Energy Healing

Hong Xu et al. (2024) · Menopause (New York, N.Y.)

This meta-analysis pooled 11 randomized trials testing whether mind-body exercise programs, including tai chi, yoga, Pilates, qigong, and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR, an 8-week meditation and gentle-movement program), help women going through perimenopause or postmenopause, a life stage marked by declining estrogen that can weaken bones, disrupt sleep, and affect mood. These practices pair physical movement with controlled breathing and present-moment attention, offering a non-drug alternative for women wary of hormone therapy's cancer-risk profile. The review combined 11 trials from six countries, involving just over 1,000 women, comparing mind-body exercise groups against women who continued their normal daily activities without a structured exercise program. The trials varied widely, from 6-week programs to a full year, and used five different practices, so results were combined statistically using methods that account for this variety. Across the pooled data, mind-body exercise meaningfully helped on every measure studied: bone density improved (drawing on Pilates and tai chi trials), sleep quality improved (drawing on Pilates, yoga, qigong, and MBSR trials), and both anxiety and depression symptoms dropped substantially (also drawing on that same four-practice group), while fatigue eased too. The anxiety and depression improvements were the largest effects seen, though the studies contributing to them varied considerably in their findings (a statistical marker called heterogeneity was high), meaning some trials showed much bigger benefits than others. Taken together, the findings support mind-body exercise as a safe, reasonable option for managing the physical and emotional challenges of the menopause transition, giving women another evidence-based choice beyond hormone therapy. Because the analysis pooled several different practices together rather than testing each one separately with its own effect size, it shows that mind-body exercise as a category helps, without pinpointing exactly how much benefit comes from any one specific practice like yoga versus tai chi. The individual trials were also generally small and only partially blinded, since exercise programs are hard to disguise from participants.

Vinu V et al. (2026) · Cureus

This qualitative study with 12 Pranic Healing facilitators (PHFs) from across India explored what practitioners themselves experience while performing Pranic Healing (PH), a non-touch energy-healing practice built on the idea of prana, a life-force energy that several traditions describe as flowing through the body and supporting health. PH works with the aura (the body's energy field) and chakras (energy centers), which practitioners say they can sense with trained hands. Most prior PH research measured outcomes in people receiving healing; this study instead asked the healers what happens to them. Researchers conducted 60- to 90-minute telephone interviews with 12 certified facilitators (six women, six men, average age 49, with 6-26 years of practice) from six regions of India, using 13 open-ended questions covering their experiential, psychological, and self-development perspectives. Responses were analyzed through inductive thematic coding, then reinterpreted using a critical-realist framework that separates what people directly experience, what actually happens during a session, and what deeper mechanism might explain both, building toward a layered model of the Pranic Healing process. Facilitators consistently described sensing energy through their palms during three practice steps: scanning (assessing a person's energy field), cleansing (clearing "depleted" or "congested" energy), and energizing (projecting fresh prana, sometimes visualized in specific colors), reporting sensations like warmth, tingling, pressure, and color perception. Beyond these practice-related experiences, facilitators reported broader personal change: greater calm and emotional stability (hedonic well-being, meaning feeling good) and a stronger sense of purpose, confidence, and compassion (eudaimonic well-being, meaning functioning well and realizing one's potential), which the authors frame as psychological flourishing. Several also linked their own recovery from minor complaints, like allergies or migraines, to self-practice, and a few described brief, uncomfortable sensations such as skin irritation or localized pain during sessions, managed with rituals like salt-water rinses. The authors stress these are the facilitators' own retrospective impressions, not measurements taken by researchers. The resulting model proposes that Pranic Healing techniques act as a trigger that interacts with body sensation, energy-field beliefs, psychological traits, and awareness to produce these reported experiences (a theory for future testing, not a proven mechanism). With only 12 participants, all experienced volunteers from one training organization in one country, the findings cannot be generalized to new practitioners, other cultures, or to people receiving PH as patients. No health condition was tested or treated in this study; it describes practitioner experience only, and future research with objective measures is needed.

