In Vitro Effects of Biofield Energy Treated Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Bone Formation by Osteoblast Cell Line (MG-63)

, , , ,

Journal of Orthopedic Research and Therapy, 2018(8) (2018) .


Abstract

Inadequate intake of vitamin D leads to hormonal imbalance, aging, decreased calcium absorption, and bone loss. Present study aimed to evaluate potential of The Trivedi Effect®- Biofield Energy Healing Treatment on vitamin D3 as Test Item (TI) and DMEM to improve bone health in MG-63 cells. One part of each samples was received Consciousness Energy Healing Treatment by Dahryn Trivedi and those samples were labeled as Biofield Energy Treated (BT) samples, while other parts of each sample were denoted as untreated TI (UT-TI). Cell viability assay (MTT) found test items were safe and nontoxic in the tested concentrations. ALP was considerably improved by 753.3%, 1173.3%, and 424.4% in UT-DMEM+BT-TI, BT-DMEM+UT-TI, and BT-DMEM+BT-TI, respectively at 0.1 µg/mL compared to untreated. Collagen was significantly increased by 454.7% and 96.2% in BT-DMEM+UT-TI and BT-DMEM+BT-TI, respectively at 1 µg/mL, while 202.4% (at 50 µg/mL) increased collagen in UT-DMEM+BT-TI compared to untreated. Moreover, percent of bone mineralization was significantly increased in UT-DMEM+BT-TI, BT-DMEM+UT-TI, and BT-DMEM+BT-TI by 301.4% (at 50 µg/mL), 143.3% (at 50 µg/mL), and 178.0% (at 100 µg/mL) respectively, compared to untreated. Thus, Biofield Energy Treated vitamin D3 and Biofield Energy Treated DMEM were found safe and to have remarkably improved the bone health parameters, which could be a powerful alternative nutraceutical supplement to combat against various bone-related diseases including low bone density and osteoporosis, osteogenesis imperfecta, Paget’s disease of bone, rickets, osteomalacia, bone and/or joint pain, increased frequency of fractures, deformed bones, osteoma, chondrodystrophia fetalis, hormonal imbalance, stress, aging, bone loss and fractures.



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