The Lightning Process is a psychological intervention created by Phil Parker that has been promoted to myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome patients as a cure. It gets its name because it is supposed to cure in three days.
- 1 Overview
- 2 Evidence
- 3 Anecdotal evidence
- 4 Studies with ME/CFS
- 5 Criticisms
- 6 Controversy
- 7 Learn more
- 8 Online presence
- 9 See also
- 10 References
The Lightning Process claims to be a combination of neurolinguistic programming (NLP) and osteopathy. The content of the process is copyrighted but according to patient reports involves affirmations and counteracting negative thoughts:
"You ask yourself if you want to choose happiness. Which you obviously do and then you say how fantastic you are to have stopped the negativity thought. You ask yourself what you really want, then you answer yourself, and again ask yourself how you are going to get there. The answer of course is to keep doing the process, getting rid of those negative thoughts. Then you tell yourself how great you are again and maybe have a bit of a hug with yourself, then…….. no nothing, that’s it."
The cost is between £695 and £1,997 for a three day course with additional sessions up to £250 an hour. (September 2016 rates) 
The Lightning Process has not been tested with any randomized, controlled trials.
According to a national survey by the Norwegian ME Association (2012), Lightning Process is one of the treatments that has done the most harm to patients. 50% of the participants reported that LP had made their condition worse, 25% seriously worse. 30% reported that LP had no effect on symptoms.
Studies with ME/CFS
King's College London Study
A small non-randomised qualitative study took place at King's College London, reporting in 2012. The study was conducted by Trudie Chalder and Nicola Archer with Silje Endresen Reme of Harvard University. Nine Participants aged 14 to 26 were recruited through advertisements. They were interviewed after undergoing the process along with three of their parents..
Seven participants reported being satisfied with two as dissatisfied. The intensity and poor follow up were criticised by participants along with the secrecy surrounding it and feelings of guilt and blame if the treatment did not work.
The Smile study protocol
John Greensmith criticised the programme as a costly pyramid scheme noting that people who train in the process frequently go on to become practitioners themselves.<existing CBC citation>
Some patients critique the Lightning Process for its high cost, lack of evidence, and the pressure placed on participants if they do not improve.
In a joint statement in August 2010, the ME Association and the Young ME Sufferers Trust called the SMILE study "unethical" saying, "The ME Association and The Young ME Sufferers Trust do not believe that it is ethically right to use children in trialling an unproven and controversial process such as the Lightning Process."
Professor Robin Gill, a member of the BMA medical ethics committee, wrote to the Church Times about the LP and the SMILE trial. He expressed concern about the issue of coercion of children in the trial.
British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruling
In 2012 the British Advertising Standards Authority ruled against an claims on the Lightning Process (LP) website.
The ASA upheld a complaint from Hampshire County Council trading standards made about false claims about the use and effectiveness of LP on ME/CFS. The claims were that "Our survey found that 81.3%* of clients report that they no longer have the issues they came with by day three of the LP course", which the complainant stated "misleadingly implied that the Lightning Process could treat or cure CFS/ME."
The ASA noted, "the website breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation) and 12.1 (Medicines, medical devices, health-related products and beauty products)."
The ASA ruled that Phil Parker Ltd should not make medical claims for the LP unless they were supported with robust evidence and the company was not to refer to conditions for which advice should be sought from suitably qualified health professionals.
The Nordic Consumer Ombudsman
The 2017 Agenda for the Nordic Consumer Ombudsman ruled that it is illegal to claim that any alternative medicine treatment is effective against specific illnesses and conditions. This ruling forbids the Lightening Process (LP) owners to market Lightening Process (LP) as a treatment for ME/CFS.
In 2011, a 13 year-old Norwegian boy with ME attempted suicide after he failed to improve with the Lightning Process.
- Skepdic overview of Lightning Process
- Wikipedia - Lightning Process
- 2015, Patient's account of Lightning Process - Phoenix Rising
- 2014, Cort Johnson on the Lightning Process SMILE Study - Health Rising
- An Introduction to the Lightning Process, book by Phil Parker
- Esther Crawley
- Martine McCutcheon
- Mickel therapy
- Controversial training program comes to Canada - CBC April 2008
- The Lightning Process Didn't Work For me
- Cost of Lightning Process courses & sessions-Lightning Process website
- Experiences of young people who have undergone the Lightning Process to treat chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis – a qualitative study by Reme, Archer & Chalder
- SMILE Study protocol
- Twitter: James Coyne on the Lightning Process
- The Lightning Process Didn't Work For me
- Statement of ME Association and Young Sufferers Trust on SMILE (August 2010)
- Letter to National Research Ethics Committee - Invest in ME
- Children should not be used as Guinea Pigs - Church Times 8 October 2010
- ASA Ruling on Phil Parker Group Ltd
- 13-year-old attempted suicide after ME courses