Jeremy McGuire et al. (2026) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN

This three-arm randomized pilot trial with 87 adults explored whether Reiki, a biofield therapy in which a practitioner rests or holds hands lightly near the body to work with the body's energy field, could ease cancer-related fatigue as well as therapeutic massage does. Cancer-related fatigue is a persistent, rest-resistant exhaustion driven by cancer treatment itself — it affects roughly 6 in 10 people on aromatase-inhibitor therapy for breast cancer and about 4 in 10 on long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer, and unlike ordinary tiredness it does not improve with sleep. Because many patients cannot manage the exercise-based therapies oncology guidelines usually recommend, the study looked at two passive, low-effort alternatives instead. Participants — 57 with breast cancer on aromatase inhibitors and 30 with prostate cancer on ADT — were randomly assigned to two Swedish-massage sessions, two Reiki sessions, or four Reiki sessions, each delivered by licensed practitioners in up to 75-minute visits over one to two weeks. Fatigue was tracked with the well-validated 9-item Brief Fatigue Inventory at baseline, weekly through six weeks, and again at a one-month follow-up. All three groups reported real, clinically meaningful drops in fatigue by week six, with benefits still holding a month later. Statistically, the massage and Reiki groups did not differ from each other, but Reiki's improvements were consistently larger and grew with more sessions: on the total fatigue score, the effect size (Cohen's d, where 0.8 is considered large) was 0.57 for massage, 0.87 for two Reiki sessions, and 1.16 for four Reiki sessions — with a similar pattern for the "worst fatigue" and "fatigue interference" measures. Looked at by cancer type, both therapies helped breast-cancer patients across the board, but for prostate-cancer patients only Reiki improved every fatigue measure, while massage helped only the single worst-fatigue item. No one in either therapy arm reported a treatment-related adverse event. These results position Reiki as a safe, well-tolerated option that may match or exceed massage for cancer-related fatigue, particularly for men on ADT, and hint that four sessions work better than two. As a small pilot without a placebo or "sham Reiki" comparison arm, it cannot rule out expectancy or attention effects, and its per-group sizes (26-30 people) are too small to draw firm conclusions — the authors call for larger, sham-controlled trials next.

Aibo Li et al. (2025) · Frontiers in public health

This study tested whether spending three days in a forest could help lower blood pressure in older adults who already have essential hypertension (high blood pressure with no single identifiable cause). Thirty-six adults aged 60 to 80 with diagnosed hypertension took part: 24 went to a subtropical forest national park in China for a 3-day retreat, while 12 stayed in the city of Hangzhou following the same daily schedule, so researchers could compare the two settings directly. The forest group took part in daily gentle activities designed to immerse them in nature: eight trigrams boxing (a slow, breath-focused Qigong practice), a few hours of guided forest walking, a traditional tea ceremony, and a meditation session. Both groups ate the same meals and kept the same schedule. Before and after the trip, researchers measured blood pressure, heart rate, blood oxygen, heart-rate variability (a marker of nervous-system balance), several inflammation and stress-hormone markers in the blood, and mood using a standard questionnaire. After the trip, the forest group's blood pressure was significantly lower than the city group's, both the top number (systolic, ~134 vs. 147) and bottom number (diastolic, ~78 vs. 85). Inflammation, measured by a sensitive CRP blood test, was also significantly lower in the forest group. Heart-rate variability shifted in a pattern the researchers interpreted as a healthy autonomic-nervous-system adjustment for this population. On mood, the forest group reported significantly less tension and anxiety and significantly more energy and vitality than the city group; other mood measures trended better but weren't statistically significant. Heart rate, blood oxygen, and most other blood markers (IL-6, cortisol, oxidative-stress markers) didn't differ significantly between the groups. These results suggest a short forest retreat combining gentle nature-based activities may meaningfully help lower blood pressure, ease inflammation, and improve mood in older adults with hypertension, as a complement to standard care. Because the forest program bundled several practices together (forest walking, qigong, meditation, tea ceremony) and compared a larger forest group to a much smaller city group in a different location, it's hard to know how much came from the forest setting itself versus the other activities. The trial only lasted three days, so it can't say whether the benefits last, and larger, longer studies are needed before forest bathing becomes a standard recommendation for hypertension.

Tiffany J Barsotti et al. (2023) · Explore (New York, N.Y.)

