Giving placebos such as reiki to cancer patients does more harm than good

alt text
Genuine reiki was found to be no more effective than sham reiki for improving cancer patients' wellbeing. Photograph: Martin Argles/Guardian

American nurses recently published an intriguing study with bizarre conclusions. They recruited almost 200 patients who were receiving chemotherapy for cancer. This is, of course, a difficult time for most cancer sufferers. There may be side-effects such as hair loss, nausea, fatigue, depression etc. All of these are bound to decrease patients' wellbeing. So the nurses tested whether a session of reiki healing would improve the general wellbeing of their patients.

Reiki involves channelling "healing energy" into the body. Lots of people swear by it, but does it really work?

To find out, a proper control group is essential. The researchers therefore decided to compare reiki against "sham reiki" and against no such intervention. Sham reiki involved a non-reiki healer pretended to be a reiki healer. He was not trained in reiki and only followed the ritual of the treatment. So he did not send any "healing energy" to the patients whereas the reiki healer had been taught to do just that.

The results of this study were impressive: reiki did, in fact, make the patients fell better. Specifically, it increased the comfort and wellbeing of the patients in comparison with those who received no such intervention. Intriguingly, however, the sham reiki had exactly the same effects, and there were no differences between real and sham reiki.

What does this mean? The researchers were quite clear about their interpretation of the results. They believe reiki has been shown to work. Yet, I think the findings demonstrate exactly the opposite: genuine reiki is no better than sham reiki, thus it does not work.

Perhaps this is a rather academic matter of interpretation over which one could argue until the cows come home. However, the more pressing question is this: what should oncology teams throughout the world do about such findings?

Should they use reiki or similar therapies, as these American nurses seem to be suggesting? They clearly help desperately ill cancer patients, . Or should they avoid such treatments, because they are no better than placebo, as I and most scientists would suggest?

Read on

TAGGED: MEDICINE, PSEUDOSCIENCE


RELATED CONTENT

Pseudoscience harming unis - journal

- - news.com.au 27 Comments


Pseudoscience harming unis - journal

When Pseudoscience Kills

Dr. Steve Novella - James Randi... 74 Comments


When Pseudoscience Kills

College of Medicine is a lobby group...

Edzard Ernst - The Guardian 5 Comments


College of Medicine is a lobby group promoting
unproven treatments

Scientists buzz Simon Cowell for...

Alok Jha - The Guardian 27 Comments

Sense About Science publishes its annual review of celebrities' misleading claims, including Cowell's intravenous vitamins

Edzard Ernst: at war with prince

Susanna Rustin - Guardian 25 Comments

America’s top scientist again peddles...

Jerry Coyne - Why Evolution Is True 137 Comments

MORE

MORE BY EDZARD ERNST

College of Medicine is a lobby group...

Edzard Ernst - The Guardian 5 Comments


College of Medicine is a lobby group promoting
unproven treatments

MORE

Comments

Comment RSS Feed

Please sign in or register to comment