Biofield Energy Treatment Based Test Formulation as a Novel and Efficient Approach on Various Biomarkers in human Bones, Heart, Liver, Lungs, and Brain Cells

, , , , , ,

Open Access Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 3(3) (2019) .


Abstract

Multiple organ dysfunction syndromes (MODS) are one of the common reasons for increased mortality rate against healthcare services. The present experiment aimed to determine the impact of the Biofield Energy Treated test formulation on the function of vital organs such as bones, heart, liver, lungs, and brain using standard activity parameters in specific cell-based assays. The test formulation and cells medium was divided into two parts; one untreated (UT) and other part received the Biofield Energy Treatment remotely by a renowned Biofield Energy Healer, Laura Nelson Streicher, and USA and were labeled as the Biofield Energy Treated (BT) test formulation/media. The test formulation was tested against various activities using cell line assay. The test formulation was tested for cell viability, and the results showed that the test formulation was found non-toxic against all the cell lines at the tested concentrations. Cytoprotective activity among the experimental groups showed a significant improved activity by 156.9% at 1 µg/mL in UT- medium (Med) + BT - test item/formulation (TI) group in human cardiac fibroblasts cells (HCF) cells, while 94.5% at 25.5 µg/mL in the UT-Med + BT-TI group in human hepatoma cells (HepG2), and 92.4% at 63.75 µg/mL in the BT-Med + BT-TI group as compared with the untreated test group in adenocarcinomic human alveolar basal epithelial cells (A549) cells as compared with the untreated test group. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity in MG-63 cells was significantly increased by 80.2% and 93.5% at 10 and 50 µg/mL respectively in the UT-Med + BT-TI group, while in Ishikawa cells showed maximum increased ALP activity by 51.5% at 1 µg/mL in UT-Med + BT-TI group as compared to the untreated group. The percent protection of HCF (heart) cells (decreased of lactate dehydrogenase-LDH activity) was significantly increased by 156.9% and 18.3% at 1 and 10 µg/mL concentrations respectively, in UT-Med + BT-TI group, while BT-Med + UT-TI group showed increased protection by 24.5% and 17.7% at10 and 25.5 µg/mL respectively, and 67.1%, 32.2%, 47.7%, and 73.1% improved cellular protection 1, 10, 25.5, and 63.75 µg/mL respectively, in BT-Med + BT-TI group as compared to the untreated test group. Alanine amino transferase (ALT) in terms of percent protection of HepG2 (liver) cells (decreased of ALT activity) was reported by 93.1% and 64.1% at 1 µg/mL in the UT-Med + BT-TI and BT-Med + UT-TI groups, respectively as compared to the untreated group. Cellular protection of A549 (lungs) cells (increased of superoxide dismutase-SOD activity) in terms of percentage was increased by 20.6% (at 0.1 µg/mL) and 6.9% (at 10 µg/mL) in the UT-Med + BT-TI and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively as compared to untreated group. Serotonin level was significantly increased by 59.3% (at 10 µg/mL), 55.6% (at 1 µg/mL), and 100.1% (at 0.1 µg/mL) in the UT-Med + BT-TI, BT-Med + UT-TI, and BT-Med + BT-TI groups, respectively compared to untreated in human neuroblastoma cells (SH-SY5Y). However, the relative quantification (RQ) of vitamin D receptor (VDR) was significantly increased by 150.6% (at 50 µg/mL), 380.1% (at 10 µg/mL), and 148.1% (at 50 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 MG-63 cells. In conclusion, test formulation would be significantly useful for multiple organ health and improve overall health of bones, heart, liver, lungs, and brain after treatment with the Biofield Energy treated test formulation (The Trivedi Effect®). As a complementary and alternative therapy, Biofield Energy approach can be used against coronary artery disease, arrhythmias, congenital heart disease, cardiomyopathy, cirrhosis, liver cancer, hemochromatosis, asthma, chronic bronchitis, cystic fibrosis, 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