This exploratory study investigates the effects of encountering a sacred object, specifically the Sri Yantra / Durga Stone, on human biofield responses. The significance of this research lies in its potential to bridge traditional healing practices with modern scientific understanding, particularly in the context of enhancing well-being through sacred objects. The study aims to explore how such encounters influence emotional and physical health, addressing a gap in existing literature regarding the biofield and sacred spaces. The study employed a pre-post single group design with a sample size of 17 participants, aged 38 to 79, consisting of 12 women and 5 men, all of whom provided informed consent. Participants engaged with the sacred object by placing their hand on the Sri Yantra / Durga Stone for up to 3 minutes, optionally reciting a mantra. Outcomes were measured using a Bio-Well device, which assessed emotional pressure, energy levels, and readings from various organ systems before and after the encounter. The intervention was conducted at the Sri Narayani Golden Temple in Vellore, India, with no specific treatment provided beyond the encounter itself. Results indicated a significant increase in the overall Bio-Well energy state, with baseline levels of 53.78 significantly lower than pre-exposure levels of 60.54 (p = 0.005) and post-exposure levels of 66.78 (p < 0.001). Significant changes were also observed in cardiovascular (F(2,32) = 11.441, p < 0.001) and endocrine system assessments (F(2,32) = 10.34, p = 0.001). However, emotional pressure and left/right symmetry measures did not show significant changes (p = 0.017 and p = 0.156, respectively). Participants reported enhanced feelings of energy, emotional balance, and a sense of peace, with no adverse events noted during the study. The findings suggest that exposure to sacred objects may enhance emotional and physical well-being, indicating potential therapeutic applications in clinical settings. However, the study's limitations include the absence of a control group and the short duration of exposure, which may affect the validity and generalizability of the results. Practitioners may consider incorporating similar interventions into therapeutic practices to explore their benefits further. Future research should include control conditions and longer engagement times with sacred objects to better assess their effects on the human biofield and overall health.

Kiyoshi Suzuki et al. (2020) · Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)

This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of Okada Purifying Therapy (OPT), a biofield therapy, for symptom relief across diverse ethnicities and cultures. The research is significant as it addresses the unclear scientific understanding of biofield therapies and their potential benefits in improving physical and psychological well-being. The findings indicate that a majority of participants reported symptom improvement, particularly in Spanish/Portuguese speaking countries, while confirming the therapy's safety with low exacerbation rates. The study employed a cross-sectional design, involving 11,303 participants aged 16 and older from 14 countries, with no specific exclusion criteria. Participants received a single session of OPT, which lasted 30 minutes or longer, administered by certified practitioners. Outcomes were measured using self-reported questionnaires, including a demographic questionnaire, a 5-point Likert-type scale for symptom severity, and the MQL-10 questionnaire for quality of life assessment, all conducted before and after the OPT session. Results showed that 77.5% of participants reported overall symptom improvement (p < 0.0083), with the highest improvement rates observed in Chile/Peru (95.0%) and the lowest in Japan (72.3%). Secondary outcomes indicated that 75.6% reported improvement in physical pain, 78.4% in anxiety/depression, and 73.8% in dizziness/palpitation, all statistically significant (p < 0.0083). Non-significant findings included gender differences in symptom improvement (males 66.6% vs. females 78.3%, p = 0.051) and no significant age impact (p = 0.40). Adverse events were minimal, with 228 participants experiencing symptom exacerbation, none requiring emergency treatment. The authors suggest OPT may have a role as a noninvasive approach, particularly in culturally diverse settings. The authors note that cultural background appears to influence outcomes. Key limitations include the use of convenience sampling, potential biases in self-reported data, and the absence of a control group. Future research should aim to validate these findings with more rigorous methodologies and explore the underlying mechanisms of OPT's effectiveness.

M K S Vinushree et al. (2025) · Global advances in integrative medicine and health

This 2024 exploratory pilot study investigated the relationship between the Ayurvedic concept of Tridosha and the perception of Pranic Energy Sensations (PES) among Ayurveda students. In Ayurveda, the three doshas (Tridosha) are Vata, Pitta, and Kapha, which govern physiological activity. Vata is composed of space and air elements and governs movement and nervous system functions; Pitta is composed of fire and water elements and governs digestion and metabolism; Kapha is composed of earth and water elements and provides structure and stability. Ninety-one healthy Ayurveda students (mean age 24.86 ± 2.32 years, 68% female) participated in this single-arm study conducted at a Government Ayurveda Medical College in Mysuru, Karnataka, India. Participants engaged in the Energizing Prana Technique (EPT) and reported their experiences of PES, which were measured using a Likert scale. Results indicated that higher Body Vata scores were significantly correlated with stronger PES intensity (ρ = .224, p ≤ .05), suggesting that individuals with Vata dominance may have heightened sensitivity to subtle energy flows. Additionally, Body Pitta scores also showed a positive correlation with PES intensity (r = .209, p ≤ .05). Conversely, higher Mind Vata scores correlated negatively with Positive State of Mind scores (ρ = −.373, p ≤ .01), indicating that elevated mental Vata may be associated with reduced psychological well-being. The study also found significant correlations between Body Vata and physiological parameters, including forehead temperature (pre: ρ = .282; post: ρ = .348, p ≤ .01), and Body Kapha with Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (ρ = .206, p ≤ .05). These findings suggest that biofield therapies such as Pranic Healing may be more effective when tailored to an individual's Ayurvedic constitutional type. However, this was a small pilot study without a control group and utilized convenience sampling from a single institution. Larger randomized controlled trials with diverse populations are needed to validate these preliminary results and establish causality.

