Biofield Therapy and the Path towards Mainstream

The understanding and awareness of the biofield and biofield therapies such as Reiki, energy chelation, and Biofield Tuning can build a foundation for needed future studies identifying how these complementary practices may reduce stress and disease-related symptoms, and potentially optimize one’s own immune system (Jain, 2021). With this understanding, what if individuals could regulate their own biology? For example, how does practicing daily self-Reiki affect stress levels and ultimately one’s immune system? A full comprehension of the biofield is necessary for this exploration and the effort to advance biofield therapies.

Biofields (see Figure 1) can be broadly viewed as sets of interacting and interpenetrating fields of information and energy; some electromagnetic and others more subtle in nature (Jain, 2021). The term biofield was coined by the Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 1992 (Rubik et al., 2015). In looking at therapies such as Reiki and acupuncture these modalities were recognized by the OAM as being based on the vital force. Hundreds of years ago, Western science rejected the idea of vital force, even though vital force, or élan vital, is central to nearly all indigenous wisdom and knowledge. Vital force is largely considered the “quintessence of life” (Rubik, 2015, p. 83). With recent discoveries in epigenetics, energy medicine, and mind-body science, the dominant biomedical paradigm is being challenged (Rubik, 2015).

The OAM developed the universal term, biofield, as it scientifically captured the essential organizing biological field for these vital force-based modes of healing (Rubik et al., 2015). Rubik (2015) has expanded the definition of biofield and suggested:

The biofield as nature’s original “wireless” communication system, in which the field is complex and dynamic, like a moving hologram, conveying information throughout the

organism and the central regulator of homeodynamics [sic], the steady state behavior that changes as the organism integrates new information. (p. 90)

Figure 1

The Biofield (Barsotti, 2022)

Rubik (2015) also connects consciousness to the biofield in various ways. Consciousness can be defined as primordial intelligence which expresses itself as energy and information in every experience, all the way down to the human cell (Currivan, 2022). Consciousness presents as “sensations, perceptions, images, feelings and thoughts that we interpret as mind, body, and world” (Chopra, 2021, p. 2). The endogenous biofield of the body can be viewed as the bridge between mind and body (Rubik, 2015).

Rubik (2015) posited that through conscious intent, such as affirmation or prayer, the biofield can be influenced because “it denotes a higher level of being” (p. 91). Thought and intention, therefore, can cause changes in the biofield and eventual shifts in physiology and biochemistry. Biofield science supports the notion of electromagnetic bioinformation, and that information affects life functions. According to Jain (2021) we are “bioelectromagnetic beings” (p. 18). Biofield therapies act informationally with the use of subtle energetic stimulation, matching in intensity to the biofield itself, and can provide integral positive effects. With the concept of consciousness at play, the biofield can also be defined as “a field of energy and information that reflects and guides the homeodynamic [sic] regulation of a living system, and as such influences and is influenced by consciousness” (Jain et al., 2015, p. 6).

The OAM also successfully submitted the term biofield as a Medical Subject Heading (MeSH term) at the National Library of Medicine making it an official search term for scholars and a topic of research interest (Rubik et al, 2015). Research has brought forward theories on how biofield therapies work and analysis of their potential efficacy.

Biofield Mechanism Theories

Most skeptics conclude that literature reporting biofield therapies as having positive outcomes are poorly conducted, or only shows evidence of placebo (Ernst, 2007). However, a systematic review found that Reiki biofield therapy, for example, is better than placebo through analyzing available clinical studies (McManus, 2017). The findings indicated that Reiki shifts the autonomic balance towards parasympathetic dominance and that physiological measurements show Reiki as more effective than placebo in increasing heart rate variability and decreasing resting heart rate and blood pressure (McManus, 2017). These effects are likely driven by Reiki’s power to activate the parasympathetic nervous system and increase heart rate variability, which can be understood in terms of the neurovisceral integration model and the polyvagal theory (McManus, 2017). Hence, what might be considered a placebo effect might actually reflect biofield shifts caused by biofield therapy (Jain, 2021). Exploring the notion of nested fields or systems and quantum entanglement expands this theory.

Living systems, according to Rubik (2015), are complex, dynamic, non-linear, and self-organizing at a universal level. Within this larger system, information is in constant exchange on multiple levels, thereby maintaining existence. Organisms are metaphorically exquisitely sensitive antennae for subtle, natural electromagnetic fields. It is these natural fields where life is interconnected to the environment in which it exists, as well as all the organisms within it. This form of entanglement between fields establishes an interdependent system where nonlocal regulating information can be transferred (Jain, 2021). “Entanglement allows a natural self-healing process to occur which is otherwise prevented by a local attractor in the unhealthy person’s system—rather like shaking up a system so it can resettle in a new way” (Hyland, 2004, p. 203). In biofield therapies and through the theory of entanglement, the healer is able to transfer nonlocal regulating information into the client’s system because both the healer and client have recognition of being within the same larger system (Hyland, 2004).

One specific concept of the biophysical field, proposed by Fröhlich, is also based on quantum physics, specifically coherent oscillations (Rubik, 2015). The physical state of coherence is where all parts of an organism oscillate simultaneously creating long-range dynamic order, with the particles being communal and inseparable. Rubik offers the example of dynamic coherence as a stage full of ballet dancers simultaneously, and repeatedly pirouetting in unison.

Another piece of Fröhlich’s model is quantum electrodynamics (QED) which involves hypothetical nanostructures in water called coherent domains (Rubik, 2015). These coherent domains create dynamic order over distance, from intracellular to the entire system, and behave as antennae for exogenous fields. Given that the human body and many other organisms are made up of at least 70% water, Rubik posited that the QED theory of water may “underlie the dynamic organization of life itself” (p. 88).

According to Fröhlich’s coherent modes, living organisms produce subtle photon emissions called biophotons (Rubik, 2015). Biophotons have been shown to be involved with intracellular communication and communication between organisms. There is preliminary evidence that biophoton emission measured by energy healers and their clients changes before, during, and after a session, leading to a possible cause of energy healing. Essentially, through entanglement and resonance, harmony and order can be brought back to an organism’s system and create regulation and healing.

Biofield Therapy and Health

Lipton (2022), a cell biologist, contended that stress hormones are a major cause of disease, produced by simply living in this world. Lipton shared that stress chemistry shuts down the immune system, but one can learn to self-regulate their own biology. Stressful situations and events are globally prevalent from natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, and tsunamis, to those caused by humans like war, terrorism, and mismanagement of our planet’s resources (Halbreich, 2021). Additionally, COVID-19 has created more severe stressors that have manifested as many new and diverse mental and physical symptoms (Halbreich, 2021). Since stress is related to most illnesses and our global environment is continuously getting noisier, then explorations that support the evolution of the existing Western paradigms of the science of healing are necessary (Bukowski, 2015). For example, preliminary studies on lab mice indicated that biofield therapies can reduce cancer spread and reduce the growth of cancer tumors (Jain, 2021). This intriguing data adds to the solid groundwork of biofield therapies and calls for more research. Rubik (2015) reported that studies have shown energy healing to have beneficial effects on cellular systems, and as such establishes biofield therapies as advantageous to organisms beyond placebo effects, stressing the importance of the biofield in medicine. This paper shares a few examples to illustrate how biofield therapies are currently being researched.

Self-Reiki

One such study was designed to explore the effects of a self-Reiki protocol for a group of 20 college students (Bukowski, 2015). Reiki is a Japanese system of energy healing that has been used for over 2,500 years and involves the transfer of energy from the practitioner to the recipient thereby facilitating and activating their own healing system. Unlike most studies on Reiki, the Reiki in this research was self-administered instead of having a healer and a client. The researcher’s hypothesis was “self-Reiki would decrease stress levels and promote relaxation in college students” (Bukowski, 2015, p. 337).

Participants were attuned to Reiki level 1, given instructions, and shown hand positions for performing self-Reiki twice a week for 20 weeks (Bukowski, 2015). The valid and reliable Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) was used as the method for collecting data. There was a significant decrement in stress levels from pre-study to post-study confirming the researcher’s hypothesis that the use of self-Reiki promotes relaxation. In this case, individuals were able to influence their own biofield and bring about regulation in terms of stress levels.

Reiki

Abdurahman and Payne (2022) explored the impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on the experience and projected future of Reiki as perceived by practitioners through a qualitative study. The researchers positioned Reiki as a sought-after nonpharmacological, complementary, and alternative medicine, and as such a potential key in integrative care. Reiki and self-Reiki benefits include decreased anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain, and stress. For example, self-care or self-Reiki has been proven to reduce stress and burnout in nursing students. According to the authors’ research, another study found significant improvements in stress for recipients of distant Reiki during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Abdurahman and Payne (2022) designed a qualitative study that employed semi-structured interviews. The investigators drafted five open-ended questions with a series of prompts for each inquiry. The participants consisted of 10 Reiki practitioners, all female except one male, drawn from a pool that followed specific criteria: 18 years or older, based in the UK, English speaking, and practiced both hands-on and distant Reiki healing services. The recorded interviews took place via Zoom or by phone. Once the transcripts were created, the researchers used Thematic Analysis to identify three main themes: “1) adapting and growing with the challenges of COVID-19, 2) Reiki for individual and community resilience, 3) moving from mainstream hands-on to the lesser known distance Reiki” (p. 3). Along with quoted narratives from the participants, these themes were expounded on and included subthemes, such as acceptance, balance, innovation, personal development, and broadened community.

The researchers’ findings showed that, at least within this small group size, Reiki practitioners successfully turned adversity into opportunity. Adaptability was the overarching theme and key insight that is meaningful to Reiki practitioners and people in general. Qualitative research is a valid means for gathering psychological, emotional, and intellectual information about the lived experience of Reiki biofield healing.

Energy Chelation

Jain et al. (2012) explored the effects of energy chelation, a biofield healing technique similar to Reiki, on cancer-related fatigue (CRF) for breast cancer survivors. Energy chelation is channeling healing energy into the human body and its biofield to clear blocked energy and draw out impurities. Making corrections in the field through chelation catalyzes a corresponding change in the body. The researchers reported that CRF is the most frequently listed and most troubling side effect associated with cancer, cancer treatment, and the residual side effects experienced in survivorship. Further, breast cancer patients and survivors seek out complementary and integrative medicine approaches across the US. Patients have reported that biofield therapies enhance the quality of life physically, emotionally, and spiritually, as well as decrease stress and enhance the immune system.

The investigators performed a 4-week, randomized controlled trial with intention-to-treat fatigued breast cancer survivors (Jain et al., 2012). Of the 80 participants, 30 received mock healing, 30 received biofield healing, and 20 made up the control group. Several quantitative measures were used including the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-short form, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale-revised, as well as saliva collections for cortisol levels information. The results showed a significant decrease in fatigue over time for the biofield healing group as compared to the sham and control groups. According to the authors, the results suggested biofield healing may be a successful intervention for mitigating CRF but noted that factors such as touch and rest could contribute to relief.

Biofield Tuning

Hammerschlag et al. (2020) studied practitioners of Biofield Tuning and analyzed the inter-rater agreement (IRA) scores during this study. The wellness status of a Biofield Tuning client is assessed by noting off-the-body biofield perturbations using vibrations from a tuning fork (TF). Biofield Tuning regards molecules, cells, tissues, and organisms as dynamic forms that create and respond to information-carrying signals allowing for a rebalancing of perturbations. According to the Biofield Tuning perspective all mental, physical, and emotional disorders can be detected as perturbations in the biofield. Biofield Tuning gives the practitioner the ability to locate and resolve a perturbation, and in doing so, alleviate the corresponding mental, physical, or emotional symptoms.

This research tested inter-rater agreement on the detected perturbations’ location (Hammerschlag et al., 2020). Practitioners used 174 Hz TF to “comb” the identified four sites of each of the 10 research subjects, then distances were recorded. The study concluded that the IRA was low and suggested this was likely due to the constraints of research versus the real-world experience of Biofield Tuning. This raises an interesting point, designing a quantitative study that provides scientific evidence in an artificial environment can be challenging. As little interruption of a biofield therapy as possible is required to obtain authentic results. This study also shows that collaboration between biofield practitioners and researchers is valuable in considering the next steps for subsequent studies.

Impediments to Mainstreaming Biofield Therapies

Barriers to mainstreaming biofield therapies into the current healthcare paradigm need to be addressed for these integrative modalities to take a rightful place in comprehensive healthcare. Hufford et al. (2015) offered several characteristics of biofield therapies that create resistance. First, the terminology used with biofield science (e.g., subtle energies) does not fall within the ontology of conventional science which results in demarcation issues. Not only is biofield science considered outside the bounds of science, but it is also considered pseudoscience. Second, biofield modalities became popular more quickly with the general public than with scientists. This tends to support the pseudoscience label and demarcation. Third, the use of the word “spiritual” within energy healing practices clearly moves it to the nonmaterial realm and further away from conventional materialism.

Science denies religion, in using the word spiritual fundamentally creates a barrier to going beyond the fringe of mainstream medicine (Hufford et al., 2015). Another impediment is the vitalist perspective. Traditional science sees vital force without merit in explaining life sciences putting the biofield at odds with biomedicine. And lastly, and perhaps because of the aforementioned characteristics, biofield healing has been criticized for lacking an academic infrastructure in which theory and practice can thoughtfully grow.

Despite the resistance, to continue evolving as a species will necessitate gaining knowledge of the many layers of consciousness; especially the subtle realms that are not visible to our ordinary human eyes (Singh, 2013). In support of this Singh posited, “In modern times the pursuit of knowledge has come a full circle, and the time has come to pursue the ancient science once again” (p. 101). A more complete approach to the whole being can be found by transcending the current polarizing worldview and dropping the binaries.

