In 1993, my appointment to the chair of complementary medicine at the University of Exeter caused much ink to flow, so much so that the university had organized a press conference. A reporter asked me what kinds of treatments I intended to study. I replied that as the only professor of complementary medicine in the UK, I felt I should focus on the most popular alternative therapies in the UK. This statement was later published in several national newspapers.
Shortly after, a complete stranger rang my doorbell. She explained to me that she was a spiritual healer and that she had come to discuss with me the studies on energy healing that I intended to conduct. “But I have no such plans,” I replied. “Oh, yes, you do. You said so yourself!” she replied. To my surprise, it turned out that she was right. At the time, the UK had more spiritual healers than other alternative practitioners. In fact, their number was almost as high as that of family physicians. As a man of my word, I began to think, somewhat reluctantly, about a clinical trial on the practices of these healers.
We started by bringing together a group of five highly reputable local energy companies who were willing to participate in a scientific trial. We asked them which disease they were best able to treat effectively. After some discussion, they all agreed on chronic pain and said they would need eight sessions to successfully reduce these symptoms. I then explained that I had no doubts that they were successful in relieving the pain, but that I wanted to check if the healing effect was superior to that of a placebo treatment.
Several long discussions followed to define what an adequate placebo was: it had to be indistinguishable from the energy healing we wanted to evaluate and not have a specific effect on pain. Eventually, we decided to recruit five actors who would perform the same ritual as the professional healers, but who had no knowledge or experience in healing. We then asked each of our five healers to teach their own ritual to the corresponding actor. Healing rituals can vary from healer to healer, but generally involve the practitioner’s hands moving over the patient’s body without touching it.
Once this stage was completed, panic took hold of our group of healers: they told us that during these teaching sessions, they had discovered that our actors also had healing powers. It was therefore likely that our study showed no difference between real healing and fake healing – not because the healing was ineffective, but because our actors were all gifted healers.
No difference between healers and placebo
Back at the drawing board, I had another idea for our study design: we could build a small cabin (about the size of a telephone booth) in our lab where healers would hide and practice their healing. at a distance of 2 meters from the patient. It would thus be possible to have a control group where, unbeknownst to the patient, the cabin would be empty and where no healer would be near the patient. Thus, the involuntary healing power of our actors would not interfere with the result.
After much discussion, we all agreed to conduct this randomized, controlled, double-blind study with four groups of patients with chronic pain, exposed in different groups to a healer visible to the patient, an actor visible to the patient, to a hidden actor in the cabin or to a fictitious cure with an empty cabin without the knowledge of the patient.
After obtaining a grant to fund the study, cooperation from our local pain clinic, and approval from our ethics committee, the trial began and ran for about a year. The results were then calculated by a blinded scientist. When the random code was opened, we were stunned. All groups experienced significant pain relief. Mean reductions in pain did not differ significantly between the four groups. The patients included in the control groups even obtained slightly better results than those who received treatment from a practitioner!
A mystical “energy” of healing
Our conclusion was “that a specific effect of face-to-face or distance healing on chronic pain could not be demonstrated during the eight treatment sessions in these patients”. Of course, our study does not necessarily mean that energy healing is ineffective. First, there are many forms of this type of treatment and, second, there is more evidence than our relatively small study.
In fact, energy healing is an umbrella term that covers a whole range of paranormal healing practices from different traditions, such as spiritual healing, faith healing, intercessory prayer, pranic healing, qigong and Reiki.
The common denominator is the belief in a mystical healing “energy” that can allegedly be used to facilitate the self-healing abilities of the diseased body. This “energy” is distinct from the concept of energy as understood in physics; it refers to a kind of “vital force” such as the chi in traditional Chinese medicine or prana in Ayurvedic medicine. It defies quantification and lacks biological plausibility. In other words, it goes against the science.
Incalculable damage
Despite – or perhaps because of – this implausibility, a surprising number of studies on energy healing have become available. Generally speaking, the best methodological trials fail to demonstrate that energy healing produces effects. better than a placebo. Rigorous systematic reviews that critically appraise the evidence from all of these studies tend to reach negative conclusions. Thus, the most recent data shows that the available evidence contradicts the idea that distant healing offers better results than a placebo. None of the benefits claimed by healers could not be demonstrated. No study has been able to determine whether the reiki is useful for people over the age of 16 with anxiety or depression, or both.
Even though energy healing itself is harmless – since “energy” doesn’t exist, it can’t hurt anyone – it can cause untold damage. Many tragic cases show that this is not just a theoretical concern. Take, for example, the recent case of parents who refused to give insulin to their eight-year-old diabetic daughterwhile recovering with the healing energy of God. Jason Richard Struhs, his wife Kerrie and ten other healers have been charged in the death of Elizabeth Rose Struhs. The child had gone several days without insulin before he died. The parents had decided to stop administering the treatment because their religious belief was based on the healing power of God and the refusal of any medical intervention in human life.
A medical expert told the court that Elizabeth reportedly spent her final days suffering from insatiable thirst, weakness and lethargy, abdominal pain, incontinence and the onset of impaired consciousness. As the child lay dying, the parents and ten other people in their religious group known as the “Saints” relied on the power of faith healing. They were also aware of the girl’s condition, but did not seek medical assistance.
These horror stories are poignant reminders of a lesson that I believe is crucial when considering so-called “mild” forms of alternative medicine: even seemingly harmless treatments can be life-threatening when used as alternative to effective health care. Unfortunately, energy healing is no exception to this rule.
Edzard Ernst is Emeritus Professor at the University of Exeter in the UK, where he specialized in the evaluation of alternative medicine. He is the author of numerous books including Don’t Believe What You Think: Arguments For and Against SCAM, Exeter Ingram Book Company, coll. Societas, 2020, 261 pages (untranslated), SCAM: So-Called Alternative Medicine, (untranslated) Exeter Imprint Academic, coll. Societas, 2018, 225 p.