Evaluation of the Biofield Energy Treated Novel Test Formulation on Overall Organs Health Specific Biomarkers

, , , , , ,

Alternative Medicine & Chiropractic Open Access Journal, 2(3) (2019) .


Abstract

The aim was to study the impact of the Biofield Energy Treated test formulation on the function of vital organs viz. bones, heart, liver, lungs, and brain in various cell-based assays. The test formulation and the cell media were divided into two parts; one part was untreated (UT) and other part received the Biofield Energy Treatment remotely by a renowned Biofield Energy Healer, John Suzuki, USA and was labeled as the Biofield Energy Treated (BT) test formulation/media. Cell viability data suggested that the test formulation was safe and non-toxic in nature in six different cells. The Biofield Treated medium (BT-Med) + Biofield Treated Test Item (BT-TI) group showed 91.6%, 56.9%, and 114.5% restoration of cell viability at 1, 10, and 25 µg/mL, respectively in human cardiac fibroblasts cells (HCF) compared to the UT-Med + UT-TI group. Moreover, BT-Med + BT-TI group showed 70.6%, 126.3%, and 60.2% restoration of cell viability at 1, 25, and 63 µg/mL, respectively; while 78.5% in the UT-Med + BT-TI group in human hepatoma cells (HepG2) compared to untreated. Furthermore, 72.6% (at 0.1 µg/mL), 57.4% (at 25 µg/mL), and 90.4% (at 63 µg/mL) restoration of cell viability was observed in adenocarcinomic human alveolar basal epithelial cells (A549) by BT-Med + UT-TI, UT-Med + BT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively compared to the untreated. The alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level was significantly increased by 82.2% and 106.6% in the UT-Med + BT-TI and BT-Med + UT-TI groups, respectively at 10 µg/mL; while 80.2% (at 10 µg/mL) in the BT-Med + BT-TI group in human bone osteosarcoma cells (MG-63) compared to the untreated. Additionally, the level of ALP was significantly increased by 90.2% (at 0.1 µg/mL) and 78.3% (at 10µg/mL) in the BT-Med + BT-TI group in human endometrial adenocarcinoma cells (Ishikawa) compared to the untreated. The percent protection of HCF (heart) cells (decreased of LDH activity) was significantly increased by 63.7%, 59.6%, and 63.3% at 1, 10, and 25 µg/mL, respectively in the BT-Med + BT-TI group; while 122.2% (at 0.1 µg/mL) in the UT-Med + BT-TI group as compared to the untreated in HCF cells. The percent protection of HepG2 (liver) cells (decreased of ALT activity) was significantly increased by 62.8% and 153.2% at 1 µg/mL in the UT-Med + BT-TI and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively compared to untreated in HepG2 cells. The percent protection of A549 (lungs) cells (increased of SOD activity) was significantly increased by 133.1%, 153.8%, and 107.5% in the UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively at 10 µg/mL compared to untreated. Serotonin level was significantly increased by 75.7% (at 10 µg/mL), 124.1% (at 10 µg/mL), and 73.5% (at 10 µg/mL) in the BT-Med + UT-TI group at 10, 25, and 63 µg/mL, respectively; while 107.7% (at 25 µg/mL) in the BT-Med + BT-TI group as compared to the untreated in human neuroblastoma cells (SH-SY5Y). The relative quantification (RQ) of vitamin D receptor (VDR) was significantly increased by 162.2% (at 10 µg/mL), 193.3% (at 1 µg/mL), and 148.7% (at 0.01 µg/mL) in the UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively compared to the untreated in MG-63 cells. Overall, these results suggest that Biofield Treated test formulation significantly improved the bones, heart, liver, lungs, and brain functional enzyme biomarkers. Altogether data suggest that the Biofield Energy Treatment (The Trivedi Effect®) can be useful to protect and maintain the normal function of each vital organ such as lungs, liver, heart, brain, and bones. Therefore, The Trivedi Effect® can be used as a complementary and alternative therapy against several disorders such as coronary artery disease, heart attack, heart failure, arrhythmias, congenital heart disease, cirrhosis, cardiomyopathy, Wilson disease, liver cancer, hemochromatosis, pneumonia, asthma, cystic fibrosis, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, osteoporosis, etc.



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



Notice: Undefined index: publicationsCaching in /www/html/epistemio/application/controllers/PublicationController.php on line 2240