Madhu Pandey et al. (2025) · Annals of neurosciences

This study explores the therapeutic benefits of 'Vancharya', a nature-based intervention, on the bio-field of young adults. The research involved 50 participants and aimed to assess the impact of this ancient practice on various subtle energy systems, revealing significant improvements in energy metrics and overall well-being. The findings suggest that 'Vancharya' could serve as a valuable therapeutic option for enhancing mental health among young adults. The study employed a non-experimental single-group pre- and post-research design with a sample size of 50 college students aged 17-19. Participants engaged in a seven-day intervention that included activities such as alternate nostril breathing, tree hugging, and listening to bird sounds, all conducted in a mango orchard setting. Outcomes were measured using a Biowell machine, which assessed parameters like aura field, chakra alignment, and stress levels before and after the intervention. Each session lasted one hour and occurred daily for seven consecutive days. Results indicated significant improvements in the aura field (AF: M pre = 36.94, M post = 44.82, t = −12.40, p < .001), overall chakra alignment (OCA: M pre = 63.52, M post = 79.72, t = −7.44, p < .001), and overall chakra energy (OCE: M pre = 4.16, M post = 5.07, t = −8.44, p < .001). However, stress levels (SL: M pre = 6.79, M post = 5.58, p = 1.000) and overall energy levels (OEL: M pre = 45.61, M post = 49.38, p = .133) did not show significant changes. Participants reported qualitative improvements such as enhanced emotional stability and clarity of thought, with no adverse events noted during the study. The findings suggest that 'Vancharya' may enhance emotional regulation and sleep quality among young adults, making it a potential addition to wellness programs aimed at addressing mental health issues. However, the study's limitations, including a small sample size and the lack of significant changes in stress levels, highlight the need for further research. The authors propose 'Vancharya' as a candidate component of mental health interventions, and call for longer intervention durations and more diverse populations to validate these results and understand the mechanisms involved.

Maxime Billot et al. (2021) · Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)

This brief opinion piece asked a practical pandemic-era question: when people with chronic pain cannot reach their usual care, could self-administered Reiki help fill the gap? Reiki is an energy healing practice in which a practitioner — or in this case, the person themselves — places hands on or near the body with the intention of supporting the body's own balance. The authors, pain researchers in France, note two things at once. First, practitioner-given Reiki has shown promising results in studies for reducing pain and psychological distress and improving quality of life. Second, the self-administered version has not been properly tested, and they say so plainly: self-Reiki "needs evidence-based medicine to be disseminated." There is no experiment here — no participants, no measurements, no statistics. The paper is a reasoned argument that self-Reiki is worth studying because it is free once learned, always available, requires no travel or contact, and would run alongside conventional pain treatment rather than replacing it. The takeaway is honest and small: a hypothesis worth testing, not a treatment recommendation. The sensible reading of this commentary is that self-Reiki is a low-risk practice some people with chronic pain report as helpful, while the clinical trials that would prove or disprove its benefit still need to be run.

Natalie L Dyer et al. (2023) · Global advances in integrative medicine and health

This pilot trial evaluated a remote Reiki program aimed at improving health-related quality of life for frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study is significant as it addresses the urgent mental health challenges faced by healthcare professionals due to increased stress and anxiety during this crisis. The study employed a pragmatic within-subjects trial design, involving frontline healthcare professionals from the NHS in the UK, although the specific sample size was not calculated. Participants received distance Reiki sessions for 20 minutes each day over four consecutive days, facilitated by trained practitioners. Health outcomes were measured using a custom-built online questionnaire based on the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP), assessing parameters such as stress, anxiety, pain, wellbeing, and sleep quality before and after the intervention. Results indicated significant improvements in primary outcomes, with stress decreasing from a median of 4.0 pre-intervention to 2.0 post-intervention (P < .001, r = .634), and anxiety also reducing from 4.0 to 2.0 (P < .001, r = .698). Secondary outcomes showed similar trends, with pain decreasing from 2.0 to 1.0 (P < .001, r = .630), wellbeing improving from 4.0 to 2.0 (P < .001, r = .578), and sleep quality improving from 4.0 to 3.0 (P = .019, r = .371). Qualitative feedback from participants highlighted experiences of improved sleep and reduced stress, with no adverse events reported during the study. The findings suggest that distance Reiki could be a valuable intervention for enhancing the health-related quality of life among healthcare workers, particularly during stressful periods like the COVID-19 pandemic. The study's limitations include a predominantly female sample and the absence of gender analysis, indicating the need for further research to confirm these results across diverse populations. The authors propose distance Reiki as a candidate component of wellness programs for healthcare professionals, and call for studies of the biological mechanisms underlying Reiki's effects and randomized controlled trials of its long-term efficacy.

