Comprehensive Vital Organ Biomarkers Analysis of the Consciousness Energy Healing Based Novel Test Formulation Using Various Cell-lines

, , , , , ,

BioMed Research Journal, 3(3), 125-137 (2019) .


Abstract

The aim was to study the effect of the Consciousness Energy Treated test formulation on vital organ functions 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 untreated (UT) and other part received the Biofield Energy Treatment remotely by a renowned Biofield Energy Healer, Alan Joseph Balmer, USA and was labeled as the Biofield Energy Treated (BT) test formulation/media. Cell viability data suggested that the test formulation was found as safe and non-toxic in six different cells. The Biofield Energy Treated medium (BT-Med) + Biofield Energy Treated Test Item (BT-TI) group showed 181% and 82.2% restoration of cell viability at 1 and 10 µg/mL, respectively in human cardiac fibroblasts cells (HCF) compared to the UT-Med + UT-TI group. The UT-Med + BT-TI group showed 126.8% and 86.3% restoration of cell viability at 10 and 25 µg/mL, respectively with respect to the untreated group in human hepatoma cells (HepG2). Furthermore, 101.2% (at 10 µg/mL), 103.6% (at 10 µg/mL) and 135% (at 25 µg/mL) restoration of cell viability was observed in adenocarcinomic human alveolar basal epithelial cells (A549) by UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively compared to the untreated. The alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level was significantly increased by 90%, 87.3% and 86.9% in the UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively at 10 µg/mL in human bone osteosarcoma cells (MG-63) compared to the untreated. Additionally, the level of ALP was significantly increased by 137% in the BT-Med + UT-TI group in human endometrial adenocarcinoma cells (Ishikawa) at 1 µg/mL compared to the untreated. The percent protection of HCF (heart) cells (decreased of LDH activity) was significantly increased by 52.1%, 65.9% and 63.5% at 1 µg/mL in the UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively as compared to the untreated in HCF cells. The percent protection of HepG2 (liver) cells (decreased of ALT activity) was significantly increased by 157% and 58.9% at 0.1 and 10 µg/mL, respectively in the BT-Med + BT-TI group compared to the untreated group in HepG2 cells. The percent protection of A549 (lungs) cells (increased of SOD activity) was significantly increased by 168% and 135.4% in the UT-Med + BT-TI group at 10 and 25 µg/mL, respectively; while, 137% at 10 µg/mL in the BT-Med + UT-TI group as compared to the untreated group. Serotonin level was significantly increased by 50.8% (at 63 µg/mL), 78.8% (at 63 µg/mL) and 52.7% (at 1 µg/mL) in the UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively as compared to the untreated in human neuroblastoma cells (SH-SY5Y). The relative quantification (RQ) of vitamin D receptor (VDR) was significantly increased by 265.5% (at 0.1 µg/mL) and 253.4% (at 1 µg/mL) in the UT-Med + BT-TI group; while 335.3% (at 0.1 µg/mL) in the BT-Med + BT-TI group compared to the untreated in MG-63 cells. Overall, these results suggest that Biofield Treated test formulation significantly improved the relevant bones, heart, liver, lungs and brain-related 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