to Coué’s devotees" (Yeates, 2016a, p. 19). "Most of us are so accustomed … to an elaborate medical ritual … in the treatment of our ills … [that] anything so simple as Coué’s autosuggestion is inclined to arouse misgivings, antagonism and a feeling of scepticism" (Duckworth 1922, pp. 3–4). According to Yeates (2016a, p. 18), although Coué never produced any empirical evidence for the efficacy of his formula and, therefore, his claims had not been scientifically evaluated, three subsequent experimental studies, conducted more than half a century later — i.e., those of Paulhus (1993) — "seem to offer some unexpected support for Coué’s claims". The psycho-medical establishment According to Yeates (2016a, p. 19), the protests routinely made by those within the psychomedical establishment (e.g., Moxon, 1923; Abraham, 1926) were on one or more of the following grounds: (1) "Healing of organic disease by 'self-mastery' was impossible! Aside from 'spontaneous remissions' of authentic disease (efficacious vis medicatrix naturæ!), reported 'cures' were either due to mistaken diagnosis (it was never that disease!), or mistaken prognosis (it was always going to get better!). Anyway, even if it had been diagnosed correctly, there was no compelling evidence to suggest that Coué’s approach had been in any way responsible for the cure." (2) "Even if it was true that, in some extraordinary circumstances, healing by 'self-mastery' was possible, Coué’s failure to immediately eliminate those with counterproductive limitations — such as, for example, those lacking the required dedication, mind-set, talent, diligence, persistence, patience, etc. — resulted in many (clearly unsuited) individuals mistakenly postponing (otherwise) life-saving operations and delaying (otherwise) radical medical treatment far beyond any prospect of recovery or cure." (3) "Despite the obvious fact that each 'disease' had a unique cause, a unique history, and a unique (and idiosyncratic) personal impact, Coué treated a wide range of disparate individuals in the same, single group session, in the same way; and, moreover, he treated them without any sort of detailed examination or differential diagnosis." (4) "The method’s central 'magical incantation' — a specific formula, uttered a specific number of times, in a special way, using a knotted string — aroused strong opposition, as it reeked of outmoded superstitious practices and beliefs." The Press While most American reporters of his day seemed dazzled by Coué's accomplishments, and did not question the results attributed to his method, a handful of journalists and a few educators were skeptical. After