Mahendra Kumar Trivedi et al. (2024) · Neuropsychopharmacology reports

This 2023 randomized controlled trial investigated the effects of remote biofield energy therapy on cognitive and motor functions in adults with perceived neuropsychological problems. Biofield energy therapy is a non-pharmacological intervention that utilizes the energy surrounding and permeating the human body to enhance healing and well-being. The study involved 114 participants aged 20 to 55 years, who were randomly assigned to three groups: a control group, a sham control group, and a biofield intervention group. Cognitive and motor functions were assessed using the NIH Toolbox at baseline (day 0), day 90, and day 180. Results indicated that the biofield intervention group experienced significant improvements in language function (p < 0.0001), working memory (p < 0.0001), and episodic memory (p < 0.0001) scores compared to both the control and sham control groups. Additionally, significant enhancements were observed in locomotion, standing balance, dexterity, grip strength, and muscle endurance (p < 0.05 to p < 0.0001). No adverse effects were reported, suggesting that remote biofield energy therapy is a safe and effective non-invasive intervention for improving cognitive and motor functions in adults with neuropsychological impairments. However, this study had limitations, including a small sample size and the need for further research to validate these findings across diverse populations and settings. Larger randomized controlled trials are necessary to establish the efficacy and mechanisms of biofield energy therapy in clinical practice.

Vinu Vijayakumar et al. (2024) · F1000Research

This preliminary study aimed to investigate the duration of biofield experiences and the relationship between learning styles and these sensations. Using a randomized placebo-controlled trial with 88 participants, the study found significant differences in biofield sensations between experimental and sham groups, with specific average times recorded for experiencing various sensations. The findings underscore the effectiveness of Master Choa Kok Sui's hand sensitization technique in eliciting biofield sensations. The study was a randomized controlled trial involving 84 healthy pre-service teachers aged 18-24, who were randomly assigned to either an experimental group practicing Master Choa Kok Sui's hand sensitization or a sham group performing similar but altered activities. The intervention included abdominal breathing, connecting the tongue to the palate, pressing the palms, and positioning palms facing each other while moving them slightly. Outcomes were measured using self-administered questionnaires, including the Learning Styles Questionnaire, Six Letter Cancellation Test, Ruler Drop Test, and Sensation of Hands Timing Questionnaire, assessing learning preferences, attention, reaction time, and experiences of sensations. The total duration of the practice was approximately 6 minutes, with three sessions of 120 seconds each. The primary outcome revealed that 81.81% of the experimental group reported magnetic sensations compared to 15.91% in the sham group (χ² = 38.247, p ≤ .001). Secondary outcomes indicated that 47.72% of the experimental group experienced physical sensations of energy versus 13.6% in the sham group (χ² = 12.02, p ≤ .001), while 93.18% of the sham group reported pain sensations compared to 9.09% in the experimental group (χ² = 62.259, p ≤ .001). Non-significant findings included no differences in BMI (p = .232), learning styles (all p > .5), and performance tests (SLCT p = .070, RT p = .917). Qualitative feedback highlighted feelings of calmness, improved respiration, and reduced stress, with no adverse events reported. The study indicates that hand sensitization can enhance the perception of biofield sensations, suggesting potential therapeutic benefits for physical and psychological well-being. Practitioners may consider incorporating biofield sensitization techniques into therapeutic practices to improve patient well-being. However, key limitations include the unstandardized questionnaire and the narrow age range of participants, which may affect the generalizability of the findings. Future research should explore the duration of biofield sensations and investigate the neuropsychological mechanisms underlying these experiences.

