As someone who is known to be quite factual, especially when it comes to all things health related, I'm often asked about the scientific proof of energy treatments. There's obviously a lot of cynicism around some complementary therapies, with Reiki getting more than its fair share (in my opinion).
So let's just step back for a moment and take a look at what we mean by science...
It's important to remember that science does not deal with PROOF; it deals with EVIDENCE. When we're looking at something through a scientific spotlight, there are four stages: 1) observation 2) hypothesis 3) experimentation 4) conclusion.
For example, we may observe something and wonder what's causing it; when there's lots of wind, there are waves; when the wind is stronger, the waves are higher. We then develop a hypothesis, such as "Wind influences water and therefore the height of the waves". A series of experiments is then performed to test our hypothesis. For example, using a hairdryer on a bowl of water and watching how the ripples get bigger. The results from the experiments are then analysed and a conclusion is reached; i.e. was the hypothesis correct?
So, what if I used this scientific approach for a Reiki treatment? Many of my clients come for a treatment because they are suffering from stress or a chronic illness, such as headaches. I've observed that, following a treatment, the majority of people say they feel better, e.g. their headache has gone. My hypothesis therefore would be that Reiki has helped them, so "Reiki helps people suffering from headaches". Following the scientific process, I then need to carry out experiments to test this hypothesis. So I carry out more Reiki treatments, and analyse how people feel afterwards (which is standard practice for a treatment anyway).
Over the years that I have been practising Reiki, I have only ever had one person attending one treatment say they felt no difference. After every single other treatment, every single other person has reported positive results. So, just from my little practice alone, there is a huge body of evidence that supports my hypothesis that "Reiki helps people suffering from... [enter condition]" (because I haven't found an ailment yet that Reiki hasn't helped).
Imagine how much more evidence I would get if I asked other Reiki practitioners for their results?!
So, why all the cynicism still? Well, that's an easy one! People are baffled about HOW Reiki works.
However, when you take a paracetamol to ease a pain, eat your vegetables to get your daily vitamin requirements, or go for a brisk walk outside, you trust that it is doing you some good, or that you will feel better. But do you know HOW the paracetamol works? Or HOW your body breaks down the vegetables to get the vitamins (let alone HOW the vitamins then work!)? Probably not.... You're just trusting the scientific evidence that has been done in the past.
So why not do the same for Reiki...?