Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions - James Randi [112]
One woman, told that she had goiter trouble, was amazed that Sue had been able to discover that fact. And when I asked her if she was impressed, she said that she was even more struck by the diagnosis of her back trouble "right here [gesturing] where she said it was!" and of several other minor ailments she'd not even suspected. Now, I'd been right there making notes, though I hadn't told the patient this, and I let her rave on, then recapped the whole episode for her. First, I asked her how long she'd had goiter trouble. She had no idea. In fact, she had no proof at all, or any previous suspicion, that she had goiter trouble. Her vigorous nodding had been in response to the repeated question from Sue, "Do you understand?"—not in response to the correctness of the diagnosis! As for the back problem, Miss Wallace had suggested to her that there was "maybe a problem in the back?" In response, the patient had pointed to her upper left back and asked, "Here?" whereupon Miss Wallace agreed. Thus, the patient had pointed out the location, not the operator!
At this point, a woman standing nearby chimed in. She told us that she'd recovered from open-heart surgery and was out of bed for the first time. Miss Wallace had failed to detect her problem and, when told about it, had explained that since the surgery had been a success there was no longer any illness! But that was inconsistent with a diagnosis she had given earlier that day in the case of a man who had undergone exactly the same test. She had mentioned heart trouble to him, and he had replied in an astonished voice that he'd undergone open-heart surgery. There had been oohs and ahhs left and right, of course.
One other "diagnosis" deserves mention. It became obvious to me that Sue Wallace very frequently referred to "problems with the reproductive organs" when confronted with any female more than forty years of age. She scored frequent "hits" with this ploy, augmented by one of the common "outs" used when the patient would deny any trouble in that area: "I often call problems well before they develop," Sue would caution. "Sometimes the illness doesn't show up for several months—or years. But it's there, believe me."
Her escape from one particularly glaring boo-boo shows her versatility in the face of defeat and illustrates her cool approach. It happened with a rather proper-looking middle-aged woman who seemed determined not to listen to any nonsense. I recorded the conversation verbatim.
SUE: There is a problem with your right ovary.
PATIENT: Impossible. Impossible. My right ovary was removed about—
SUE: Don't tell me! [smiles] I'm telling you. There's a problem there. No mistake.
PATIENT: But it's removed!
SUE: Listen to me. These doctors take your money—you know?—and they do these operations, but they don't need to—you know?—and just because they cut out your ovary, I mean, the trouble is still there. I'm getting it....
PATIENT: Still there?
SUE: Let me try again. [She does the diagnostic procedure again] Yes, the trouble is there. A bit below the ovary. But I get it very strong.
PATIENT: Well, I don't know. I haven't had any problem. Not now.
SUE : Well, I get it very strong.
Note what has been done. Miss Wallace, faced with a decided contradiction, has to back up a bit and make some fast qualifications. She has a difficult subject, one who is not about to ignore mistakes and just go her way. This one wants results. Sue throws up the money-hungry doctor image—which she did several times during the long period I observed her at work—and then suddenly the problem is in the area of the right ovary rather than the ovary itself. She would not back down on her decision; she simply shifted the affliction's location a bit.
Almost invariably, Sue