NANDA and Energy Field Disturbance

---

The following is a certified letter Bob Glickman mailed to NANDA, the North American Nursing
Diagnosis Association.
March 30, 1999

North American Nursing Diagnosis Association

1211 Locust Street

Philadelphia, PA 19107
 
 

Dear Madam or Sir,

This is my second letter to your organization regarding the Nursing Diagnosis "Energy Field
Disturbance." I had written to you last year about this time and received no response, so
some of the material in that letter will be appearing again in this one.

NANDA should make it a priority to remove "Energy Field Disturbance" (EFD) from the
Diagnosis List. The indisputable fact is that there is not a single shred of evidence that
anyone, including Therapeutic Touch (TT) creators Dr. Deloris Krieger and Dora Kunz, can
feel a human energy field (HEF). To back up this statement I refer you to last year's
articles in Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the Scientific Review of
Alternative Healthcare (SRAM) will be featuring TT. The JAMA article has sixth grader Emily
Rosa's report of 21 Therapeutic Touch practitioners (TTP) who were unable to show that they
can feel an energy field. The SRAM article, which I co-authored, features a TTP who failed
a similar test and the amazingly poor response of the TT community, including Dr. Krieger,
to avoid the challenge of taking this test.

I have been researching TT and the HEF since 1993 and what I have found has been very
disturbing. The research behind TT has been shoddy at best. Incomplete research,
insufficient patient population sizes, poor designs, improper or absent double-blinding to
rule out the placebo effect, and the inability of independent researchers to duplicate
positive results are among the many flaws. On the basis of bad research, TT promoters
assumed the phenomenon to be real and skipped to "discovering" what ailments TT can be used
to treat.

I have to wonder what criteria led NANDA to think that EFD was a viable diagnosis in the
first place. Consider this fictitious diagnosis: "Alteration in the Ability to Levitate."
Prior to making this diagnosis a part of NANDA's list, wouldn't it be necessary for someone
to prove that they could levitate? It is likewise necessary that people who claim to feel
the HEF prove that it is possible.

In the NANDA guidelines, under the listing "Energy Field Disturbance," the section
"Definition" shows that the diagnosis is totally dependent on someone being able to feel an
energy field. The section "Defining Characteristics" mentions the perception of changes in
patterns of the energy flow. Terms used include warmth, coolness, spike, hole, bulge,
tingling, flowing and dense. If no one can actually feel a HEF, how can they possibly
differentiate between any of these "characteristics?" Another thing to consider is that
there is also no way to measure the intervention brought about by the TT "treatment." These
concepts render the entire diagnosis meaningless.

It is wrong for nurses to mislead their patients into thinking that they have special
"powers" if they do not. Unfortunately, by giving credence to TT and the HEF by including
the EFD as a legitimate nursing diagnosis, NANDA contributes to this miseducation of
patients and is hurting nursing. I have looked at several major nursing textbooks and have
found this diagnosis included as education for nursing students. This concept is being
taught as fact and yet it is completely vacuous. All evidence points to the fact that no
one can feel an energy field. If this is the case, not a single nurse that can use the
"Energy Field Disturbance" diagnosis.

Respectfully,

Robert J. Glickman RN CNOR

President of PhACT

Philadelphia Association

for Critical Thinking

>So what is your point? That the research to date is lacking? I don't
>think that you will get much argument from TTP's or others involved in
>the field. (no pun intended)

My point is that the Energy Field Disturbance (EFD) was accepted into nursing science without the proper evidence
and research to support it. The only way to get at the truth is to use the scientific method. It is the only way
to filter out wishful thinking, experimenter bias, self-deception and error - in other words, the crap. Nursing
has skipped this and no one seems to think that it’s important.

>The mere fact that people have had pain dissipated, fears relieved, >situations changed, or even just been made
to generally feel better, by >someone with the ability to feel and "comb" the energy into a "flow" is >all that
is important. The "how" is not nearly as critical as the "when".

