Be careful about reading health books. You may
die of a misprint.

—MARK TWAIN

Chapter 14

Testing Energy Healing in
the Laboratory

Studies by medical epidemiologists reveal that tens of millions of people worldwide have received various forms of energy healing and that energy-healing techniques are being provided by millions of trained practitioners. Think about this. As you are reading these words, literally thousands of people in various places of the world are receiving energy treatments.

These treatments are being provided by many different kinds of practitioners, applying arts that include Reiki, Johrei, Qigong, healing touch, therapeutic touch, quantum touch, and vortex healing. Healing is also performed by practitioners such as Sufi healers, ayurvedic physicians, spiritualist mediums, Christian Scientist practitioners, shamans, and Native American medicine men and women.

Are their patients improving? Studies indicate that many patients experience significant benefits, and the literature is replete with case studies of cures beyond all reasonable expectation, which tend to be labeled “miraculous”—excruciating pain that vanishes in minutes, as recounted in the opening story of this book; chronic pain that disappears after a few treatments or sometimes after only a few minutes; injuries that heal exceptionally fast; malignant tumors that vanish. Numerous authors have summarized the clinical research, including those mentioned in the recommended readings list at the end of this book.

Of course, energy-healing techniques do not benefit everyone. Not every patient heals. But enough people experience significant relief to motivate millions of sick and injured individuals to seek out these healing practitioners. As you’ve read, I have personally witnessed a number of healings that Western medicine would call impossible.

Of the patients who do heal, how does their healing come about? Might they have healed anyway, in the process referred to as “spontaneous recovery”?

Could the results primarily arise from the expectancies and hopes of patients and healers—the so-called placebo effects?

Or is energy and consciousness somehow involved in this healing?

I began to wonder if there were ways to test whether the successful cures might be examples of true energy healing.

Designing Energy-Healing Experiments

Simply documenting that some patients heal doesn’t tell us why they heal. Scientists want to know, what are the mechanisms?

To study the topic, we need to know if energy healing truly involves energy. Science insists on finding out if the healer’s intentions, consciousness, and skills actually modulate the energy healing in specific ways that contribute to recovery and health.

Finding these answers is not easy. It requires bringing open-minded energy healers into the laboratory and designing controlled experiments that carefully test their claims.

If energy healing is real, then we would expect to find that what works on humans also works with rats and even with cells in a test tube. Studying the effects on traditional laboratory animals and materials offers many advantages. A major one is that it removes the effects of beliefs and expectations that human patients bring to the experiment, therefore eliminating placebo effects. Fortunately most rats don’t understand English, and as far as we know, most cells in test tubes have little or no understanding of anything at all, English included. The research does not require that we explain to them what we are doing, or why.

In addition, researchers and university administrators don’t have to concern themselves with the rats or cells suing for medical complications or malpractice. This doesn’t mean investigators are unconcerned with animal welfare—quite the contrary. We’re exceptionally sensitive to the needs of laboratory animals and their comfort. However, the university lawyers are relieved when we work with lower animals and cells because the legal consequences are minimized. Scientists can also explore questions with rats and cells that they can’t explore with healthy human subjects or patients.

My colleagues and I designed an experiment in which we would subject E. coli bacteria in test tubes to heat stress. We would then bring Reiki healers into the lab, allow them to use their healing techniques, and observe whether the effects of the heat stress were reduced.

In a related experiment, we planned to subject laboratory rats to noise stress sufficient to cause vascular inflammation. (We would not be causing severe damage, but the effects would be readily observable at the microscopic level.) Once again Reiki healers would exercise their healing techniques. We would then determine whether the blood-vessel damage had been reduced.

I wasn’t certain what I expected the results to show. However, so many people offer personal testimony to the positive results of energy healing that I admit to being highly curious about whether the experiments would provide any confirmation.

