Health Studies 301 Complementary and Alternative Therapies

Study Guide: Unit 5

Energy Medicine

An Examination of Magnetic Therapy, Therapeutic Touch, and Related Therapies

Reiki session in progress. James Logan, 2011 CC BY-SA 3.0.

We now turn our attention to an area called energy medicine. Several forms of CAM therapy are based on a belief in energy fields. These are known by different names, including qi (chi) in traditional Chinese medicine, prana in ayurvedic medicine, and vital force in homeopathy.

Unit 5 represents a stark contrast with Units 3 and 4 in that there is a huge difference in the level of credibility of many of the claims being made. Whereas there is little difficulty in accepting that such interventions as meditation, biofeedback, music, and humour can affect various aspects of mental functioning, some types of energy medicine present an altogether different story.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of Unit 5, you should be able to

• explain the concept of energy medicine.
• discuss magnetic therapy.
• explain briefly the theory behind therapeutic touch.
• explain briefly the theory behind reiki.
• discuss the challenges in conducting research on the effectiveness of therapies in energy medicine.
• analyze the research available to demonstrate the effectiveness of magnetic therapy, therapeutic touch, and reiki.

Learning Activities

Study Questions

As you complete the activities for Unit 5, keep the following questions in mind. You may want to use the Personal Learning Space wiki on the course home page and answer these questions as a way of keeping notes to focus your learning.

1. Have correlations been established between subtle (putative) and electromagnetic (substantive) energy?
2. Do most energy medicine techniques assume that intentionality interacts with the effects of energy?
3. What are the challenges in conducting research to evaluate the effectiveness of energy therapies?

Unit 5 Discussion Forum

When you have completed the other activities for this unit, answer at least one of the questions in the Unit 5 Discussion Forum and respond to at least one post by a fellow learner.

The more questions you answer, the better prepared you will be for the final exam!

Read

In addition to the notes provided here, read in the textbook:

Micozzi, M. (2019). Fundamentals of Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine. Pages 52–64.

Pages 62–64 of the textbook look to quantum physics to help explain some aspects of energy medicine. We should remind ourselves of Ockham’s razor, a simple but valuable way to evaluate competing explanations for a set of observations. This concept was explained in Unit 2. Let us apply that principle to various observations in energy medicine.

While we cannot definitively rule out a role for quantum physics theory, we should start with the principle that the factors most likely to be responsible for observations are the well-established explanations that occur with many types of CAM therapies, most notably the placebo effect, the laws of chance, and the inaccurate recording of observations. Only when these are clearly shown to be inadequate explanations for the observations do we turn (hesitantly) to less plausible explanations, such as quantum physics. There is no reason to believe that quantum physics theory has any relevance to any of the therapies discussed in this course. The discussion of quantum physics is informative to the extent that it illustrates the tendency of many so-called experts in CAM to promote ideas that have extremely little supporting evidence.

Magnetic Therapy

Read textbook page 336 (from “Modern Medical Magnetism”) to page 337 (to “Field Penetration”).

The discussion on magnetic therapy (textbook page 57) provides solid evidence that this therapy is effective for relieving pain. Also read textbook page 338 (from “Clinical Observations and Effects”) to page 340 (to “Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields”). These two readings repeat some of this evidence regarding the benefits of magnetic therapy.

We must, of course, always be cautious before accepting that a therapy does indeed have an analgesic benefit, as relief from pain is often reported simply due to the placebo effect. However, the evidence supporting the benefit of magnetic therapy is based on numerous randomized trials of good quality.

Therapeutic Touch and Reiki

Micozzi, M. (2019). Fundamentals of Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine. Pages 234–235.

Therapeutic touch (TT) is based on the belief that a universal life energy sustains all living organisms and that this energy field has order and balance. In a state of health, life energy flows freely in, through, and out of the body in a balanced manner. But in disease, the flow of energy may be obstructed, disordered, or depleted. Through either touch or non-touch modalities, imbalances or disruptions in the human energy field are rebalanced. Healing touch is another type of energy medicine and is quite similar to TT. Both types of therapy were developed by nurses.

