What Energy Medicine Is, and Isn't
I've been promoting my book, One Hundred Days of Rewilding, recently, and I've noticed some rather strange misunderstandings about energy medicine cropping up.
One of the things I've found particularly interesting is how quickly folk reach for a Wikipedia definition and consider the matter settled.
Wikipedia describes energy medicine largely through the lens of pseudoscience, reflecting scientific criticism of claims about healing energy fields. But Wikipedia is an editor-curated encyclopedia, not a global healthcare authority, and I think it's worth looking beyond a single definition before drawing conclusions.
Especially when we're talking about something as complex and multifaceted as human health.
So, what is energy medicine, and where does it sit?
Energy medicine is a broad term encompassing practices that work with concepts of energy, vitality and healing. These include Medical Qigong, Reiki and other approaches, some of which have their origins in traditional medical systems dating back thousands of years.
Different practices have different theoretical foundations, and the scientific evidence supporting them varies considerably.
But here's where things get interesting.
The World Health Organization (WHO) takes a global, public-health approach to traditional, complementary and integrative medicine.
Its Global Traditional Medicine Strategy 2025–2034 recognises the worldwide use of these practices and sets out priorities for scientific research, safety, regulation and evidence-based integration into healthcare systems.
This doesn't mean the WHO has scientifically validated every energy-healing modality. It means these practices are part of a global healthcare conversation that deserves serious investigation rather than blanket dismissal.
And I think that's an important distinction.
Complementary is not alternative
These terms are often used interchangeably, but they mean very different things.
Alternative medicine means using a practice instead of conventional medical treatment.
Complementary medicine means using it alongside conventional medical care.
Integrative medicine brings conventional medicine and appropriately evidenced complementary approaches together, recognising the importance of treating the whole person.
See the difference?
Throughout my book, I repeatedly make the case for what I refer to as both/and badassery.
It's the idea that we don't have to choose between conventional medicine and taking an active role in our own healing. We can seek appropriate medical care and explore complementary practices that work for us.
We can appreciate the extraordinary work of the NHS and recognise that it's an overstretched system that cannot possibly take responsibility for every aspect of our health and wellbeing.
Rather than passively waiting for the NHS to do all the work, what if we became more curious, more resourceful and more actively involved in our own care?
What if we gave ourselves permission to explore, investigate and discover what supports us, without abandoning medical care or critical thinking?
That's both/and badassery
It's not about choosing sides. It's about exercising choice.
Human beings are not machines
In 1977, psychiatrist George Engel introduced the biopsychosocial model, challenging the limitations of understanding illness exclusively through biological processes.
He proposed that biological, psychological and social factors all contribute to our experience of health and illness.
In 2002, physician and bioethicist Dr Daniel P. Sulmasy developed this thinking further in his paper A Biopsychosocial-Spiritual Model for the Care of Patients at the End of Life.
Sulmasy argued that genuinely holistic healthcare must also consider a person's spiritual concerns, including their relationship with meaning, transcendence and existence itself.
The resulting biopsychosocial-spiritual model offers a framework for understanding the human being beyond biology alone.
We are biological beings, yes. But we're also emotional, social, creative and meaning-making creatures.
Our relationships matter. Our environment matters. Our emotional lives matter. Our sense of purpose and connection matters.
A human being is not a machine where you simply swap out broken mechanical parts.
This doesn't mean every complementary practice has been proven to improve physical recovery. It means that a comprehensive understanding of health must consider more than biology alone.
And to me, that's where the conversation becomes far more interesting than an argument about whether conventional or complementary medicine is better.
What about evidence?
I'm all for it.
In fact, I think one of the most important things we can do is distinguish between what we know, what we think we know, and what remains to be investigated.
Some complementary practices have substantial research behind them. Others, including many forms of energy healing, have a much more limited evidence base, and their proposed mechanisms have not been scientifically established.
That's not a reason to make claims we can't substantiate.
Nor do I think it means we should stop asking questions.
There is a difference between acknowledging that something hasn't been demonstrated scientifically and insisting that no further investigation is worthwhile.
Openness, intelligence and the art of discernment
Something else I find fascinating is the relationship between openness, curiosity and intelligence.
In psychology, the Big Five personality model, also known as OCEAN, identifies openness to experience as one of five major personality traits.
Openness is associated with curiosity, imagination, intellectual exploration and a willingness to consider unfamiliar perspectives. Research also suggests relationships between openness and certain aspects of emotional intelligence.
And I think there's something important here.
Being open-minded doesn't mean believing everything. And being sceptical doesn't mean dismissing everything.
Intelligence isn't simply about how much information we possess. It's also about how we engage with information, how willing we are to examine our assumptions and whether we can tolerate the possibility that our existing understanding might be incomplete.
Some of the best teachers I've encountered, across psychotherapy, energy medicine and spiritual practice, have advocated for precisely this kind of discernment.
Study. Question. Investigate. Examine the evidence. Conduct your own responsible experiments. Observe what happens. And remain willing to revise your understanding.
Your personal experience is valuable information, even when it isn't sufficient to establish a scientific conclusion.
We don't have to accept ideas blindly, and we don't have to reject them reflexively either.
The opposite of blind belief isn't automatic disbelief. It's discernment.
And perhaps that's the point I most want to make.
I'm not interested in persuading people to abandon conventional medicine or accept claims without evidence.
I'm interested in encouraging people to become active, curious and informed participants in their own health and wellbeing.
To think critically. To explore responsibly. To exercise their capacity for choice.
Because surely the goal isn't to have somebody else tell us what to think.
It's to develop the confidence, curiosity and discernment to investigate for ourselves.
And speaking of choice…
Oh, and if you're here for women reclaiming their authority, trusting their instincts and activating choice as one of the most important muscles in their lives…
You might rather enjoy my book.
One Hundred Days of Rewilding is a funny, intimate and occasionally provocative account of what happened when I stopped waiting for permission and started taking a more active role in my health, creativity and life.
A little bit of both/and badassery, if you will.
I am an author, teacher & healer whose work incorporates the creative arts. These are offered as complementary practices, not replacements for appropriate medical care.