Many practitioners are stating that they do “Energy Medicine”. What does this mean? I would like to provide some areas of thought, questions, and possible research.

Do you practice Energy Medicine? If so, what is your definition of energy? What types of energy do you measure, diagnose, and treat? How do you do this? What effect does your treatment have (both long-term and short-term), and where is it acting? What is your definition of medicine?

If you’ve gotten this far without being able to answer these questions in a concrete and definitive manner, then it’s time to do some research and study. Too often terms and concepts in this area are thrown about with little true understanding of what is meant by them. Is this the mark of an expert?

Let’s look at EAV as an example. These days, almost anyone can take a two-day course, buy a machine, and be an “Energy Medicine expert”. My experience is that many, if not most, of them do not understand what they are doing. I recently gave a lecture and mentioned that Infrared saunas can cause energetic damage. A doctor in the audience challenged this statement, saying that he had done IR therapy, felt good, and found no damage on EAV testing. I responded that EAV does not test in the area in which IR does its damage, and thus would not be an accurate reflection of what was happening. He was totally unable to grasp this concept, and kept repeating that his EAV measurements hadn’t changed. His belief was that EAV testing gave him total information about his energy system. Is this true?

Let’s review some basics about EAV testing. Where does it test? According to traditional EAV, it tests the energy characteristics of the interstitial areas, or, as Pischinger states, the matrix or ground substance. This is an extracellular space. It does not test the cell membrane, intracellular space, nucleus, etc. As time went on, various filters have been used in an attempt to test these other areas via manipulation of specific frequencies. But, is it really possible to obtain information that is not in the ability of the equipment to originally measure? How was this tested and verified? What information are these filters really supplying? I bring these questions up as a starting point. Dr. Helmut Schimmel’s solution was to design a totally different machine, utilizing light to measure other areas of the system.

Every test gives specific types of information, and I haven’t seen any device or test that gives all types of information. Yet, many people test with only one device and assume that this gives definitive data about their patient and the subsequent treatment requirements.

Here’s another example. I have many patients who have stated that they have parasites. They state that they were diagnosed through some type of energy device, such as EAV. Based on this diagnosis, the patient is then placed on an herbal formula to treat the parasites. Is it possible to make a physical diagnosis based on this type of evaluation? Are we able to test energetically, then make a physical diagnosis and use a physical remedy? What are the limits, dangers, and characteristics of crossing modalities in this way? Even with different types of energetic testing, should we use the exact type of energy as treatment? Or, can we cross over into using another type of energy as therapy, and still get the results we need?

As physics has shown us, everything is truly connected. Therefore, shouldn’t any type of approach or combination of approaches work? What difference does it make if we’re crossing back and forth between energy types and energy/physical. The place to start with here is the degree of difference a treatment makes, or how potent it is in directly addressing the needs of the patient at this moment. If we maintain consistency between what we are measuring, and what we are using as therapy, we obtain a more potent effect. With this approach, we are getting maximum effect at the area of intervention, rather than having the treatment effect a more distant area, and have to go through one or more transitions to reach the area that was originally measured. It is best to test and treat within the same modality, and recognize the limits of what our testing is telling us. Use a different test to measure different parts of the system, and treat appropriately.

I hope that this has generated some thought, and also perhaps future discussion. We are at present touching the surface of this vast area of our being, and I, for one, look forward to future discoveries in Energy Medicine.

An Exclusive Article for Members
From THE BRIDGE Newsletter of OIRF
Published October 15, 2007

© Copyright 2007, Dr. Ted Cole, Ohio, USA

About the author

Featured News

  • Instrumentation News and Updates:

    January 2015 In view of our continued emphasis on devices and instrument assisted methods following the discontinuation of so many homeopathic and natural remedies, [...]

    January 20, 2015|Commentaries & Editorials|
  • 40th Anniversary Germany Tour 2013

    Neuschwanstein Castle, Schwangau, Germany We didn't get to see it this time, but we did travel through the Swiss Alps and several other scenic [...]

    January 15, 2014|Articles|
  • MORA Therapy in North America

    First of all, I want to thank Dr. Herrmann (the Chairman), and the Board of Directors of the “International Physicians Society for Biocybernetic Medicine”, [...]

    April 3, 1997|Articles|
  • Removing Gallstones Naturally

    THERAPY TIP Submitted by: Dr. Justin Morais, Singapore Dear Friends, I found the English written version! This is a useful piece of information that [...]

    October 15, 2009|Points of Interest|

Sign-up to receive updates sent straight to your inbox