Conclusion

The recognition of the biofield rose from the vitalist foundation, but according to researchers like Rubik (2015) and Jain (2021), it is becoming strongly established in science. The vital force has been identified as the source of consciousness, evolution, self-regulation, and the inherent healing abilities of living organisms (Hufford et al., 2015). The biofield concepts shared in this paper provide rudiments that support a shift from a strictly biomedical perspective to one that is more holistic. These concepts support the notion that the biofield may function as the mediator between mind and body and “underlie the modus operandi of mind-body interactions” (Rubik, 2015, p. 93).

Further explorations of biofield and biofield therapies could potentially unite particle and field views of life, augmenting medicine in multifaceted ways (Rubik, 2015). An integrative model based on rigorous systematic research could replace both alternative and traditional worldviews, galvanizing negotiation with the impediments to mainstream medicine (Hufford et al., 2015). Moreover, further research on specific self-administered practices such as self-Reiki, a marginally studied area, could provide data to empower individuals to help manage their own biology and health within this new holistic paradigm.

References

Abdurahman, F. & Payne, N. (2022). Reiki practitioners’ perceptions of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the experience, practice, and future of Reiki. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice 46, 1–8

Barsotti, T. (2022). Healing Practice: As above, so below - as below, so above - as within, so without. [Webinar] Consciousness and Healing Initiative. https://scienceofhealingcourse.chi.is/products/the-science-of-healing-course/categories/2151601278/posts/2162751354

Bukowski, E. L. (2015). The use of self-reiki for stress reduction and relaxation. Journal of Integrative Medicine 13(5), 336–340.

Chopra, D. (2021). What is wholeness? The consciousness view. Global Advances in Health and Medicine, Volume 10: 1–3

Currivan, J. (2022). Consciousness, cosmology and healing. [Webinar] Consciousness and Healing Initiative. https://scienceofhealingcourse.chi.is/products/the-science-of-healing-course/categories/2149865955/posts/2161488221Links to an external site.

Ernst, E. (2007). ‘Laying on of hands’: Magic or medicine? Support Care Cancer, 15(2),

121–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-006-0142-6

Hammerschlag, R, McKusick, E. D., Bat, N., Muehsam, D., McNames, J., Jain, S. (2020). Inter-rater agreement of biofield tuning: Testing a novel health assessment procedure. The Journal of alternative and complementary medicine, 26(10), 911–917

Hufford, D., Sprengel, M., Ives, J., Jonas, W. (2015). Barriers to the entry of biofield healing into “mainstream” healthcare. Global Advances in Health and Medicine 4(suppl):79–88. DOI: 10.7453/gahmj.2015.025.suppl

Hyland, M. (2004). Does a form of entanglement between people explain healing? An examination of hypotheses and methodology. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 12, 198-208

Jain, S., Pavlik, D., Distefan, J., Bruyere, R., Acer, J., Garcia, R., Coulter, I., Ives, J., Riesch, S., Jonas, W., & Mills, P. (2012). Complementary medicine for fatigue and cortisol variability in breast cancer survivors. Cancer. Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). 777–787

Jain, S., Ives, J., Jonas, W., Hammerschlag, R., Muehsam, D., Vieten, C., Vicario, D., Chopra, D., King, R., Guarneri, E. (2015). Biofield science and healing: An emerging frontier in medicine. Global Advances in Health and Medicine, 4 (1_suppl), 5-7.

Jain, S. (2021). Healing ourselves: Biofield science and the future of health. Sounds True.

Lipton, B. (2022). From Separatism to Interconnection [Webinar] Consciousness and Healing Initiative. https://scienceofhealingcourse.chi.is/products/the-science-of-healing-course/categories/2151343232/posts/2161736288 13

McManus, D. (2017). Reiki is better than placebo and has broad potential as a complementary health therapy. Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine, 22(4), 1051–1057 DOI: 10.1177/2156587217728644

Rubik, B. (2015). The biofield: Bridge between mind and body. The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, vol. 11, no. 2, 83–96

Rubik, B., Muehsam, D., Hammerschlag, R., Jain, S. (2015). Biofield science and healing: History, terminology, and concepts. Global Advances in Health and Medicine., 4(suppl), 8–14, https://doi.org/10.7453/gahmj.2015.038.suppl

Singh, K. (2013). Beyond mind: The future of psychology as a science. In Cornelissen, M., Misra, G., & Varma, S., Foundations and applications of Indian psychology, 2e, 2nd Edition. 86-102. Pearson Education India.