Remote healing is the belief that a person can use their intentions to heal at a distance.
Even if this is a post about scepticism of remote healing, we must first understand its belief. It is the belief in crossing time and space with positive energy. The person sending this healing says they focus on health and prosperity, and the subject will get better. The energy that is being transmitted is alleged cosmic energy or “chi”. One Popular healing modality is Reiki healing.
Scepticism to communicating through space and time
If it were possible to heal people over distance, we wouldn’t need hospitals. Healers could heal patients by making a phone call. Then the question comes – what are its limits? Could remote healing cure cancer or straighten out broken bones? Also, If remote communication were possible, we would not need phones.
Now. What science says is that we have electrical signals inside our brains. The physical brain is what creates consciousness. Mainstream science does not confirm consciousness being outside the brain. And if communication with others, then non-physical means have not been proven, why should remote healing work?
Scepticism to the healing process
We know that placebos exist. Could it be that remote healing is just a placebo? If a person thinks a healer will heal him, he may feel hope and activate the placebo effect. Another point to consider is that people get better anyways. A sick person would get better anyway, even if he did not contact a healer. So How can we know that it was not their body’s healing mechanism?
The idea of sending positive energy implies that the person “sending” has to be in a festive mood. What happens if the healer is sick, in a bad mood or tired? Is there any limit on how long a healer has to keep on focusing their attention? Exactly where is the limit? A second, a minute or an hour before it works?
And what about the receiving part? What happens to the person who receives it? How does it feel to him? If a severe disease suddenly should repair itself in a short time, you would think it would disturb the individual receiving it. If the person is driving a car or taking an exam, could it make his life more difficult by being part of a remote healing session?
Do you have to ask permission to “send” healing to someone? Also, a person can change his mind, and the healer has turned off his phone and has started the healing process. What about people who can not talk or do not have the cognitive understanding to say yes to healing? Are they forbidden to send healing too?
Scepticism to promises that are not mainstream science
There are also moral implications here because you risk doing something that does not work. What if the sick person drops seeing a doctor because she has an appointment with you? For example, a cancer patient could die if she does not visit the doctor or get their medicine. The topic of medicine raises another question: What happens if a subject is on medication? Does not the remote healing process interrupt the treatment’s mechanics?
A placebo could explain it all.
We know that if a person believes he can be healthy, he can activate the placebo effect. This may be the only negative about scepticism about remote healing; you lose the placebo effect.
He would then be healthy because he believes in it. We also know that if a nurse or “healer” talks warmly and empathically to a subject, he will feel validated, which can also make a person feel better. We risk the issue by saying he is better, while he may objectively not be. Someone receiving healing who pays for it may also feel pressure to say it works. Admitting feeling better could be a cognitive bias called rationalization. Read more about open scepticism here: https://abundance7.com/open-scepticism/.
To read the believer’s perspective, see this link: https://abundance7.com/remote-heal/.