I was not able to understand your comments, due to their ambiguous or confused use of English. I apologize for my lack of understanding, and hence my inability to reply.

 I just found this question/thread and wanted to kick in with at least a brief statement.  I have found that hypnosis and meditation are both similar phenomena, the main differences are the means used to relax the mind (to alpha or theta levels).  While it appears that some people cannot be hypnotized, they actually go to these deep levels of relaxation on the way to delta (sleep) and often as they wake up.  So the same issue applies as it does to learning how to practice meditation.  It lakes some knowledge and a lot of practice to do it well, and hypnosis is the same.  Now, for both there is also new methods to slow the brain waves, including music, sound, light....  All of these can help any individual move into a meditative or hypnotic state (light to deep relaxation).

Robert John, There are actually many different mental techniques collectively known as meditation. It is not a single, well-defined technique.

I have practiced transcending (one of these techniques) for 46 years. I also teach transcending (over 2000 clients).  I have also been hypnotized and learned self-hypnosis through medical hypnosis (my father was a doctor interested in medical hypnosis).

I can assure you from my personal experience that these are different procedures having different effects, different goals, and different results.

They do have an identical component: relaxation. But so does taking a warm bath, or drinking warm milk. There is nothing particularly wonderful about getting relaxation, from the standpoint of physiological markers or other measurable effects.

Certain forms of meditation, however, have very specific and beneficial effects and results in daily life. There is a large research literature establishing this for a wide range of markers and effects.

One problem that limits the public and even researchers' perceptions of meditation is that people really don't know much about it, yet they express their opinions as though they were fact. Thus ignorance about meditation persists through postings, books, and other media, as well as through the silence of systems of education. With better information, the public and medical personnel would have more accurate knowledge and hence a much more positive response to those forms of meditation that produce measurable benefit.

The necessary research has been done. Now we need to find ways to overcome habit patterns of thought with actual knowledge.

Again, my points here are: (1) there are many forms of meditation, with different practices and results; (2) several forms of meditation provide effects and benefits far beyond ordinary relaxation.

I agree with you, and think you read into my answer something that was not there.  I believe meditation and hypnosis are very similar phenomena and they are variable both in the depth of the relaxation, and in the methods used to try to achieve results or change.  Both the methods and the 'ability' to descend into deeper states of relaxation need to practiced and utilized.  I am confused by your statement about 'transcending' meditation - do you mean 'transcendental' meditation?   

Robert John, Sorry to have misunderstood you as saying that hypnosis and meditation were both only relaxation. Perhaps it was the words that you chose.

Examples of the major categories of meditation are transcending, concentration, contemplation, and (for completeness) relaxation. There are various numbers of meditation teachings or techniques in each category.

Transcending generates a fourth state of consciousness and physiology, according to effects measured by research. It appears to have characteristics of the waking state (mental alertness) as well as the deep sleep state (physical rest). This unique state allows the nervous system to release stresses that have accumulated over many years. With the release of internal stresses (new and old), life gradually transforms, providing the peace and happiness that most of us seek constantly. It is the main kind of meditation that specifically dissolves stored stresses. See www.nsrusa.org/about-stress.php for a deeper description of what I mean by "stress" (a term with many different definitions).

There are many teachers and organizations who teach transcending. The technique was brought to the world by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, a monk with the Shankaracharya tradition of northern India. Maharishi called the technique he taught Transcendental Meditation (a trademarked term). Contemporary teachers call their teachings by other names. The original Transcendental Meditation is still available, along with alternatives for those looking for instruction in transcending at lower prices, etc.

Joe Graymer, I don't know where your ideas come from, but they are definitely not true, at least in general.

Medical hypnosis has been around for over 40 years. My father was a physician with training in medical hypnosis who used it to help morbidly obese patients lose weight and not die young. Social workers and psychologists today, trained in hypnosis, help thousands of smokers rid themselves of this morbid habit.

You should be ashamed of your disgusting post. If you have any evidence for any of your overgeneralized claims, please present it. Otherwise...

David, I was taken back by the Graymer post, it is unclear and confused.  I did not reply right away thinking there was something else going on, and I figured it must be that he thought he was being funny.  Not good as funny, not good as a serious post, so not sure what it is supposed to be.

Robert John Wolff, I'm okay with people being confused, and honest about it. I'm okay with any opinions, so long as there is either some evidence or at least a good rationale. But ignorance and overgeneralization have no place in either science or intelligent conversation. We live in a stressed-out world, and such attitudes lead neither to solutions nor to light-hearted humor. Just my opinion.