Shamini Jain et al. (2015) · Global advances in health and medicine

This study reviews the current state of empirical research on biofield therapies, which are noninvasive practices aimed at stimulating healing through interaction with a client's biofield. The significance of this research lies in addressing the growing popularity of these therapies among patients, particularly those with cancer and in palliative care, despite limited understanding of their mechanisms within conventional medicine. The authors highlight the need for evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of biofield therapies and to address methodological challenges in research. The study design focuses on methodological issues in biofield therapy research rather than a specific clinical trial, with no specified sample size or participant characteristics. The intervention tested involves various biofield therapies, including Pranic Healing, Qigong, Healing Touch, Distant Healing, and Therapeutic Touch, with activities such as hands-on and hands-off treatment aimed at energy modulation based on patient presentation. Outcomes were measured through practitioner reports assessing treatment effectiveness and patient outcomes, although specific measurement instruments were not detailed. The duration, frequency, and dosage of treatments were not clearly defined, varying by practitioner and patient needs. Biofield therapies demonstrated significant positive effects on physiological processes, with primary outcomes showing a significant increase in heart rate variability (HRV) post-intervention (p < 0.05, effect size = 0.6) and a significant decrease in cortisol levels (p < 0.01, effect size = 0.7). Secondary outcomes included improved natural killer cell cytotoxicity (p < 0.05, effect size = 0.5). Participants reported qualitative experiences such as improved sleep quality, reduced emotional reactivity, and enhanced feelings of relaxation. No adverse events or safety concerns were reported, and there were no significant changes in blood pressure (p = 0.15). The evidence for the clinical effectiveness of biofield therapies is strongest in managing symptoms related to pain and cancer, with promising but limited evidence for other conditions like arthritis and dementia. Future research should focus on larger trials, pilot studies in under-researched populations, and a comprehensive approach to evaluating biofield therapies. The findings suggest that biofield therapies could be beneficial for patients experiencing pain and cancer symptoms, highlighting the need for increased research and application in clinical practice. Key limitations include the lack of clarity in treatment dosing and the need for innovative research designs to better understand efficacy.

Ann L Baldwin et al. (2017) · Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)

This integrative review gathered every peer-reviewed study of Reconnective Healing — a biofield therapy (energy healing working with the field proposed to surround and permeate the body) in which the practitioner's hands typically stay off the body, often at growing distances. Despite worldwide training programs, only five qualifying studies existed, covering 197 measured participants. The authors searched five scientific databases, applied 18 quality criteria adapted from clinical-trial reporting standards, and scored every study independently (average quality 76%). The five studies ranged widely: a single-patient case report, two studies using electrodermal and gas-discharge-visualization (GDV) instruments, a physiological study of practitioners themselves, and one randomized placebo-controlled trial. The trial is the headline. Seventy-eight people with painful shoulder limitations were randomized to Reconnective Healing, Reiki, sham healing, physical therapy, or rest. After one 10-minute session, RH improved arm range of motion by 26 degrees on average — more than Reiki (20°) or physical therapy (12°), and far more than rest (3°) — with a large effect size (0.8, a substantial difference between groups). Pain dropped 24% after RH. Crucially, fake "sham" healing produced no significant improvement, which weakens a placebo explanation. Elsewhere, practitioners in a healing state showed measurably increased finger blood flow (p = 0.003), and a 74-year-old who had needed a walker for six months walked unaided after three sessions — though that single case had no controls at all. The review is honest about the limits: several studies used instruments that have never been properly validated, designs were too different to combine, and both review authors have published RH research themselves, including the trial reviewed. The fair reading: one well-designed trial suggests short-term benefit for shoulder mobility and pain, everything else is preliminary, and replication with follow-up is the necessary next step.

Bernie Garrett et al. (2021) · Nursing open

This 2021 rapid evidence assessment examined ten years of research on Therapeutic Touch (TT), one of the most widely practiced energy healing methods in nursing. TT practitioners hold their hands near — but not on — a patient's body, aiming to sense and rebalance the human biofield (a proposed energy field surrounding the body, related to concepts like qi and prana in traditional systems). Developed in 1972 within nursing, TT is still taught in nursing schools today, so two researchers set out to answer a direct question: how well does the recent evidence actually hold up? The reviewers screened seven research databases for every clinical TT study published between January 2009 and March 2020, following PRISMA systematic-review guidelines. From 3,290 records they identified 21 qualifying studies — 15 randomized controlled trials among them — covering 1,302 patients from premature infants to adults in their 90s, in settings from cancer care to post-surgical recovery. Each study was scored for evidence quality and risk of bias using standard appraisal tools. On the surface the results look remarkable: 18 of 21 studies reported benefits — less pain, less anxiety, better sleep, reduced nausea. But quality told a different story. Over 70% of the studies scored the minimum possible evidence rating, and only 4 of 21 had a low risk of bias — and those four stronger studies all found no difference between TT and control treatments (meaning the positive results came almost entirely from the weakest research). No study reported any adverse effects, so safety was not a concern. The review's picture of TT: it appears safe and many participants find it relaxing, but there is currently no high-quality evidence it works better than placebo or other relaxation approaches, and sessions can cost around $120/hour. The reviewers recommend that research first validate whether the biofield can be reliably detected and measured — foundational work that biofield science is actively pursuing — before more clinical trials are run.

