The Use of Consciousness Energy Healing Based Herbomineral Formulation for Skin Anti-Aging Strategies
Vaibhav Rajan Parulkar, Mahendra Kumar Trivedi, Alice Branton, Dahryn Trivedi, Gopal Nayak, Sambhu Charan Mondal, Snehasis Jana
The present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of a Consciousness Energy Healing (The Trivedi Effect®) Treatment based test formulation and medium (DMEM) against skin health parameters using HFF-1, HaCaT, and B16-F10 cells. The test formulation and DMEM were divided into two parts. One part of the test formulation and one part of the DMEM received the Consciousness Energy Healing Treatment by Vaibhav Rajan Parulkar and were defined as the Biofield Energy Treated samples, while the other parts were denoted as the untreated test samples. Cell viability using MTT assay showed more than 75% cells were viable in all the tested concentrations in three cells, indicating that the test formulation was safe and nontoxic. The percent cell proliferation by BrdU assay was significantly increased by 434.14%, 244.77%, and 268.53% in the UT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation, BT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation, and BT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation groups, respectively at 8.75 µg/mL in relation to the UT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation group. Elastin was significantly (p≤0.001) increased 93.52% and 75.81% in the UT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation and BT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation groups, respectively at 10 µg/mL compared to the UT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation group. Hyaluronic acid was significantly increased by 100.07% (p≤0.05), 41.60%, and 50.10% in the UT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation, BT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation, and BT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation groups, respectively at 0.625 µg/mL in relation to the UT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation group. Melanin was decreased by 10.09% and 6.51% in the UT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation and BT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation groups, respectively at 0.125 µg/mL compared to the UT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation group. Protection of skin cells after UV-B exposure data displayed that the cell viability was increased by 7.22%, 5.75%, and 8.15% in the BT-DMEM + BT-Test Formulation at 0.625%, 1.25%, and 2.5% µg/mL, respectively compared to the UT-DMEM + UT-Test Formulation group. Wound healing data exhibited significant wound closure and cell migration activities in the HFF-1 cells compared to the UT-DMEM + UT-Test formulation group. Overall, the data suggests that the Biofield Energy Treated DMEM and test formulation demonstrated better skin protection action compared to the untreated DMEM and test formulation. Therefore, the Biofield Energy Treated test herbomineral formulation could be useful for the development of effective cosmetic products for the prevention and treatment of several skin problems such as erythema, contact dermatitis, skin aging, wrinkles and/or change in the skin color, etc.