The E. coli Experiment

Beverly Rubik is a biophysicist by training—she holds a PhD in the subject from the University of California, Berkeley—and she is recognized as a pioneer in biofield science. More than that, she was part of the NIH consensus panel that coined the term “biofield.” Beverly has received training in numerous healing techniques, including therapeutic touch and Qigong, a type of Chinese healing.

As part of the work at my NIH-funded center, Beverly and I, along with statistics expert Dr. Audrey Brooks, worked out the details of the E. coli heat-stress experiment. E. coli is of particular interest because it’s a bacteria found in both rats and humans. Our ability to digest food effectively depends upon the well-being of the E. coli that live within our digestive tract.

Based on well-established research, if we subject E. coli bacteria to heat of a certain temperature for a given period of time, we can determine the extent to which colony growth is slowed due to cells damaged or killed. For this experiment, we set parameters so that growth rate would slow to approximately 50 percent of the normal level.

After preparing the cells in test tubes, we placed each test tube in a rack and set the racks into a cardboard box. Hence the cells could not “see” whether a practitioner was present or not. (Was that a silly precaution to take? Even if it was, it ruled out the possibility of anyone complaining later that a failure to do this invalidated the results.) Our first experiment was simple in design but complex in analysis.

We arranged for fourteen Reiki practitioners to come into the laboratory. Each would come on three separate days and would work with a unique set of E. coli–filled test tubes each time. When they first entered the laboratory, we had the practitioners fill out a standardized well-being form. They were then told that inside the box were cells that had been heat-stressed, and they were asked to perform Reiki directed to the box of test tubes.

Unbeknownst to the practitioners, there was a box of matched test tubes in a separate part of the laboratory that served as the control group. Hence, the total of forty-two treated boxes of test tubes (fourteen practitioners times three days) had a matched set of forty-two control boxes of test tubes.

If a particular Reiki healer was effective, the results would show that the number of surviving cells, on average, would be greater in the test tubes exposed to the healing than in the controls.

The results turned out to lean toward the predicted direction, but in fact the findings were not statistically significant. Indeed, almost half of the samples went in the wrong direction—the E. coli in the untreated test tubes survived better than the E. coli subjected to the Reiki healing.

That didn’t seem to make sense. Clear data showing that the healers had achieved some success would have opened an intriguing path for further research; data showing they had no effect would have made me think I needed to close the door on that path and to turn to some other avenue of exploration. But something like half the samples responding negatively to the healing efforts? That seemed bewildering. What could account for this result? Could we dream of another experiment to make sense of it?

I pondered the challenge for several days. And then it struck me. What if the cells had been responding not just to the energy and conscious intentions of a particular Reiki practitioner but also to that healer’s emotional state?

Beverly’s biochemistry laboratory is in the greater San Francisco area. She noted that some healers, on some days, came into the laboratory stressed, which could have been caused by traffic, personal problems, health issues, patient crises, or other problems. If a healer was feeling stressed during the experiment, would his emotional stress affect the E. coli bacteria?

To examine this possibility, we separated the data for E. coli pairs (treated versus control) into those where the treated increased in number (the healthy response) and those where the treated decreased (the unhealthy response). We correlated this with the well-being scores of the healers when they came into the laboratory.

The results were clear and statistically significant. We found that when the cell growth increased following Reiki treatment—the healthy response—the healers had entered the lab reporting that they were feeling physically and emotional healthy. If the cell growth decreased following treatment—the unhealthy response—the healers had entered the lab reporting they were more stressed and feeling less well.

Equally interesting was that after fifteen minutes of doing Reiki on the E. coli in the test tubes, all the healers reported feeling better. If their subjective reports can be relied on—and we have replicated this finding many times—doing Reiki on cells in test tubes makes the practitioner feel better than when she began. The process of doing Reiki appears to be positive for healers, regardless of whom or what they are treating.

We then wondered what would happen if we repeated the experiment, this time having the practitioners perform Reiki on a person first, and having them treat the test tubes afterward. Since we had already learned that doing Reiki increases one’s state of well-being, the practitioners’ emotional state should improve, which in turn should increase their ability to have a positive effect on the E. coli bacteria.

