Biofield energy healing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by (Username or IP removed) at 00:37, 4 November 2010 (→‎How healing may work: rewrite brockhampton citation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"Spiritual Healing" redirects here. For the album by the band Death, see Spiritual Healing (album).
This article is part of a series on
Alternative medicine
General information
Fringe medicine and science
Conspiracy theories
Classifications
Traditional medicine
Diagnoses

Biofield energy healing[1][2], also known as spiritual healing[3], are terms used to describe a number of techniques by which practioners intend to treat illness. Healing by therapeutic touch [4] and other practices such as Reiki[5] are known as biofield therapies[1]. The Chinese tradition of qigong[6] is claimed to be based on the control and manipulation of qi[6]. In addition to clinical trials of contact and distant healing, analysis techniques allow research to be conducted on in vitro samples which may be able to identify a mechanism by which healing works. Concerns about a lack of good quality data are frequently reported by trial reviews and individual trials.

Unlike faith healing, spiritual healing is not based on the belief that prayer and religious devotion can be used to obtain divine intervention in order to cure illness.

Introduction

This type of healing is based on the belief that a healer is able to channel healing energy into the person seeking help by different methods: contact[7] where the healers' hands are held just above the patient, and absent[8] (or distant) where the patient and healer are in different locations. It is claimed that this "healing energy" may sometimes be perceived as a feeling of heat[9] although this sensation could also derive from the heat radiating from the healers' body.

Spiritual healing is the term used on the website of the charity Macmillan Cancer Support, where it is classified as a "mind therapy"[7]. Macmillan say that healing "may be able to help people feel better and reduce symptoms or emotional distress ... or ... reduce side effects caused by cancer treatment."

Scientific Investigations

While faith in the supernatural is not in itself usually considered to be the purview of science, claims of reproducible effects are nevertheless subject to scientific investigation. Current research into biofield therapies is being conducted in a number of areas by different groups and these results are published in a number of journals.[10][11][12]

Distant healing

A systematic review of 23 trials of distant healing published in 2000, found mixed results, with 57% of the trials showing a positive effect of healing on health and also recommended further investigation.[10] In 2001, the lead author of that study, Edzard Ernst published an primer on complementary therapies in cancer care in which he reiterated the findings of the 2000 review that "about half of these trials suggested that healing is effective" but cautioned that the evidence was "highly conflicting" and that "methodological shortcomings prevented firm conclusions." He concluded that "as long as it is not used as an alternative to effective therapies, spiritual healing should be virtually devoid of risks."[13] A 2001 randomized clinical trial by the same group found no statistically significant difference on chronic pain between distance healers and "simulated healers".[12]

Contact healing

A Cochrane collaboration systematic review[14] of the use of touch therapies published in 2008 analysed the results of 24 trials and found that 12 (50%) showed a statistically significant effect in reducing pain, although there were concerns due to a lack of good quality data. A need for further research was noted.

A selective review of only positive results published by Hodges & Scofield in 1995 defined spiritual healing as possibly involving an "as yet unrecognized" form of energy.[15] Further research, in a 2001 randomized clinical trial[12] investigated the efficacy of spiritual healing (both at a distance and face-to-face) on the treatment of chronic pain in 120 patients. Healers were observed by "simulated healers" who then mimicked the healers movements on a control group while silently counting backwards in fives. The study found a decrease in pain in all patient groups but "no statistically significant differences between healing and control groups ... it was concluded that a specific effect of face-to-face or distant healing on chronic pain could not be demonstrated." However the study found an increase in the physical functioning component of a health-related quality of life measure (SF36) in patients who received healing compared to those who received "simulated healing".[16] A systematic review in 2008 concluded that the evidence for a specific effect of spiritual healing on relieving neuropathic or neuralgic pain was not convincing[17] and in their 2008 book Trick or Treatment, Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst concluded that "spiritual healing is biologically implausible and its effects rely on a placebo response. At best it may offer comfort; at worst it can result in charlatans taking money from patients with serious conditions who require urgent conventional medicine."[18]

Biological specimens

In 1995 Hodges & Scofield published a study which used the growth rate of cress seeds as their independent variable in order to eliminate a placebo response or participant bias. The results for each sample were consistent with the healers' intention that healing should or should not occur. However the healer involved in the experiment was a personal acquaintance of the study authors raising the possibility of experimenter bias.[15]

Research has been conducted into whether healing has beneficial effects on human cells in vitro. In one study, fibroblasts, bone and tendon cells grown in culture were subjected to either healing, sham healing or no treatment. The study, published in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, investigated the effect of different treatment patterns on the healing rates of these cell types and concluded that healing stimulated cell proliferation.[19] Another trial published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research by a different group compared the effect of healing on normal and bone cancer cells. The results of this trial were consistent with the suggestion that healing encouraged the growth of normal cells and reduced the progression of cancerous cells.[20] It should be noted that the positive reaction of cells to a healing treatment in vitro does not predict how they will react to the same treatment in vivo.

How healing may work

Several researchers have published papers[21][22] which suggest a number of mechanisms for the action of spiritual healing based on the concept of action-at-a-distance or non-locality. In a paper[22] Drew Leder suggests that there are four possible modes of action for distant healing, two from quantum mechanics and two based on relavity theory respectively:

  • Nonlocal entanglement, where the healer seeks some sort of connection with the patient based on imagery, compassion, gathering information, specific memories, or prayer
  • Actualization of potentials where the probability of healing is directed by the conscious intent of the healer towards a specific outcome
  • Energetic transmission model based on the intention by the healer to transfer a form of "healing energy" to the patient
  • The "path facilitation" concept derived from general relativity and the warping of spacetime by a planet as a cause of gravity - except that in this case there is a "spiritual field" from healer to patient. Patients who are most receptive to the healer may experience greater benefit

In his paper[21], Michael Hyland suggests that two different versions of the entanglement theory may explain healing and suggests testing methods based on predicting changes in outcome in naturally occurring contexts. The Brockhampton Reference guide to Spiritual healing[8] however describes healing in terms of the "energetic transmission" model described above.

