Disturbed Energy Field

Published

I was looking through my Doenges nursing dx book, and there is a NANDA dx of Disturbed Energy Field as evidenced by objective things like waves, spikes, color changes, or holes in the pt energy flow. What the heck?! :icon_roll I wrote it in as a possible dx on my final care plan, my teacher was cracking up.

Not only can we create anti-matter, we can harness its properties for good.

Back to PET scans, for instance: We use positrons, which are anti-electrons. They collide and destroy each other, releasing gamma rays. Which we can detect.

Science is awesome like that.

That's why we love science. ;)

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Med/Surg/Tele/Acute Rehab.

There may be some sort of placebo effect thing going on here on the part of a desperately ill person. That being said, the thought of a practitioner doing whatever they do...makes me snicker. As to how this became an official ND...baffling.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in informatics.

I am so upset that my new Nursing book explains how to do TT, and earlier tries to stress that rationales should be evidence based. No one has ever demonstrated that we have energy fields. Emily Rosa has shown that the so called "experts" in TT cannot tell the difference if there was body part under there hand or not. TT is an embarrassment and having a Nursing DX related to it brings nursing back to the dark ages. How can nursing be taken seriously by the medical profession, if we hold on to bad science. It is so frustrating to me that we are dumbing down nursing education with this bunk, while on the other hand pushing evidence based practice. Thank you for letting me rant! This subject is very disturbing to me!

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in MS, ED.
Then proponents of it need to stop supporting it blindly and get to work establishing data in support of their hypothesis.

For a third time, I'm in favor of research and subsequent advances in pain management and increased quality of life. Perhaps the detractors need to stop criticizing it blindly, particularly as a study currently in progress has already been cited in a previous post.

I'll get right to work as soon as you get to work disproving the existence of an invisible dragon in my garage. You once again have shifted the burden of proof.

I don't need to shift a burden of proof; nearly ten years of energy work is proof enough and is the reason I believe what I do. As for nursing research, case studies are likely what validated the practice of healing touch among nurses as well as the acceptance of this diagnosis in the mid 90s.

Your invisible dragon doesn't help patients in pain. Energy work has and can, for reasons we don't fully understand yet.

This is dodging the issue by calling people who don't accept nursing practice on faith alone "closed minded". Bravo.

I'm in favor of research; others would rather laugh away the practice and cite James Randi as some sort of reference. :rolleyes:

Document and publish double blindeds compared to control, then.

I don't care much for nursing research, myself, but there is a continuous study in progress, as previously cited.

That's a poor argument-- snake oil medicine has existed since the dawn of time. Doesn't make it true or right.

Perhaps you missed my point: energy work is not some new trend, and it sure wasn't discovered or developed by a nurse, (much as they may want to take credit for it.) There are many people who seek it out, many who have wonderful experiences, and many who practice.

I suppose your lack of firsthand experience or knowledge of the practice trumps the direct experiences of thousands of others? Really?

The onus is on those making the extraordinary (and extranatural) claims to research a mechanism and design testable experiments to validate their hypotheses. Science.

The benefits are reported by patients. I advocate research to investigate what is really happening in energy sessions. Problem being?

Perhaps you'd like to stop the practice altogether though patients receive benefit from participating?

Straw man. Not responding.

This was absolutely a valid question. Any time one stonewalls research into a practice - whether it is proved to be valid or ultimately discredited - we are ignoring an opportunity to learn.

It is quackery precisely because it is untested and it's central concept is supernatural or "untestable" in orgin, so say proponents. That's a red flag for quackery. If you claim x has a detectable effect, you can test for that effect. Pure and simple.

Okay, so talk to the patients receiving the treatment. Are they reporting positive benefits?

Oh yeah - that's what got us to where we are: reported positive benefits without explanation of how it works. Research is needed to determine how and why this works. Why is that a problem again?

Regards,

Southern

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Yea its like seeing Chakra or Chi, in my humble opinion its a crock of ...well you get the idea. The whole idea of waving your hands in front of someones head to alleviate a headache seems like a load. Oh well if it works for you it works.

I've been a reiki practitioner for awhile now- and yes- it does work. Call it a crock of... if you like- but IMO if it helps someone- it helps someone and I really don't give a flying fig whether the academia snob squad respects it or not.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Part of it may be the simple factor of human contact. Babies require it to thrive- perhaps that need is carried into adulthood- at least as far as being able to affect positive immune/healing response based on it. Or yes- it could be a placebo- who knows. But, as a reiki practitioner- all I know is that it *does* work- and frankly, if I have a tool in my box that I know works- I'm going to use it.

Also- if all else has failed/isn't working- who's to say there isn't actually something to it if it's the only thing that IS working? IMO there is at least a reasonable chance that there IS something scientific to these alternative practices- but it just hasn't been proven/discovered yet. How many things started out as "bunk" later to be proven effective with scientific backing?

I am so upset that my new Nursing book explains how to do TT, and earlier tries to stress that rationales should be evidence based. No one has ever demonstrated that we have energy fields. Emily Rosa has shown that the so called "experts" in TT cannot tell the difference if there was body part under there hand or not. TT is an embarrassment and having a Nursing DX related to it brings nursing back to the dark ages. How can nursing be taken seriously by the medical profession, if we hold on to bad science. It is so frustrating to me that we are dumbing down nursing education with this bunk, while on the other hand pushing evidence based practice. Thank you for letting me rant! This subject is very disturbing to me!
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Maternal - Child Health.
Research is needed to determine how and why this works. Why is that a problem again?

Regards,

Southern

Because it hasn't been done!

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU Level III.

This is one reason why the medical profession looks down on nurses and our "diagnoses".... they are NOT understandable at all. NANDA is a joke.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ED, Tele, Psych.
This is one reason why the medical profession looks down on nurses and our "diagnoses".... they are NOT understandable at all. NANDA is a joke.

:yeahthat:

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I have to agree with NeoNurseTX. I just started NS and was quite disappointed to see "Disturbed Energy Field" as on of our "diagnoses". It's fine if someone wants to believe in and perform these alternative practices, but they don't have a place in nursing, IMO.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
Yea its like seeing Chakra or Chi, in my humble opinion its a crock of ...well you get the idea. The whole idea of waving your hands in front of someones head to alleviate a headache seems like a load. Oh well if it works for you it works.

It works! My chiropracter practised "Network Chiropractic" which involved energy field awareness, and only adjusted me "when I was ready". Then the subluxation happened practically on its own! It is also emotionally cathartic. Well, I just convinced myself to go back for more treatments.

By the way, you don't see Chi, as that's inner energy. Don't knock stuff unless you have enough information about it. Colors describe areas of chakra, but chakra itself, is within.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.

By the way, you don't see Chi, as that's inner energy. Don't knock stuff unless you have enough information about it. Colors describe areas of chakra, but chakra itself, is within.

Accordingly, don't hock stuff unless you have enough information about it.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion