Forums IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ PhotoReading, Memory Optimizer Studies done on Photoreading - Proof that it works?

Are there any studies that have been administered by reputable companies in regards to the validity of Photoreading? (i.e. Consumer Report) Also, are there any studies that are available on reputable websites? (i.e., apa.org, harvard.edu, etc; some sites such as religioustolerance.org try to be non-bais and educated, but are quite lacking in academical knowledge)

In brief, no.

There is no proof that the system works, only evidence based on the hundreds of thousands who have had successful results.

As of yet, no "reputable" company has conducted a correctly done set of studies to determine if PhotoReading 'works.'

-youngprer

Like many semi-paranormal phenomena, it seems, PhotoReading works for people whether or not you choose to believe it :-)

LSC was checked out by the Minnesota Deparment of Education in 1986. It was only after they reviewed the PhotoReading seminar curriculum and business practices that they were granted the license as a private vocational school.

Doctor J Michael Bennett, Doctorate in Reading Education, contributed some brilliant techniques to help make PhotoReading Whole Mind System even more practical. We had him with us at the PhotoReading Retreat and gave a presentation advise for handling technical material using the PhotoReading system.

Actually there is nothing paranormal about it. That's what hangs everyone, when they try the system... they spend the time looking for the magic in it when like reading you only need to follow the steps. Do it a few times like riding a bike often enough one day you discover... "look ma... no hands!!!" There was no chorus of angels singin' halleulah, you just discovered an innate skill that was always there, but wow what a thrill it was to discover you could do that. Same thing with learning any new skill

Real proof is in the doing. You know what the difference is between a master and a novice?

AlexK

[This message has been edited by Alex K. Viefhaus (edited March 31, 2004).]

I only said it was "semi-paranormal" because according to conventional thought, PhotoReading is impossible, no? Just as improving one's eyesight is impossible according to conventional medicine. In other words, it is only paranormal for the closed-minded people who refuse to believe anything without a very detailed scientific explanation with certain causes and effects.

Am I wrong? This seems like it is a fair portrayal of what I have observed...

-CameronJ

You are correct and there was nothing wrong with your post. I was only pointing out the the problem. To be amongst the mainstream that view it as even "semi-paranormal" Keeps you trying to find some strange magic or think it's some magic formula and you have yet to uncover some deep dark secret about the process before it will work for you as easily as falling off a log.

AlexK

I don't know if I agree with the "you have to believe in it for it to work" philosophy. My personal feeling is that it works and it will work for anyone who follows the steps, whether they believe it or not.

Having said that, I do think that we make faster progress in learning new skills when we start out believing this is something we can accomplish and it's something we want to accomplish.

As an example, I had Photoread and postviewed a book then a few days later I wanted to know some very specific information from it but I wasn't sure if the information was actually there. I also figured that it would be really cool if I could open right to the page with the information I wanted. Immediately, my left brain kicked in and said that was impossible, but I let my fingers find a place on the pages anyway. As I opened the book I was thinking to myself that it's so stupid to think I could open right to the correct page, but I closed my eyes and opened it anyway. I scanned the page and there was the info I wanted.

Even now, as I write this I'm thinking I just got lucky and something like that will never happen again. But who knows?

[This message has been edited by scribe (edited March 31, 2004).]

Scribe, for the the problem probably was that when I didn't really believe it would work, I sort of didn't follow all of the steps as well as I ought to have. Strange sense of self-sabotage, eh? I'm sure glad I got that out of my system and that it's no longer an issue for me! :-)

At first glance, I knew PhotoReading was a gem of a study skill. I definately couldn't validate it until I tried it.

As I first encountered PhotoReading, my initial background knowledge was that there is plenty of evidence that your subconscious is very active all day. It didn't seem too outrageous that you can use it in aiding in reading.

Maybe when people first read the advertisements, they expect to read 25,000 wpm in one sitting, and that's it. I believe the "25000 wpm" was really to attract customers' attention. There's a whole system behind the technique. And when you study the study in-depth, it's convincingly realistic and consistent with modern knowledge of natural sciences.

I've changed my attitude since I started. I used to force it to work. I then used it to see IF it works. Now, I use it when I need it to work.

quote:

---

...the problem probably was that when I didn't really believe it would work, I sort of didn't follow all of the steps as well as I ought to have.

---

My problem was the opposite. I read the book and the theories behind it really made sense to me. I believed it would work. Then it didn't work as well as I thought it should, so I forgot about PR for a few months, and then came back to it. After reading the book again I realized my mistakes in postviewing and asking mindprobing questions. That was when it really started to gel for me.