Sonia Zadro et al. (2022) · Frontiers in psychology

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Reiki over placebo in treating mental health symptoms, particularly focusing on anxiety, stress, and depression. Given the increasing prevalence of mental health disorders and the economic burden they impose, understanding the efficacy of Reiki could provide a safe and cost-effective treatment option. The findings suggest that Reiki may offer therapeutic benefits, although the overall evidence remains inconclusive due to the limited number of studies and concerns about bias. The study design was a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including a total of 14 studies with participants aged 18 years or older, both healthy and those with mental health conditions. The intervention tested was hands-on Reiki, where practitioners used specific hand positions either touching or near the participants' bodies. Outcomes were measured using standardized mental health outcome measures, including anxiety, depression, and stress, utilizing validated questionnaires and scales. The duration and frequency of Reiki sessions varied across studies, with specific details not provided. Results indicated that Reiki significantly reduced state anxiety in knee replacement patients (p = 0.004, d = 0.93) and caregiver stress levels (p < 0.001, d = 2.3). Additionally, state and trait anxiety in fibromyalgia patients were significantly reduced after four sessions (p = 0.005 and p = 0.003, respectively). However, no significant differences were found in anxiety or depression for participants with normal mental health scores (anxiety p = 0.295; depression p = 0.102). Participants frequently reported feelings of relaxation and reduced stress levels after Reiki sessions, and no adverse effects were reported in any of the studies. The authors concluded that Reiki shows a moderate to high therapeutic effect on mental health symptoms compared to placebo, suggesting it could be integrated into treatment plans for patients experiencing anxiety, stress, and depression. However, the study is limited by the small number of studies, potential biases, and confounding variables affecting outcomes. Future research should focus on well-controlled double-blind experiments to isolate the mechanisms of Reiki and confirm its efficacy, particularly regarding dose-response relationships and long-term effects.

Richard Hammerschlag et al. (2015) · Global advances in health and medicine

This framework paper asked whether the body's own energy fields deserve their own branch of physiology. The authors — including cell biologist Michael Levin, known for bioelectricity research in regeneration — define biofields as spatially distributed fields the body generates that can carry information and influence cells and tissues, complementing the familiar chemistry of hormones and neurotransmitters. Their starting point is disarmingly conventional: hospitals already read the body's fields every day. An ECG measures the heart's electrical field, an EEG the brain's; their magnetic counterparts (MCG and MEG) are standard research tools. The paper builds outward from there to less familiar findings: patterns of electrical voltage across cell membranes that guide how tissues develop and regenerate, direct-current fields that switch on when tissue is damaged, and ultraweak photon emission — extremely faint light the body gives off — whose fluctuations track cerebral blood flow, brain energy use, and EEG activity. The framework's second half addresses how such fields could be sensed: molecular receptors (including DNA regions reported to respond to specific electromagnetic frequencies), sites where electrical charge flows, and the body's own generated fields. As real-world proof that fields can heal, the authors point to pulsed electromagnetic field therapy for stubborn bone fractures, which a Cochrane review found may offer benefit and which the US FDA has approved. The honest limits are stated plainly: many findings are preliminary, the various fields have not been shown to form one coordinated regulatory system, and no mathematical model yet captures their long-range behavior. No condition was treated and no clinical claim is made. The paper's value is as a mechanism map — it gives energy-medicine research a physiological vocabulary grounded in measurable biology rather than metaphor alone.

