Lesniak KT: The effect of intercessory prayer on wound healing in nonhuman primates. AlternTher Health Med 12(6): 42-48 (2006). 
Methods
Twenty-two bush babies, a type of small African monkey used for psychology research at the Jackson State University Center for Prosimian Studies in Jackson, MS, experienced stress, likely from being confined, but also from boredom, noise, an unfamiliar environment, etc. Like people with OCD who perform repetitive actions to soothe themselves and reduce anxiety, the bush babies “over groomed” themselves—they were so distressed, they licked themselves to the point that their skin began to break down, referred to in this study as a “wound”. The researchers for the clinical trial wanted to study how best to heal the wounds and asked the question: “Would prayer help the wounds heal better than just anti-anxiety medication?”
Christian laypeople experienced in intercessory prayer (IP) were recruited to help with the study. The laypeople were given the names of the animals and asked to pray for specific outcomes (that the animals become calm, that their sores heal etc.). IP is distant prayer, such as praying at home, and can be for anything not just healing. IP is the kind of prayer congregations do on Sunday morning during “prayers of the people”. IP is different than healing prayer, even though in this case the IP was used for healing of wounds. (Healing prayer is generally another name for laying-on-of-hands, where the person being prayed for is not only in the same room, they’re actually being lightly touched by those doing the praying.)
The researchers randomly assigned the monkeys to one of two groups. One group received a nutritional supplement called L-tryptophan, a precursor to Prozac (which was deemed too expensive) that they ate in a little bit of yogurt each day. The other group got the L-tryptophan and in addition they were prayed for by the IP volunteers. The researchers videotaped the monkeys to observe how much they licked their skin and also drew blood 3 times during the month-long study. The researchers measured the monkeys’ wounds at the beginning of the study and at the end to compare them. None of the researchers involved in measuring the wounds knew which monkeys were being prayed for.
Results
The results when analyzed showed that the wounds of the monkeys who were prayed for healed to a smaller size than those who did not receive prayer. The blood levels of hemoglobin, hematocrit and red blood cells in prayed-for monkeys increased. The researchers theorized that the increased blood levels could explain the skin healing results, since oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood has a direct effect on wound healing, or it may have occurred indirectly by stimulation of the immune system. The results were statistically significant, meaning that the results are unlikely to have occurred by chance.
Discussion
There are many pros and cons to this study.
Pros: It’s good that it was conducted in a controlled setting, and therefore presumably under the auspices of an IACUC (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee). Though these are not without controversy, they are the means currently available at most institutions for monitoring research using animals in university settings.
The National Institute of Mental Health Career Opportunities in Research Program funded this study, and hopefully it sets a precedent for future researchers seeking funds for similar studies. NIMH is a government agency and they typically don’t fund studies looking at faith-based topics.
Also in the plus column is its publication in a peer-reviewed journal, which is the gold standard. Being selected for publication at all brings credibility and recognition to the idea that prayer, and specifically prayer for animals, is worthy of study and interest, and the results have meaning for both science and the public—I found this journal on a newsstand not in a medical library.
Having a statistically significant result in a randomized double-blind clinical trial showing that prayer is effective in animals is certainly exciting, especially considering that not only the wounds got smaller but the blood counts changed. Personally, I was thrilled to see Christian Healing Ministries mentioned as a source of prayer intercessors since I'm familiar with their leadership and know it to be a well-respected organization.
Cons: Though this clinical trial, conducted at a primate facility, admirably sought to ameliorate suffering, in reality these animals wouldn’t be experiencing so much stress that they mutilated themselves to the point of injury if they weren’t living in a laboratory.
I abhor that any animals are captive, whether in zoos or circuses and the like, but especially those for experimentation or vivisection. I realize that until we elect visionary leaders to Congress willing to change the laws of our country, life-saving medicines for both humans and animals must go through the regulatory process which, as it currently stands, requires animal testing. That the majority of drugs marketed in the US are not life-saving is another topic for another day. That primate research centers, and university research centers by and large, are not involved life-saving drug research is yet another topic for yet another day.
One concern is that lab researchers will now use these results as a tool to subdue their subjects. I had the same reaction to this study as a similar one I read done with harp music in an Army vivisection lab implanting cardiac devices in African green monkeys. Using music and prayer to make animals more compliant so you can vivisect them is a disingenuous perversion of gifts and an affront to the Spirit.
(And by the way, the harp music didn’t work! The authors attributed their failure to the fact that the species is too calm in captivity to show any difference with music. Why then were they bothering to do a clinical trial at cost to the taxpayers examining an intervention to calm down already-calm monkeys? They concluded they need to repeat their study with a more excitable species such as a rhesus macaque.)
Learn more about lab animal protection, which animals are subsumed under such, and the legislative challenges involved in its oversight here.
In the future I’ll be posting more about the scientific view of prayer.