In the interim, before we began the second series of experiments, Beverly Rubik badly sprained her ankle. This gave us an available patient.

The fourteen practitioners all agreed to come back for two more sessions. As before, they began by filling out the well-being form. This time we had each start by doing fifteen minutes of Reiki on Beverly. They then filled out the well-being form a second time before going on to repeat the E. coli experiment for another fifteen minutes. When finished, we had the healers fill out a third well-being form.

I found the results revealing, convincing, and satisfying. As expected from the earlier findings, after doing Reiki on Beverly, the practitioners’ average well-being scores increased substantially—they felt more “in the flow.”

When they subsequently worked on the E. coli bacteria, the overall increase in cell growth for the twenty-eight test-tube pairs (fourteen practitioners times two sessions) reached statistical significance. Almost three-quarters of the test-tube pairs showed positive growth.

But what about the one-quarter that did not? If we examined this group, would we find that the practitioners who had worked with those test-tube sets had entered the laboratory in a particularly stressful state? Indeed, when we examined their entry well-being scales, we discovered that they had in fact reported being more stressed than the others. In other words, the bacteria still responded negatively to practitioners who were most stressed.

Remember, the E. coli cells had been placed in test tubes inside a sealed box. If the Reiki practitioners were stressed, their own E. coli—the billions inside their guts—were also probably stressed (influenced by the stress hormones circulating throughout the practitioners’ bodies). One possible explanation is that the E. coli cells in the test tubes were resonating with the E. coli inside the practitioners. Is it possible that there really was “little bitty cell phone” E. coli communication between the practitioners and the subjects? As far-fetched as this might seem, I think you’ll agree that it’s a question worth further scientific research.

The Rats and Reiki Experiment

Ann Baldwin, a Brit with a delightful English lilt to her voice, received her PhD from the University of London and is a renowned professor of physiology at the University of Arizona School of Medicine. She accidentally discovered that rats housed in noisy areas showed increased damage to their tiniest blood vessels (the microvascular capillary beds), as evidenced by increased leakage of blood molecules. The rats also exhibited behaviors that are associated with stress, such as excessive fighting. Simply stated, the rats were showing stress responses to the noisy environment.

The pattern of symptoms that arise in rats exposed to noise stress is identical to humans suffering from inflammatory bowel disease. Research has shown that psychological stress in humans aggravates intestinal diseases such as Crohn’s disease and colitis. The stress findings in rats therefore have direct implications for stress findings in humans.

Ann loves people and animals. She is happily married, and her life includes two children, two cats, and a horse that she rides most days. A few years ago, introduced to Reiki by one of her research assistants, she took to it like a fish to water, in time becoming a Reiki practitioner. When my NIH research center was funded, Ann came to ask me if I thought it might be possible to use her animal-testing procedure to determine whether Reiki could reduce the physiological effects of stress in rats.

Ann and I resonated both on the intellectual level and in our love for animals. When I was a professor at Yale, I lived in Guilford with my wife and five Welsh corgis (the queen of England at one point had eleven of these dogs). For a while I had three pet French Alpine goats—which many people are surprised to learn are very smart and affectionate, like dogs.

Ann and I designed an experiment to test whether Reiki could reduce the microvascular inflammation she had discovered in noise-stressed rats. Since the rats could see the Reiki practitioner, it was important to have a comparison condition where a person not trained in Reiki spent the same amount of time with the rats and made the same kinds of hand gestures modeled after Reiki practitioners.

We studied four groups of rats:

Group 1: A normal, nonstressed group—to obtain baseline rates of microvascular inflammation

Group 2: A noise-stressed group—to verify Ann’s finding that noise produces increased microvascular inflammation

Group 3: A Reiki-treated group of noise-stressed rats—to see if Reiki healing produces a decrease in microvascular inflammation

Group 4: A “sham-treated” group of noise-stressed rats—the control condition to determine if the presence of a person with no Reiki training would be sufficient to produce a corresponding change in microvascular inflammation. This controlled for a possible placebo effect in the rats.

