What Doctors say about the Lightning Process
Dr Rajesh Munglani
MB BS DCH DA FRCA FFPMRCA Consultant in Pain Management“I have been very impressed with the results of the Lightning Process. I have seen the lives of some of my patients transformed by this self empowering technique. Everyone who has battled with chronic illness and wants to win should have the opportunity to do the Lightning Process.”
Dr Stephanie Hughes
MD BSc BMBChI am a medical doctor whose life has been transformed by the Lightning Process. It is, without doubt, an extremely effective training programme which enables participants to make hugely important, life-enhancing changes to their health and wellbeing – rapidly and permanently.
Dr Lissa Rankin
MD“I have been very impressed with the results of the Lightning Process. I have seen the lives of some of my patients transformed by this self empowering technique. Everyone who has battled with chronic illness and wants to win should have the opportunity to do the Lightning Process.”
Dr Susy Mikkelsen
MD“I hope the importance of this innovative approach to medical health will spread rapidly to the practice of medicine and to all who need it.”
Dr Anna Chellamuthu
GP“I am so impressed with the potential for positive change in health that I am currently training with Phil Parker to become a Lightning Process practitioner myself. ”
Published Research involving the Lightning Process
There is a growing amount of published research on the Phil Parker Lightning Process® (LP) with 12 clinical studies by 2018. Research is important for providing clarity about the effectiveness of interventions, but it often takes years from designing a study, to ethics aproval, funding, running a project, analysing the data and writing and publishing the results. And for many the results are often written in an academic language that is difficult to understand.
Below we’ve provided a list of some of the main studies, their titles and the highlights from the papers for those who want the key facts. There are also links to the papers for those who wish to read them in full. Further information is also available on the main Lightning Process website…
Randomised Controlled Trial: CFS/ME
‘Clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Lightning Process in addition to Specialist Medical care for pediatric Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Randomized Controlled Trial.’
The ‘SMILE’ trial; a randomized controlled trial (RCT) run in conjunction with the NHS and the University of Bristol.
Two papers had previously been published on this study and you can find a link to them both here:
1. The feasibility and acceptability of conducting a trial of specialist medical care and the Lightning Process in children with chronic fatigue syndrome: feasibility randomized controlled trial (SMILE study)
2. Comparing specialist medical care with specialist medical care plus the Lightning Process® for chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (SMILE Trial)
Review of the Lightning Process approach to CFS/ME in JEP
‘Understanding the Lightning Process Approach to CFS/ME; a Review of the Disease Process and the Approach.’
Conclusions: This paper resolves the identified gaps in the research and clarifies the hypotheses behind this approach, which has been identified by the evidence base as providing successful outcomes for some. It is hoped this clearer understanding of the approach will assist researchers, clinicians and those with this disabling disease to identify some additional options for potential recovery.
Qualitative study: CFS/ME
Experiences of young people who have undergone the Lightning Process to treat Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) – a qualitative study
Overview: An independent study, published in 2012, found that of the 9 participants with CFS/ME “7 were satisfied and were much improved”.
Evaluation of a Treatment Strategy: Chronic Pain
‘Evaluation of a Treatment Strategy’
Conclusion: “A structured cooperation between doctor and LP instructor has contributed to significant pain reduction and improvement in the quality of life for nine of the twelve youngsters in the project. The remaining three participants had not noticed any effect, either positive or negative.”
Proof of Concept Study: MS
Proof of Concept Study: Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
Abstract: The interim data shows that the LP provided benefit to all participants and there have been no incidents of negative effects. The data suggests that it would be worth pursuing a full Randomised Controlled Trial
“The Proof of Concept study, although being in a small number of subjects, has produced some encouraging and worthwhile results over the 12 month period following participation in the Lightning Process. They indicate that the Lightning Process provides measurable benefits to those with MS and suggests that further larger randomised studies would be beneficial to investigate the role the Lightning Process plays in the well-being and quality of life of MS patients.” MS-UK October 2014.
Outcome Measures Study
Study reporting on outcome measures of those taking the Lightning Process for a range of issues
Overview: Outcome measures data was collected from 205 clients who attended a Lightning Process seminar, using the RAND SF-36 form.
The indications are that the LP is making a significant positive impact, resulting in increased health status at 6 weeks, persisting at 3 months, and demonstrating improvements in all areas that were covered by the RAND SF36 questionnaire.
ME Association’s Survey 2010
ME Association’s 2010 Survey
A UK based charity survey (N = 4,217, female = 78%, age range 11-66), asked respondents about their experiences of managing their ME. Perceptions of using 25 different approaches, including standard approaches, such as Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) (n = 997), Graded Exercise Therapy (GET) (n = 906) and the LP (which was the third least used of the approaches, n = 101) were rated on a Likert scale.
The survey found that the LP received the highest percentage out of all the 25 approaches for those feeling they had ‘greatly improved’.