Being, as yet, unregulated by government or AMA agencies, and seeking to remain so, Reiki practitioners around the country have adopted a Code of Ethics that provides guidelines for our practice.
As with most alternative therapies and treatments, some in the traditional western medical community take issue with methods that cannot be reproduced in the laboratory, capsulized, or regulated.
To offer a bit of transparency to what I do as a Reiki Practitioner, I offer an alternate opinion. My observations and opinions follow in italics.
Reiki Is Nonsense
Stephen Barrett, M.D. The following are excerpts from the website Quackwatch.com
Reiki is one of several nonsensical methods commonly referred to as "energy healing." These methods are based on the idea that the body is surrounded or permeated by an energy field that is not measurable by ordinary scientific instrumentation. The alleged force, said to support life, is known as ki in Japan, as chi or qi in China, and as prana in India. Reiki practitioners claim to facilitate healing by strengthening or "balancing" it. (Mostly true...except for the nonsensical part)
The most comprehensive review of reiki research was done by Edzard Ernst, M.D., Ph.D. and his colleagues at the University of Exeter. After surveying studies published through January 2008, they concluded that most were poorly designed and "the evidence is insufficient to suggest that reiki is an effective treatment for any condition." (I would recommend he check out what The Harvard School of Medicine has to say)
In 2009, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops concluded that "reiki therapy finds no support either in the findings of natural science or in Christian belief" and urged Catholic health-care facilities and clergy not to promote or support it. (Reiki and the Reiki practitioner have no argument with any religious organization nor do we claim to have the corner on alternative healing methods. I find it sad that some people are so threatened by something new that they make blanket claims and recommendations to those under their influence.)
And...Reiki practitioners claim that their training allows one to channel the "universal life energy" that is present in all things. This "universal life energy," however, is unknown to natural science. (Which natural science are we referring to here?)
Reiki has no substantiated health value and lacks a scientifically plausible rationale. Science-based healthcare settings should not tolerate its use, and scarce government research dollars should not be used to study it further. (Again, I would refer to the Harvard School of Medicine for a different medical opinion as to the value and effectiveness of Reiki)