Reiki originated in Japan in the 1920s. Unlike with TT and healing touch, the practitioner does not attempt to manipulate the patient’s energy field. Rather, he places his hands gently on the patient or just above the body. The hands are not moved except to place them over another area. Reiki rests on the belief that healing energy arises from the practitioner’s hands as a response to the patient’s needs.

Based on the experiences of those receiving TT, the benefits include reduction of anxiety and stress, promotion of relaxation, a sense of well-being, reduction of pain, and promotion of healing. TT is considered to be an independent nursing intervention and does not require a doctor’s directive.

Research on Therapeutic Touch and Reiki

The crucial question we ask here is, Do TT or reiki achieve any of the benefits claimed by their practitioners?

A noteworthy study of TT was reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). This study was performed by a nine-year-old girl for a grade 4 science project (Rosa, Rosa, & Barrett, 1998). Her project involved 21 experienced TT practitioners. She showed that they were unable to detect the human energy field that TT claims exists. In her experiment, she invited 21 experienced practitioners to put both of their hands through holes in a cardboard screen. She flipped coins to determine whether to hold her hand near, but not touching, their left or right hands. If they were able to “feel” the presence of the body or to “sense” her biofield, then they would be able to tell her where her hand was. All practitioners asserted confidence that they would be able to do this. However, in repeated trials, none of them were able to correctly identify the location of her hand at a rate better than the 50–50 chance that random guessing would give them.

Rosa et al. (1998) concluded that the claims of TT are groundless and that further professional use of TT is unjustified. In reaction to the article, TT practitioners argued that the study design had several flaws. Letters to the editor of JAMA argued that TT practitioners in this study were expected to “perform” instead of using their five-step process; that TT practitioners use both hands, not one, and move their hands rather than holding them stationary; and that it is the intention to heal that is important, not whether practitioners can perceive human energy fields.

An especially interesting letter came from Blank (1998) who stated that, at the very least, TT offers the patient the full and unhurried attention of a caregiver, and that such attention is rare in our healthcare system and may be of value even if it works only by enhancing a placebo effect. This could be the vital clue that helps explain the success sometimes reported with such interventions as TT and reiki: if the therapies are, in reality, nothing more than an especially effective way to make people feel better by giving them more care and attention, then the reported benefits of employing these therapies in no way conflict with scientific knowledge.

Further insight comes from a systematic review of reiki carried out by vanderVaart, Gijsen, de Wildt, and Koren (2009). These authors came to a much less positive conclusion than did So et al. (2008). Whereas So et al. included three trials that focused on pain, this review looked at 12 controlled clinical trials that covered diverse medical conditions. The reviewers concluded that “[n]ine of the 12 trials detected a significant therapeutic effect of the reiki intervention.” But the authors then stated that “[t]he serious methodological and reporting limitations of existing reiki studies preclude a definitive conclusion on its effectiveness. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to address the effectiveness of reiki over placebo.”

Summary

Complementary and alternative medicine therapies cover a wide range: in some cases the therapies are based on a plausible theory and are supported by reasonably solid research evidence, but in many cases the proposed theory makes little sense, and research studies have given little support. This unit has provided examples of both types of therapy.

To accept that a magnetic field can affect the nervous system and thereby reduce pain is not in conflict with either the laws of physics or with current knowledge of human physiology. It is true that the mechanism by which exposing the body to a magnetic field brings about relief from pain is not understood. But as the nervous system functions through the movement of charged ions, it is entirely plausible that a magnetic field might affect it.

In sharp contrast, a completely different story emerges when we look at TT: this intervention is based on an unproven theory of a human energy field. How then should we interpret the evidence that TT and related therapies such as reiki may offer potential benefits, including the reduction of pain? A plausible explanation for this is that they are especially effective procedures for inducing the placebo effect. In addition, spending time with a person or giving attention to a patient can have therapeutic value. More research is needed to examine the theoretical basis of TT and reiki as well as the benefits and contraindications of these therapies.

Learning Activity

Self-test Quiz

Do the self-test quiz for Unit 5 as many times as you wish to check your recall of the unit’s main points. You will get a slightly different version of the quiz each time you try it. (This quiz does not count toward your final grade).

If you have trouble understanding the material, please contact your Academic Expert.

References