Student Questions: Body Searches and Theta Healing

Skeptoid answers some more questions from students. Send yours in today!

by Brian Dunning

Filed under Feedback & Questions

Skeptoid #119
September 16, 2008
Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe

Once again we're going to open the email folder and answer some questions from students. If you're a student of any age, and you have a question you'd like me to answer, I'd love to hear from you. Just go to and click on Student Questions to see how to record and submit your question to me. It's really easy, and all you need is access to any computer with a microphone. Today's questions cover body searches, theta healing, dreams coming true, marijuana use, and the genetic foundations of homosexuality. Let's dive right in.

Hi, my name is Avi Steiner, and I was wondering: Is the controversy over full-body searches in airlines merited?

There are many branches to this question, and I'm not quite sure which you're most interested in. Two that are within the scope of Skeptoid to address are the statistics of whether full body searches actually prevent air piracy, and whether the image clarity of the latest imaging techniques are actually as revealing as some say they are. As far as this question goes, that's a big yes. It's called Backscatter X-Ray and it produces images that are exactly what every 10-year-old boy hoped his Cracker Jack X-Ray Spectacles would produce. Susan Hallowell, Director of the Transportation Security Administration's research lab, famously allowed a picture of herself that leaves little to the imagination to be released to the media, and if that doesn't send you scrambling to Google's image search, I don't know what will.

If your concern is whether body searches have been proven to reduce air piracy, the answer's not as clear. You may be tempted to answer "Well duh, of course it helps, because the hijackers can't bring weapons on board." But this thought experiment may be all you have to go on, because there's insufficient data to draw any conclusions from the real world. Most such incidents happen in countries where security is minimal, but there are far too many other variables at play to conclude that the low security level was the reason that the piracy acts took place from those particular airports. The Aviation Safety Network lists six fatality hijackings that took place in 2007, four in Africa and two in Turkey. Are body searches the reason these hijackings didn't happen in the United States? It could also be that these particular hijackers had less to gain by choosing a flight from Colorado Springs to Orlando.

Hi Brian, My name is Mia, from Swinburne University, Melbourne,  Australia. I want to know what your take is on the mystical Theta Healing. I have a friend who is very much into it but I get the feeling that there's not much evidence behind what it claims to do. What do you think?

Theta healing is just another random "roll-the-dice and invent a New Age healing technique" based on some imaginary energy field. This one was invented in 1995 by a self-described "intuitive reader" who believed that she could project theta waves from her brain which would instantly heal the patient. Theta healing claims to immediately and completely cure cancer, severe injuries, and even psychological and financial problems.

In fact, a theta wave is not an energy field or a type of energy at all. It's simply the name of one type of waveform on an electroencephalogram. When an EEG shows a sine wave with a period of between 4 and 8 Hertz, neurologists designate that as a theta pattern. This waveform is observed when the subject is asleep or at rest, and in some types of learning involving short term memory.

Probably what happened is that this "intuitive reader" heard the term "theta wave", misinterpreted it to mean a type of mystical energy field generated by the brain; and then erroneously put two and two together when one of her customers reported some kind of positive experience. If you look at any web page about theta healing, you'll see all kinds of vaguely scientific sounding words thrown out there in meaningless disarray. There's nothing plausible about it and no description specific enough to test, but unfortunately, unscientific laypeople are all too often ill-equipped to recognize that such technobabble on a web page is baseless.

I'm David Alexander, a university student in Ottawa, Canada, and I myself have had quite a few dreams I recall very vividly, and discover myself weeks or months later in a situation that (as far as I could tell) matches my prior dream almost exactly to the point of being able to predict with certainly what is about to happen.  My question is: what would you tell me about these experiences I have, in light of the sheer improbability of these types of things occurring?

Although I can't speak authoritatively on your specific case, I can tell you that what you describe as sheer improbability, when applied to all the dreams, thoughts, and daily experiences that a person has, surprising coincidences become not only probable, but inevitable. The law of large numbers requires that, on average, of the one million waking events you experience in a month at the rate of about one a second, one of them will be a one-in-a-million coincidence. You seem to be someone who pays a great deal of attention to matching his dreams to later experiences, and so you are by definition a walking case of confirmation bias. How many dreams have you had that did not later come true? Most of them. Of each dream that did come true, how much of the dream came true? All several hours of it, or only one of its thousands of bits? Considering that your dreams have only your life experience to draw from for their material, it's almost inconceiveable for your dreams to not match a substantial part of what happens in your daily life.

I'm sure you can point to half a dozen cases where the match was too incredibly strange to have been a coincidence. Well, so can everyone, the difference is that most of us don't pay as much attention to it as you and so we quickly forget. I only remember one such case, but I know there have been others, I just forgot about them. Don't allow yourself to confuse confirmation bias — our tendency to remember the few hits and forget the vast majority of misses — with the impression that hits were more prominent than they really were.

Hello, this is Evan from Stratford Ontario. I was wondering what are the real effects of regular marijuana use?