The rats in groups 3 and 4—treated with Reiki or sham—received their respective fifteen-minute treatments every day for three weeks from two Reiki practitioners or from two sham practitioners. The experiment was repeated three times. A summary of the experiment is shown in figure 14.1.

In analyzing the results, we first observed the expected dramatic increase in microvascular inflammation in the noise-stressed rats (for example, 3.0 leaks) compared to the nonstressed rats (0.5 leaks). The percent increase in number of leaks in the noise-stressed group was 600 percent (3.0 divided by 0.5), confirming Ann’s earlier results.

The findings for the real Reiki (1.2 leaks) were consistent and important, especially compared with the sham-treated group. Sham alone (2.1 leaks) resulted in a 420 percent increase in the number of blood-vessel leaks in response to the noise stress, as compared to 600 percent with noise alone. Apparently the presence of a person, even a person with no training in healing techniques, helps reduce the effects of stress.

Figure 14.1 Number and Total Area of Microvascular Leakage in Rats Subjected to Noise Stress and the Improvement after the Stressed Rats Were Treated with Reiki or Sham Reiki

However, the Reiki-treated rats showed only 1.2 leaks. This represented a 240 percent increase in the number of leaks as compared to 420 percent increase in sham and 600 percent increase in noise-alone rats.

As a way of providing confirmation for the findings, the rats were examined not just for the number of leaks but also for the total area of damaged vessels where the leaks occurred. As can be seen in figure 14.1, the results in terms of area of leaks is even more dramatic.

Sham helped reduce both the total number of leaks and area of leaks, but Reiki was significantly more effective than sham. The Reiki treatment did not eliminate all the effects of the stress, but it clearly reduced them substantially.

One could say that the sham treatment reveals the “psychological” effects of the intervention—the rats could clearly see the people doing the fake treatment. However, the increased effectiveness of the Reiki compared to the sham suggests that above and beyond these psychological effects, there appear to be demonstrable biofield and consciousness effects.

Could the rats have somehow sensed the energy and perhaps the conscious intentions of the Reiki practitioners? That’s not a frivolous question. If humans can detect the energy and conscious intentions from people (as suggested by the research detailed in chapters 4 and 5), even when they have no conscious awareness that they are able to do this, why can’t rats do the same? For all we know, rats, cats, goats, horses, and other animals may be even more sensitive than we are.

In the third experiment, I had the Reiki and sham practitioners record their feelings of well-being on a zero-to-ten scale in categories of physical, psychological, social, and spiritual health. They did this before and after doing the treatments, which they did every day for three weeks. On average, whereas the sham practitioners reported feeling very slightly better after the treatments (average increase in well-being scores of 0.5), the Reiki practitioners reported large increases (average increase of 3.0).

Doing a sham treatment is at best boring. Doing Reiki with rats, however, apparently feels at least as good, perhaps even better than doing Reiki with E. coli.

What can be stated, quite definitively, is that the energy and conscious intentions of healers can modulate cellular functioning in rats and even E. coli cells in test tubes. The findings support the claims of healers that their energy and intentions make a difference in the success of their efforts.

Probably my favorite finding from our Reiki E. coli experiments was that among the fourteen practitioners, one practitioner had a perfect five out of five record: for her, the treated test tubes always had greater cell growth than the untreated control test tubes. What was unique about this healer?

It turned out that her specialty was using Reiki to treat animals. Indeed, she is a professional, full-time animal healer. This practitioner deeply identified with the bacteria. In fact, she felt compassion for the bacteria that had to be sacrificed after each run in order to make the measurements. Her love of animals, great and small, including cells, and her connection to life and its energies is profound. Did this allow her to consistently provide healing for the E. coli?

