What data? The clinic paper cited doesn't present any relevant data, it is a review after all, at least I assume it was the review that was being cited rather than the unsuccessful prayer study or the editorial. It is arguable whether atheists are neccessarily not spiritual, I would assume that they aren't religious almost by definition. Since the review addresses religious involvement and the benefits of spiritual support for patients rather than simply professed beliefs as a determining variable in illness it is hard to see how you feel they justify your claims about atheism, similarly looking at the reference given for the 850 studies doesn't help as all that article itself contains is a reference to a book, perhaps if I bought the book I could actually find the data or maybe I'd have to look through all of the original 850 studies before I really knew what the variables the studies addressed were.
The vitz paper is simply a pick and choose exercise in anecdotal evidence.
TTFN,
WK
™ Version 4.2