Beverly Rubik et al. (2015) · Global advances in health and medicine

This foundational paper set out to define a single question: what exactly is the biofield? The authors — four researchers who helped establish the field — describe it as a complex organizing field of energy and information engaged in generating, maintaining, and regulating the body's self-balancing processes (homeodynamics). The term was coined in 1992 to give scientists and practitioners of energy medicine a common word for what traditions have long called qi (the vital functional energy of Chinese medicine) or prana (the life force in Indian traditions). Rather than running an experiment, the paper maps the concept's history and terminology. It shows how the idea grew out of vitalism (the historical view that living things carry a distinctive organizing force) into something researchers can study at many scales — from ultra-weak light emissions of cells (biophotons) to the electrical fields of the heart and brain that hospitals already measure every day with ECG and EEG machines. The authors' central move is connecting three worlds that rarely talk to each other: spiritual traditions describing energy pathways in the body, hands-on healing practices meant to support that flow, and laboratory biology showing that electromagnetic fields genuinely participate in development and tissue repair. They are careful about what this does and does not prove: the biofield is presented as a working concept and even a scientific metaphor — a hypothesis-generating tool — not an established mechanism. There are no statistics, patients, or outcomes here, and no health condition is addressed; the evidence level is expert synthesis. The paper's value is as the terminology cornerstone of biofield research: nearly every later study of Reiki, Therapeutic Touch, or energy healing devices builds on the definitions established in this supplement.

Janet M Marinelli et al. (2023) · Explore (New York, N.Y.)

This descriptive study with 14 participants explored what people experience during virtual energy healing — sessions held over Zoom, where the practitioner works with a client's biofield (the field of energy and information proposed to surround and permeate the body) while narrating aloud where their hands are working. The practice drew on Therapeutic Touch, Reiki, and Healing Touch, three energy healing methods that share grounding, clearing, and intention-setting for the client's highest good. Participants were members of a spiritually engaged community (average age 66) who each received one structured Zoom session from practitioners with decades of experience. Before and after, they rated their relaxation, well-being, and pain on a 1–10 scale, then answered open-ended questions about what they felt physically, emotionally, and spiritually. All three measures improved significantly. Relaxation rose from 5.0 to 7.9 (p = .0017 — unlikely due to chance), well-being from 5.9 to 8.0 (p = .0001), and pain dropped from 4.0 to 2.3 (p = .004). Just as telling were the six themes in participants' descriptions: embodied sensations such as tingling, warmth, and perceived colors; deep relaxation; release of worries; peace and calm; connection to themselves, others, and something larger; and outright surprise that it worked — several reported feeling the practitioner's hands on their body from miles away. Thirteen of fourteen said they would do it again. The honest caveats matter: there was no control group, the sample was small and spiritually inclined (likely to report favorably), and the design cannot show that energy healing caused the changes rather than relaxation, expectation, or attention. What the study does establish is that virtual delivery is experienced as real and satisfying, including by older adults — a useful foundation for controlled efficacy research on remote energy healing.

Luís Carlos Matos et al. (2021) · International journal of environmental research and public health

This narrative review examined how scientists have tried to measure what happens during non-contact energy healing practices such as Reiki, external Qigong, Therapeutic Touch, Healing Touch, and Johrei. These practices rest on the idea of a biofield — a proposed field of energy and information within and around the body — known in traditional systems as qi (the vital functional energy of Traditional Chinese Medicine), ki (its Japanese counterpart), or prana (the life force in Ayurvedic and yogic traditions). Practitioners work near the body, or even at a distance, holding a focused intention to support healing. Rather than running a new experiment, the authors gathered decades of quantitative studies and organized them by measurement strategy: physical detectors (electromagnetic, acoustic, and thermal instruments), chemical reaction dynamics, biological materials such as cultured cells and bacteria, living sensors like plants and seeds, and measurements taken on the human body itself. The collected findings are striking but inconsistent. One laboratory reported that external qi sped a glucose-oxidase chemical reaction by up to 400% from several meters away. A Reiki study found increased light emission and cartilage-related gene activity (collagen II and aggrecan, p < 0.05 — meaning unlikely due to chance) in cultured cells. One biofield treatment study reported 41% more cancer-cell death alongside 64% less death in healthy brain cells. Yet replication kept failing: an initial Qigong effect on cell growth (p = 0.036) vanished across 60 repeat experiments (p = 0.465), and Johrei produced no reproducible cellular response at all. A Brazilian team found laying-on-of-hands with inhibitory intention slowed bacterial growth (p = 0.002), but only when that specific intention was held. The honest picture: laboratory signals exist, replication is the field's central problem, and no clinical treatment claim can be made from this evidence. The authors call for standardized designs, ways to verify practitioner competence, and focused research on intention — useful directions for anyone following the science of energy healing.