More important than "how" and "when" here is "if." If TT works then more study is warranted. If it does not, then
we should proceed to something else.

>What is needed here is not blind criticism, it is the means to begin
>solid, accurate, double-blind research. While I admit I find the current
>research lacking, having been helped by this method of healing, I care
>little for why it happened, just that it did.

I am not injecting simple blind criticism here. I have been studying TT for a while. I have devised a simple
double-blind study to see if anyone can feel a HEF. So far only one TTP has had the gumption to take it. The
rest, including Dr. Krieger, have avoided me.

>There is much we do not know about this field of diagnosis, just as I am
>sure there was when it was discovered that chemicals and other >compounds could be used to affect change in the
human body.

It’s difficult to compare chemicals and compounds to TT and the HEF. Chemicals and compounds are tangible and can
be tested by anyone. TT and the HEF can only be tested by examining those who make the claims that they can feel
or manipulate these alleged fields.

>How long has it taken for us to see the full potential of "modern" >medicine? The curious point here is while
man has successfully extended >his life span from that of 500 years ago, he has done little to improve the
>machinery itself.
 

I don’t know what you mean by this. When a hernia is repaired, the "machinery" is improved. When an infected
appendix is removed, the life span increases and again the machinery improved.

>Anyone can drop a salt tablet into water to make salt water. But how
>many can stir it without a stick?

>My question is, so what about the placebo effect? If it was not a
>significant factor why would it even be considered. Again the relevance
>of how. If someones migraines cease to exist, who cares how it
>happened? Certainly not the sufferer...

The placebo effect is a very real, very important phenomenon. Its significance is critical and must be
understood. (Main point coming up here) If the placebo effect is the minimum threshold for a positive result for
a therapy, then there is no such thing as an ineffective therapy.

All therapies will have a placebo effect about thirty percent of the time. This is the point of ruling it out.

>Please don't get me wrong here, I understand the importance of being >able to recreate the same effects with a
variety of people but I think we >must also consider the fact that Penicillin does not help everyone either.

Which is why adequate testing is important. Through culture and sensitivity testing, it can be determined when
penicillin is the drug of choice for a certain infection. Unless of course the patient is allergic to penicillin
and another drug will be substituted and on and on… The bottom line is that all of these concepts can be tested
and have been tested over and over. If another researcher disagrees with the results, he is able to duplicate the
testing himself. This is all basic science to rule out error.

>Each body is different. Each mind is unique. The big question is not >whether the HEF exists or not, it does
exist, we know it must because we >know that without energy present, nothing "exists" in physical from.

I have to disagree here. You seem to be implying that the HEF and the physical human body are interchangeable.
They aren’t. While matter and energy are interchangeable, in its solid form the body stops at the skin. Real
quantum physics (not the nonsense spouted that New Age MD) allows for a quantum field that stops at the last
electron on the last molecule of the skin. The HEF is something totally different and, according to people who
claim to feel it, goes from 2-8 inches. So it does matter if the HEF exists or not. It the first step to
answering your next questions.

How much energy? How far does it reach? How
>can we see it? How can we feel it? Most importantly, how can we
>manipulate it to better our lives? These are the real issues. Our
>collective energy would be be much better spent proving TT does work >by examining the cases where applied with
efficacy.

>From one who is grateful there are those who care enought to try,
>Ian Maehlman - Former migraine sufferer.

Without double blinding, efficacy can’t be proved. Studying cases where TT appears to have worked is a study of
anecdotes. This is where most TT research gets bogged down. Too many people are impressed with anecdotes that do
not account for the cases where TT simply did not work. Keep in mind most illnesses are self-limiting and run in
cycles. Perhaps your migraines just happened to stop when you were receiving TT treatments. I had migraines in
the past myself. My last one was about 11 years ago. I didn’t do any thing special. They just stopped. Had I been
taking some herbal supplement at the time, I am sure I’d be singing its praises now.

Bob
 
 
 
 

other links of interest: