REIKI and Integrated Energy Therapy HEALING CIRCLE Message Board › NIH May end Reiki Research
Monroe Township, NJ
Hi, I received a message regarding the National Institutes of Health- the NIH is apparently not planning on doing any more studies on reiki. However, public comments are being taken about this. See below.
Dear Reiki Practitioner or client:
Your help is urgently needed to save Reiki research at NIH/NCCAM.
The NIH/NCCAM has previously sponsored research into Reiki and other forms of energy medicine. However, they are putting out a draft of their strategic plan for the next several years that does not include research on biofield therapies. This means Reiki would no longer be researched by them. It also means that others may not research Reiki because of this and grant money may be curtailed as well.
They are asking for feedback which must be in by today or asap. Below is a letter which you can copy and past into their comments box, plus the link to their comments site page. Please edit the first sentence of the letter if necessary. If you practice other energy healing modalities, please include them in this first sentence or if you are a client, please indicate this. Also, include your name at the end of the letter after Sincerely and before the references.
Send Comments Link to NIH/NCCAM: http://plan.nccam.nih...
Please edit the below letter, then copy and paste it into the comments box.
(I just received this info today which was provided by the Healing Touch group)
William Lee Rand
To Whom It May Concern
Re: NCCAM Draft Strategic Plan
I am a Reiki Practitioner. I am writing to express my grave concern over the knowledge that the draft NCCAM strategic plan has excluded research on biofield therapies as one of its strategic priorities over the next five years. I disagree with this exclusion regardless of your rationale. Energy based therapies are amongst the most widely practiced CAM therapies at the bedside of North American hospitals and health promotion facilities. They are performed by people from all walks of life and age groups. They are non-invasive, can be done anywhere and cost little to practice. The body of research that has been done to date demonstrates promise of these therapies through increasingly well done randomized clinical trials.
One of the common criticisms of biofield research is less than optimal sample sizes, often due to lack of funding. A lack of financial support from NCCAM will continue this trend and further dilute the potential results of biofield therapies that have been recognized by the Cochrane database (1) and recently, Jain & Mills (2). Through your omission, NCCAM may potentially cut off funding for biofield research from other sources as well. Recognition of the potential efficacy of any therapy through funding by NIH/NCCAM encourages the financial support of these therapies through other avenues. Research in these therapies is needed to assist healthcare professionals in their efforts to provide the best care possible for those they serve both in health promotion and adaptation to illness.
Given your goal "to further develop efforts in the important goals of identifying CAM interventions to improve symptom management, to promote greater well-being, and to sustain a healthier lifestyle." (p.3), I fail to see why biofield therapies are not included (nor even mentioned) in the strategic plan.
Obviously, I have strong feelings about the tone of the strategic plan and would implore NCCAM to rethink their priorities to include biofield therapies in the strategic plan and honor the original definition of CAM.
(1.) So PS, Jiang Y, Qin Y. "Touch therapies for pain relief in adults." Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD006535. DOI: 0.1002/14651858.CD006535.pub2.
(2.) Jain, S. & Mills, P. (2009). "Biofield therapies: Helpful or full of hype? A best evidence synthesis." International Journal of Behavorial Medicine, 17, 1-16.