By Daniel Benor, MD

In the Energy Psychology community and among many other complementary/ alternative therapists there are helpful discussions on biological energies (bioenergies) that can be shifted to promote healings for many problems. Therapists and clients regularly report enormous benefits from bioenergy therapies. A growing body of research confirms these clinical observations in Energy Psychology (Feinstein, 2012) and in spiritual healing (Benor, 2002; 2007; Web reference).

Researchers have been frustrated, however, in efforts to standardize assessments of bioenergy interventions. This has been frustrating to bioenergy therapists and to people who have benefitted from these therapies. This is one of the many reasons that conventional caregivers have been slow to accept the validity and value of these therapies.

The subject of bioenergies is enormously complex. A few of the countless factors that may enter into bioenergy interactions and assessments are considered here in the hope that this will shed some light on the state of practice and understanding of the bioenergy healing arts.

There are bioenergy fields around the body and in the body. Therapists may focus their interventions on:

The entire field around the body and interpenetrating the body
Specific layers of this field (starting from furthest away from the body)
Spirit
Personal spiritual issues, e.g. life purpose, past life residues
Personal direct awarenesses (‘gnowing’)
Religious issues
Personal direct awarenesses (‘gnowing’)
Personal beliefs (‘knowing’)
Relationships
The person him/herself + as a ‘cell’ in the body of all life on earth
Family, partners and close friends
Mind: genetic endowments + acquired life experiences, learned information and beliefs
Emotions: genetic endowments + acquired modes of expression, life experience residues
Body: genetic endowments + acquired patterns of being and functioning
Bioenergies within the body
The entire body
Meridians and acupuncture point pathways within the body
Craniosacral
Brain energy pulsation rhythms
Fascia energy pathways
Kinesiology
Muscle testing for bioenergy imbalances and balancing
Exercises for balancing bioenergies
Polarity therapies
Connecting specific points for specific problems
Connecting intuited points
Bioenergies of portions of the body, e.g. cellular (entire cell of sub-portions), tissues, organs, and of nerves and hormones that influence the entire body
Bio-electrical energies of brain, heart and other body parts

Bioenergy therapies are administered by people with varying levels of bioenergy sensitivity and varying levels of abilities and skills in administering the bioenergy intervention. Recipients of these healing interventions have varying levels of sensitivity and receptivity in accepting these energies.

Analyzing bioenergy approaches ‘scientifically’

The ‘scientific’ approach has been promoted as the preferred way to study health and illness. This has some advantages, but also has serious liabilities.

The above categories and sub-categories of bioenergy fields are all constructs of left brain hemisphere (LH) analysis. This reductionistic methodology has become the predominant focus in conventional western discussions of health and illness. This LH approach has also been adopted in the assessments and analyses of energetic harmony and disharmony.

This LH reductionistic approach makes possible the study of sub-sections of the entire biological system. Scientists can manipulate cells outside and inside the body; alter immune functions within the body; chemically alter body functions; and so on. Great benefits have come from these approaches.

Great harm has also come from LH approaches. By focusing narrowly on one problem, the functioning of the entire organism is often altered, with serious overall consequences. For example:

Antidepressant and antipsychotic medications can decrease some psychological problems. However, they have serious side effects, as in gaining weight, which often create diabetes, heart strain, backaches and leg joint pains, and many other problems.

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy are treatments that kill rapidly-reproducing cancer cells. Unfortunately, they also kill rapidly growing intestinal cells and skin cells, and often make people feel very sick and unsightly. In some cases, they don’t prolong life, or prolong it only slightly, but they seriously diminish the quality of life in the person’s remaining days.

Over a period of ten years, 50% of drugs are withdrawn from the market due to serious side effects or interactive effects with other drugs. People using the medications thereby become the laboratory animals establishing their lack of safety.

While conventional caregivers tout the scientific method as the gold standard for research, in many cases they do not adhere to this standard. For example, Knee surgery for knee disk problems is very common. A double-blind, controlled study of mock (pretend) surgery showed that there was no difference between the actual surgery and mock surgery (Moseley, Omalley, Peterson, et al 2002). There have been no replications of this study, and the business of knee surgery continues as usual.

Many conventional caregivers dismiss the possibility of bioenergies because they cannot be objectively measured. They demand LH types of studies to confirm that this is a valid phenomenon. And in that they are correct. There have not been demonstrations of consistent assessments of bioenergy fields. Different observers often report different findings.

Analyzing bioenergy interventions through bioenergy assessments

The inconsistent observations of different researchers and observers is not a valid reason to dismiss the existence of bioenergy fields. Such differences may be the products of the differences in the observing ‘instruments.’ That is to say, the human ‘instrument’ does not exist as a standard product. Each human is unique. Each will therefore resonate with the bioenergies of another unique being in a doubly unique manner.

It is actually much more complicated. Each interaction between a different human observer and a single human who is being observed may produce a unique combination of bioenergy interactions that leads to a second layer of unique observations.

Laboratory conditions that may be standardized to the criteria of conventional research on biological systems may differ significantly when considered from bioenergy perspectives. There can be numerous factors that would influence a bioenergy study that would be ignored by conventional scientists. For example, the following may alter or disrupt bioenergy fields:

– The presence of electronic equipment (in the laboratory or from nearby facilities outside the lab)
– The psychological states , beliefs, expectations and attitudes of people being studied
– The psychological states, beliefs, expectations and attitudes of researchers and observers
– Influences of the collective consciousness
– Solar electromagnetic activity
– Lunar phase

 These variables are often difficult to assess, even when researchers are fully aware of them. How much more so must this be when no attention is given by researchers to such influences on bioenergies being studied?

Personal reports of bioenergy therapies experiences

I believe that subjective reports are valid sources for useful and helpful information in assessing the healing potentials of bioenergy therapies. Right brain hemisphere (RH) awarenesses are at least as valid, if not moreso, than LH awarenesses (Benor, 2012; McGilchrist, 2009).

While these are often dismissed by conventional therapists and scientists, those who are open to exploring and accepting their inner awarenesses find them not only helpful but essential to assessing the value and validity of bioenergy experiences.

 

References

Benor, D.J. (2002) Healing Research: Volume I, (Professional Supplement) Spiritual Healing: Scientific Validation of a Healing Revolution , Southfield, MI: Vision Publications.

Benor, D.J. (2007) Healing Research: Volume I, (Popular edition) Spiritual Healing: Scientific Validation of a Healing Revolution. Bellmawr, NJ: Wholistic Healing Publications.

Benor, D.J. Right and Left Brain Dominance: Thinking outside the box. International J Healing & Caring – On line 2012, 12(1), 1-24 .

Benor, D.J. Wholistic healing. http://wholistichealingresearch.com/srmeb.html

Benor, D.J. Lists of bioenergy healing research publications http://wholistichealingresearch.com/completelistrandomizedstudiesx.html

Feinstein, D. (2012) Acupoint stimulation in treating psychological disorders: Evidence of efficacy. Rev. General Psychology , 16: 364-380. DOI: 10.1037/a0028602

McGilchrist, I. (2009) The Master and his Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World. New Haven:Yale.

Moseley J.B. O’Malley K. Petersen N.J., et al. (2002) A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. New England J Medicine. 347(2):81-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12110735

 

You may reproduce all or parts of this article in your journal, magazine, ezine, blog or other web or paper publication on condition that you credit the source as follows: Copyright © 2014 Daniel J. Benor, MD, ABHM   All rights reserved. Original publication at WholisticHealingResearch.com where you will find many more related articles on this and similar subjects of wholistic healing.