Reconnective Healing vs Reiki: What Actually Differs

Reconnective Healing is an energy practice created by Eric Pearl in the United States in the 1990s, in which the practitioner works with the hands without touching the body. The Reconnection is a separate process within the same system, done once in a lifetime. Neither one is Reiki, and neither has scientific backing. Here is the whole picture.

Why I am rewriting this

There was a short piece on this blog about the topic. It really was too short: it did not say where the practice comes from, and it did not say clearly what is known and what is not. This replaces it.

I am writing it because I am asked about it often, almost always in the same words: "is that the same as Reiki, but without touching?" The answer is no, and it is worth understanding why.

And I write it from where I stand: I am a Reiki practitioner, in the lineage of Mikao Usui. I do not practise Reconnective Healing. I will describe it with respect and without talking it down to flatter my own work.

Where Reconnective Healing comes from

There are no centuries here and no mystery, and saying so takes nothing away.

It was developed by Eric Pearl, a chiropractor practising in Los Angeles, from the early 1990s onward. Pearl recounts that his patients began reporting sensations and changes he did not attribute to what his hands were doing, and that from there he gradually formulated a different way of working.

In 2001 he published the book that gave the method its name, The Reconnection: Heal Others, Heal Yourself, and since then the practice has been taught in seminars around the world. It reached Colombia, like almost everything, through those seminars and the internet.

So: a contemporary practice, with an identifiable founder, a book and a date. When someone presents it to you as recovered ancient knowledge, you now know they are embellishing.

What "The Reconnection" is, and how it differs from a session

This is where people get confused, so let me separate the two.

Reconnective Healing refers to individual sessions. Within the system, a short series is usually proposed — commonly one to three — rather than an ongoing therapy.

The Reconnection is something else: a one-off process which, as taught, is done once in a lifetime, in two sessions on consecutive days. It is presented as a reconnecting of the body's lines with larger lines, not as a treatment for anything specific.

What that means in practice: they are two different services, at two different prices. Ask which one you are being offered before you pay.

The comparison, point by point

	Reiki	Reconnective Healing
Origin	Japan, early twentieth century, Mikao Usui	United States, 1990s, Eric Pearl
How it is done	Laying on of hands, defined positions, symbols at some levels	Hands held away from the body, no fixed positions, no symbols
Physical contact?	Usually yes, gentle; can be done without touch if you prefer	No; always worked without contact
Length	Usually 45–60 minutes	Usually 30–45 minutes
Number of sessions	Varies; often a series, then maintenance	A short series is proposed, generally one to three
How it is transmitted	Attunements given by a master, with a verifiable lineage	Seminar training; no attunement or lineage in the Reiki sense
What it proposes	To support relaxation and accompany the person's own healing capacity	A "reconnecting" of the person with a wider field of energy, light and information
What the evidence says	Limited and modest: small gains in quality of life; no proof it cures anything	Practically none: no rigorous trials support it

Being honest about the evidence

This is the part almost nobody writes, and it is the part that is most use to you.

For Reiki there is something, small and modest. The Cochrane review by Joyce and Herbison (2015) found only three randomised trials, with around 62 participants in total, and concluded there is not enough evidence to know whether Reiki helps with anxiety or depression. The NCCIH, at the US National Institutes of Health, states that Reiki has not been clearly shown to be effective for any health purpose — and also that it has not been shown to cause harm. A more recent meta-analysis (Liu and colleagues, 2025, in Systematic Reviews, 11 trials and 661 participants) found a small but statistically significant improvement in quality of life, with high heterogeneity between studies. I go through all of it in does Reiki work?.

For Reconnective Healing, the honest answer is shorter: there is no body of clinical evidence supporting it. There is no reference systematic review, no solid randomised trials, and the little that circulates is preliminary, based on very small samples, or produced from within the practice's own orbit. When you see a headline claiming otherwise, ask for the source and read it.

So the real comparison is not "which one has more science". It is: one has scarce and modest evidence; the other has essentially none. Neither cures anything, and anyone telling you otherwise is lying to you.

What is true of both: they are non-invasive practices, with no drugs and no procedures, and the risk does not lie in the technique. The risk lies in what someone stops doing because they trust it.

So which should I choose?

I do not think that is the best question. I would offer you three others.

Do you want to be touched, or not? Some people need contact in order to let go; for others, contact is precisely the hard part. That is a legitimate and very practical criterion. In Reiki you can ask for a session without touch and it is done exactly that way.

Do you want a process, or an experience? Reiki, the way I work it, is closer to sustained accompaniment. Reconnective Healing is presented as something brief and finite, not repeated indefinitely.

Can you verify the person? This weighs more than the modality does. In Reiki you can ask for the lineage and check it. In any practice you can ask about training, conditions and a clear price. I wrote a full guide in how to choose a Reiki practitioner, and the criteria apply just as well to the other.

One warning sign that applies to everything: if you are promised a cure, told to stop a treatment, pressured to buy a package on the spot, or told that something in you is "broken" and only they can fix it — leave.

What I see in my practice, in Medellín

Over these years I have sat with plenty of people who arrive having already tried several things. They bring a list: constellations, akashic records, biodecoding, Reconnective Healing, Reiki.

What worries me is not that they tried. It is the feeling they sometimes arrive with: that they are broken and need someone to fix them. Many people sell that idea, and it does damage.

I work from the opposite conviction. Your body knows how to heal. What we do here is remind it of the way and hold the space for a while. It is God who heals; the practitioner is only a channel.

People also ask me whether Reiki will "work better" than what they tried before. I cannot answer that, and I would rather say so. What I can tell them is what will happen on this table, how long it lasts, what it feels like, and what I will never promise. You can ask for that much anywhere you go.

Frequently asked questions

Is Reconnective Healing just Reiki without touch? No. They share the general idea of working with the hands and with something unseen, but they come from different traditions, are learned differently and propose different things. Reiki has lineage, attunements and symbols; Reconnective Healing uses none of that and explicitly presents itself as a separate system. And in Reiki you can also ask for a session with no physical contact.

How many Reconnective Healing sessions are usual? In that system a short series is generally proposed, commonly one to three sessions, rather than ongoing accompaniment. The Reconnection is separate: it is framed as a single process, in two sessions on consecutive days. Always ask which of the two you are being offered, and what each costs, before booking.

Does it help with anxiety, pain or insomnia? There is no evidence that allows that claim, for Reconnective Healing or for Reiki. Reiki shows small signals for quality of life and relaxation; Reconnective Healing has almost nothing published rigorously. If you have anxiety, chronic pain or insomnia, your doctor or psychologist comes first. This can accompany, never substitute.

Can it be done at a distance? Both practices have people offering distance sessions. It is a legitimate modality within each tradition, and I explain how I understand it in distance Reiki. That said, the absence of evidence is even greater here, so decide with that in front of you — and do not pay for long packages in advance.

Is it dangerous to try? There is no indication that these practices cause physical harm in themselves; they are non-invasive and involve no drugs. The real harm appears when someone delays a diagnosis, abandons medication, or spends money they do not have chasing a promise of a cure. That is the risk worth talking about, and no serious practitioner will dodge it.

---

Disclaimer

This article is for educational purposes and does not replace diagnosis, treatment or follow-up by a healthcare professional. Reiki is a complementary practice: it accompanies, it does not substitute. If you are under medical or psychological care, continue it and talk to your treating professional before adding any complementary therapy.

---

If you would like to know how I work before deciding anything, see the Sananda Reiki session or write to me on WhatsApp at +57 314 811 7561. Sessions are available in English, in person in Medellín and Santa Elena or at a distance. Asking commits you to nothing.