Well, I'll avoid the obvious assumption about why you're asking, and instead cut to the chase. For most light users, the risks of long term pot smoking are probably not worth worrying about. The risks of driving your car or smoking cigarettes are more substantial concerns. About 1 in 25 adults smoke marijuana at least once a year, with few long term effects. Short term effects can be a bigger concern. Don't plan to drive that day; don't put yourself in a situation where you might make a jackass out of yourself; don't get fired for being high on the job. Use good sense.

Heavy usage, or even a rare heavy usage, can absolutely be a problem. I once ate some brownies that I didn't know were full of pot, then drove home. I passed out on the freeway, and came to driving on the dirt shoulder at 70 mph, blind and paralyzed on my left side. It took several days to recover fully, and you can bet I went to the hospital where they ruled out all the other possible causes they could think of. You can also bet that I'll never touch the stuff again. Don't ever OD, and don't let your friends OD.

You've already demonstrated the best precaution, which is to ask before you leap. Impress the heck out of your doctor by asking him. Look it up on the web. Sites like WebMD are great places to get decent, general, consumer level information about health topics like this, and you'll see that WebMD does list potential long term problems like gum disease, changes in blood viscosity, and pregnancy concerns. No drug is completely safe, but then again, what is?

Tip Skeptoid $2/mo $5/mo $10/mo One time

I'm Kevin Mellis, I'm 18, and I'm a student at the University of La Verne. My question is this: Homosexuality is popularly conceived as innate in a person's personality. Is there any scientific research regarding the veracity of this commonly held belief?

Yes there is. Despite Newsweek and the Wall Street Journal's best efforts to promote sensationalism through misleading headlines, one thing that is very clear to geneticists is that there is no "gay gene". The idea got its start in 1993 when Science published a study of homosexuality and genetic frequencies among familes. It was complicated, and was grossly and irresponsibly oversimplified into the "gay gene" by the media. New research is published pretty often, and about the only consensus that's displayed is that it seems likely that homosexuality has a combination of genetic, other biological, and environmental causes. If you read anything that claims to have found a single or clearly identified cause of homosexuality, you have very good reason to be skeptical of that source.

If you're a student and you want to hear my take on something, come to and click on Answering Student Questions. Get a quick answer on some urban legend, conspiracy theory, or paranormal phenomenon you're curious about. I'd love to hear from you, and answer your question on a future show.

Brian Dunning

© 2008 Skeptoid Media Copyright information

References & Further Reading

Associated Press. "Nice Bombs Ya Got There." Conde Nast Digital, 26 Jun. 2003. Web. 6 Jan. 2010. <>

Aviation Safety Network. "Fatal hijackings accidents 2007." Aviation Safety Network. Flight Safety Foundation, 17 Dec. 2007. Web. 16 Sep. 2008. <>

Chang, Louise. "Marijuana - Marijuana Use and Effects of Merijuana." WebMD. WebMD, 3 Jul. 2008. Web. 16 Sep. 2008. <>

Frank, Thomas. "Revealing X-ray scanner makes its debut." USA Today. 26 Feb. 2008, Newspaper: 7B.

Kuhn, C., Swartzwelder, S., Wilson, W. Buzzed: The straight facts about the most used and abused drugs from alcohol to ecstasy, 3rd edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 2008. 142-171.

Niedermeyer, Ernst; da Silva, Fernado Lopes. Electroencephalography: Basic Principles, Clinical Applications, and Related Fields. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005.

Pool, R. "Evidence for homosexuality gene." Science. 16 Jul. 1993, Volume 261, Number 5119: 291-292.

Taleb, Nassim Nicholas. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. New York: Random House, Inc., 2007.

Reference this article:
Dunning, B. "Student Questions: Body Searches and Theta Healing." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, 16 Sep 2008. Web. 13 Oct 2015. <>


10 most recent comments | Show all 37 comments

Given the new interest in airplane security, following last weeks 'attempted attack', I was wondering about the full body x-ray technology. My father made a comment on a news article that airports are going to be adding this technology sooner now. He feels that they are clearly unsafe, given that he will have a load of radiation thrown at him. I was hoping you could address this aspect of the topic, which was omitted above.

Ben Honey, Seabrook, TX
December 31, 2009 10:35am


The radiation from the backscatter x-ray is a thousand times weaker than from the airplane flight itself.

"This radiation level is so low that a passenger would have to go through the screening portal approximately 1,000 times to receive the same radiation dose as would be received from cosmic ray exposure at high altitude during one transcontinental flight from New York to Los Angeles."

The alternative imaging technology uses millimeter-waves, which are between microwave and infrared, and are generally safer than x-rays because they're non-ionizing.

Max, Boston, MA
January 1, 2010 5:03am

Marijuana does have a long-term effect on people who smoke it more than once a week. I can't cite a scientific study (was one ever done for long-term use?), but we all can spot a pothead. They have a sameness in attitude, something like an eroded personality. Go ahead and argue, but at least ask yourself how you *know* a pot user upon first meeting.

Abby, Austin, TX
February 21, 2010 9:00pm

Hey Brian, great episode as always.

In your response to David, you ask him if he remembers and matches all several hours of his dreams, but any research I have ever been able to find says that most dreams only last about 10 minutes. For lack of a better source, I can only quote HowStuffWorks as asserting that "most dreams last anywhere from five to 20 minutes" at the moment, but it is certainly something that I have heard before.

If however, you were referring to the perceived length of his dreams, that may be a fair estimate, as he would have hours of dreamed situations to match to his real-life experiences.

Either way, not a big deal, but accuracy is worthwhile, wouldn't you agree?

Max Poschmann, Burlington, Ontario
March 29, 2010 7:43pm

Abby, that is easy, they think I am a head and ask to score. For some reason old hippy looking means someone accessible to dope.

I coulda bin RICH dammit!

by way of explanation... skin head or long hair is fairly handy. If you are going to wash your hair anyway, save on hair cuts.

Henk van der Gaast, Sydney
November 20, 2010 8:58pm

your philosophy on marijuana couldn't be farther from the truth...significant and creditable information has proven the plant to be not only harmless to your mind and body but its actually good for your mind and updated medical journals educate yourself.

jdel, canada
April 14, 2012 4:23pm

Huge fan of the show, though I would disagree slightly on the dangers of marijuana "Overdose". While I'm sure there are many stories like Brians for me the Pros outweigh the Cons.
Marijuana has been (almost literally*) a life saver for me getting over a problem with benzo's and adderall that were prescribed to me, by a real doctor, for nausea and anxiety. Marijuana does the job that both these medications did quite a bit better and without any of the complications I had on Benzo's(seizures and horrible withdrawls).

I just hope nobody gets duped like I did into taking these medications as an alternative to marijuana cause of horror stories like Brians, do a little research yourself to get an idea of what it's like for most people. And for the love of god don't eat ganj brownies ever for your fist time, I've never heard of it killing anybody, you but might get you laughed at by some veteran EMT's.

AJ Newman, Salt Lake City, UT
July 16, 2012 10:29pm

Thank you AJ for telling us about your self diagnosis and medication.

Mud, Sin City, Oz
February 14, 2013 1:13am

Aw man, I got into Skeptoid way too late. I missed out on all the hot tub humor =(

Also, I think the cannabis apologists here are confusing "overdose" with "lethal dose." Wikipedia describes "overdose" as follows: "The term drug overdose (or simply overdose or OD) describes the ingestion or application of a drug or other substance in quantities greater than are recommended or generally practiced." gives this definition: "an excessive dose." So while you can no more take a toxic lethal dose of cannabis than you can caffeine, you can still OD on it. If you drink 5 cups of coffee and become jittery, agitated, and can't concentrate, you've overdosed on caffeine. If you eat a plateful of brownies and have the unusually bad reaction that Brian did, you've consumed an amount in excess of normal practice and what anyone would recommend. You've overdosed. Brian recommended responsible usage of cannabis, and to not consume and drive, which is the same advice any doctor would give regarding alcohol and certain prescription medications. Let's not react as if he were parroting Reefer Madness. I once had a friend who was adamant that alcoholism didn't exist. Certainly Skeptoid listeners should know better than to get religiously fanatic about their favorite drugs.

Cas, Olywa
February 14, 2014 4:08pm

Well, our indubitable host has finally given into the temptation to us his own anecdotal evidence as part of his argument. In that he is the first to eschew others who use this same tactic, I found it rather hypocritical at worst & inconsistent at best.

"O.D." on marijuana? Come on Mr. Dunning? I do not doubt that you experienced what you claim happened. I would suspect however that had you known you were eating pot brownies, your experience would have been considerably different.

You have broken one of your golden rules of critical thinking & presenting a factual argument. As far as the O.D. part, I do not think anyone listening to this pod cast could support that idea as being either true or possible based on historical evidence.

Imightberiding, Victoria, BC
June 17, 2014 5:41pm

Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point).

Post a reply


What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?

Support Skeptoid

Who Was Charles Fort?
Skeptoid #488, Oct 13 2015
Read | Listen (12:11)
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
Skeptoid #487, Oct 6 2015
Read | Listen (12:13)
The Flying Saucer Menace
Skeptoid #486, Sep 29 2015
Read | Listen (12:29)
Holocaust Denial
Skeptoid #485, Sep 22 2015
Read | Listen (12:54)
More Unsung Women of Science
Skeptoid #484, Sep 15 2015
Read | Listen (12:56)
#1 -
Tube Amplifiers
Read | Listen
#2 -
Read | Listen
#3 -
That Elusive Fibromyalgia
Read | Listen
#4 -
SS Iron Mountain
Read | Listen
#5 -
A Skeptical Look at the News
Read | Listen
#6 -
The War of the Worlds Panic Broadcast
Read | Listen
#7 -
Ancient Astronauts
Read | Listen
#8 -
Myths of Alcatraz
Read | Listen

Recent Comments...

[Valid RSS]

  Skeptoid PodcastSkeptoid on Facebook   Skeptoid on Twitter   Brian Dunning on Google+   Skeptoid on Stitcher   Skeptoid RSS

Members Portal


Follow @skeptoid

Tweets about skeptoid

Support Skeptoid

Email: [Why do we need this?]To reduce spam, we email new faces a confirmation link you must click before your comment will appear.
characters left. Abusive posts and spam will be deleted.