The axiom called Occam’s razor says that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. If we follow the accepted canons of science, we are led, slowly but surely, to the simple explanation that caring energy and loving intentions are the key to healing and health.

Can Healing Affect Water?

Living systems—people, animals, and single-celled organisms—are made mostly of water. Human infants are more than 90 percent water; as we age, the percentage of water in our bodies decreases to approximately 70 percent. Doctors have long advised that drinking regular amounts of fresh water is good for one’s health.

Water, especially if it contains salt and other conductive minerals, is an excellent carrier of electricity, so it should come as no surprise that our bodily fluids are also excellent conductors. This is what allows your doctor to record your electrocardiogram to chart the electrical activity of your heart by attaching electrodes to your skin. In fact, the EKG can be obtained by placing the electrodes anywhere on your body, from the top of your head to the bottom of the feet. The electrical currents swim, so to speak, within our bodily fluids.

In the laboratory, we measure the structural dynamics of water using a device called the “gas discharge visualization” system, or GDV. Developed by Konstantine Korotkov, a PhD physicist in Russia, the instrument detects coronal discharges created by passing a high-voltage, high-frequency, very-low-current signal through water. The passing of the voltage creates tiny sparklike patterns, or auras, that can be detected in the dark using a sensitive digital camera. The image data are fed into a computer and then quantified using high-powered statistical algorithms.

Using a GDV camera in our laboratory, we took the following pictures of drops of three kinds of water—a superpure water (called HPLC), a regular purified water, and tap water.

You can see in figure 14.2 that the tap water (on the right), with its greater concentration of minerals, is more electrically conductive, creating a larger and more complex GDV image.

When a health practitioner works with a client or patient, both generate complex bioelectromagnetic signals—biofields—that extend beyond the body, just as a radio transmitter creates signals that extend beyond its antenna. Could these biofields be involved in the process of healing, a mechanism that could help explain the healers’ success?

Figure 14.2 Water Drops (GDV images)

In The Living Energy Universe, I described how all physical systems, including atoms and molecules, have the potential to store information and energy. William Tiller, PhD, during his years as a professor of material sciences at Stanford, documented that the human mind can alter the pH of water—its alkalinity/acidity balance—because water is able to store information and energy. That’s a startling idea, but Professor Tiller established it scientifically.

My researchers and I began to wonder if a practitioner’s healing energy could affect the water in their client’s body. Could the water’s structure be altered by the healer’s bioenergetic state?

Curious, we designed and conducted research to find out. In one experiment, we asked a healer to work with samples of the same three kinds of water—HPLC, purified, and tap—and attempt to alter the water’s structural dynamics. His task was to “energize” some water samples and “relax” other samples. The water was kept in syringes, which were attached to the GDV camera for analysis.

The chart in figure 14.3 shows one of the statistical measures (termed the Be coefficient) of the GDV images.

When we compare this measure for water samples that have been given “energizing” energy healing to those that have been given “relaxing” energy, we discover differences in the Be coefficient (figure 14.3). On average, the coefficient increases with relaxation intention, and decreases with energizing intention. These effects are observed in all three kinds of water.

Figure 14.3 Effects of Energizing and Relaxation Intention on Water

The experiment needs to be conducted and the results confirmed by other experimenters. If similar results are achieved by others, the results would be undeniable: healers can affect the structural dynamics of water as measured by the GDV.

If energy healing can reliably affect microvascular cellular functioning in a rodent’s intestines, the growth of E. coli bacterial cells in test tubes, and even the structural dynamics of water itself, then we have every reason to believe that the so-called healing miracles being observed to various degrees every day, worldwide, may be part of the fundamental energetic fabric of the universe itself. Dr. James Oschman, author of the book Energy Medicine, calls this the “energy matrix.”

This evidence supports the notion that everyone, healers in particular, appear to have the ability to influence the energy state of animate and even inanimate systems. Once again, the implications for us all are profound.

Is it possible we might be looking at a first step toward universal healing?