Criticism

Skeptics of healing offer primarily two explanations for anecdotes of cures or improvements, relieving any need to appeal to the supernatural.[23] The first is post hoc ergo propter hoc, meaning that a genuine improvement or spontaneous remission may have been experienced coincidental with but independent from anything the healer or patient did or said. These patients would have improved just as well even had they done nothing. The second is the placebo effect, through which a person may experience genuine pain relief and other symptomatic alleviation. In this case, the patient genuinely has been helped by the healer, not through any mysterious or numinous function, but by the power of their own belief that they would be healed.[24][25] In both cases the patient may experience a real reduction in symptoms, though in neither case has anything miraculous or inexplicable occurred. Both cases, however, are strictly limited to the body's natural abilities.

See also

References

  1. ^ a b http://www.mdanderson.org/publications/network/issues/2007-fall/network-fall-2007-energy-medicines-will-east-meet-west-.html
  2. ^ Biofield Therapies: Helpful or Full of Hype?, International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, Volume 17, Number 1, 1-16, DOI: 10.1007/s12529-009-9062-4
  3. ^ Medical Journal of Australia
  4. ^ "Therapeutic Touch". Cancer.org. 2008-06-02. Retrieved 2010-09-20.
  5. ^ "Reiki Practice". Nccam.nih.gov. Retrieved 2010-09-20.
  6. ^ a b http://nccam.nih.gov/health/whatiscam/overview.htm
  7. ^ a b Mind Therapies Macmillan Cancer Support
  8. ^ a b Daulby, Martin; Mathison, Caroline (1996). Guide to Spiritual Healing. Brockhampton Press. p. 89. ISBN 1-86019-370-6.
  9. ^ Jules Evans (July 14, 2008). "Spiritual healing on the NHS?". London: The Times.
  10. ^ a b Astin, J. (2000). "The Efficacy of "Distant Healing: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials". Ann. Internal Medicine. 132 (11): 903–910. PMID 10836918. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |unused_data= ignored (help)
  11. ^ Ernst, Edzard (2001). "A primer of complementary and alternative medicine commonly used by cancer patients". Medical Journal of Australia. 174 (2): 88–92. PMID 11245510.
  12. ^ a b c Abbot, NC; Harkness, EF; Stevinson, C; Marshall, FP; Conn, DA; Ernst, E (2001). "Spiritual healing as a therapy for chronic pain: a randomized, clinical trial". Pain. 91 (1–2): 79–89. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00421-8. PMID 11240080.
  13. ^ Ernst, Edzard (2001). "A primer of complementary and alternative medicine commonly used by cancer patients". Medical Journal of Australia. 174 (2): 88–92. PMID 11245510.
  14. ^ So PS, Jiang Y, Qin Y (2008). "Touch therapies for pain relief in adults". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Online) (4): CD006535. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006535.pub2. PMID 18843720.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  15. ^ a b Hodges, RD and Scofield, AM (1995). "Is spiritual healing a valid and effective therapy?". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 88 (4): 203–207. PMC 1295164. PMID 7745566.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  16. ^ Shamini Jain & Paul J. Mills (2009). "Biofield Therapies: Helpful or Full of Hype? A Best Evidence Synthesis" (PDF). International Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 17 (1): 9. doi:10.1007/s12529-009-9062-4. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |DUPLICATE DATA: pages= ignored (help) Page 9.
  17. ^ Pittler, MH; Ernst, E (2008). "Complementary Therapies for Neuropathic and Neuralgic Pain: Systematic Review". Clinical Journal of Pain. 24 (8): 731–733. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e3181759231. PMID 18806539.
  18. ^ Trick or Treatment. Corgi. 2008. p. 388.
  19. ^ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18370579 J Altern Complement Med. 2008 Apr;14(3):233-9.
  20. ^ Ankur Jhaveri, Stephen J. Walsh, Yatzen Wang, MaryBeth McCarthy, Gloria Gronowicz (2008). "Therapeutic Touch Affects DNA Synthesis and Mineralization of Human Osteoblasts in Culture". J Orthop Res. 26 (11): 1541–6. doi:10.1002/jor.20688/pdf. PMID 18524012.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  21. ^ a b Hyland, ME (2004). "Does a form of 'entanglement' between people explain healing? An examination of hypotheses and methodology". Complementary therapies in medicine. 12 (4): 198–208. doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2004.10.002. PMID 15649833.
  22. ^ a b Leder, D (2005). ""Spooky actions at a distance": physics, psi, and distant healing". Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.). 11 (5): 923–30. doi:10.1089/acm.2005.11.923. PMID 16296928.
  23. ^ "Complementary and Alternative Therapies for Cancer Patients: Faith Healing". Moores UCSD Cancer Center. Retrieved 2008-01-17. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) "Benefits may result because of the natural progression of the illness, rarely but regularly occurring spontaneous remission or through the placebo effect."
  24. ^ Park, Robert L. (2000). Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud. New York, New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 50–51. ISBN 0-19-513515-6.
  25. ^ "Complementary and Alternative Therapies for Cancer Patients: Faith Healing". Moores UCSD Cancer Center. Retrieved 2008-01-17. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) "Patients who seek the assistance of a faith healer must believe strongly in the healer’s divine gifts and ability to focus them on the ill."

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biofield_energy_healing&oldid=394693884"