Impact of an external energy on Enterococcus faecalis [ATCC – 51299] in relation to antibiotic susceptibility and biochemical reactions – An experimental study

, , , ,

Journal of Accord Integrative Medicine, 5(1), 119-130 (2009) .


Abstract

Background :
While spiritual and mental energies are known to man, their impact has never been scientifically measurable in the material world and they remain outside the domain of science. The present experiments on Enterococcus faecalis [ATCC –51299], report the effects of such energy transmitted through a person, Mr. Mahendrakumar Trivedi, which has produced an impact measurable in scientifically rigorous manner.

Methods:
Enterococcus faecalis strains in revived and lyophilized state were subjected to spiritual energy transmitted through thought intervention and/or physical touch of Mr. Trivedi to the sealed tubes containing strain, the process taking about 3 minutes and were analyzed within 10 days after incubation. All tests were performed with the help of automation on the Microscan Walkaway System in Microbiology Laboratory - accredited by The College of American Pathologists

Results:
The results indicated that Mr.Trivedi’s energy has changed 9 of 27 biochemical characteristics of Enterococcus faecalis along with significant changes in susceptibility pattern in 5 of 31 antibiotics. The Biotype number has changed from the original control strain giving rise to 2 different biotypes in treated samples while the external energy/treatment given was the same for all treated samples suggestive of random polymorphism as analyzed through the automated machine.

Conclusions:
These results cannot be explained by current theories of science, and indicate a potency in Mr.Trivedi’s energy, providing a model for science to be able to investigate the impact of spiritual energy in a rigorous manner.

In lyophilized state, biochemical and enzymatic characteristics could be altered.



Add your rating and review

If all scientific publications that you have read were ranked according to their scientific quality and importance from 0% (worst) to 100% (best), where would you place this publication? Please rate by selecting a range.


0% - 100%

This publication ranks between % and % of publications that I have read in terms of scientific quality and importance.


Keep my rating and review anonymous
Show publicly that I gave the rating and I wrote the review