Antiaging Potential of Biofield Energy Healing Treatment in HFF-1 Cell Line Using Collagen level and Cellular Proliferation

, , , , ,

Open Access Journal of Gerontology & Geriatric Medicine, 4(5) (2018) .


Abstract

Skin health and aging are co-related with a complex biological process that are influenced by a combination of factors such as intrinsic (or endogenous) and extrinsic (or exogenous). Many skin based therapies including physical and chemical methods are in practice to rejuvenate the skin, but they might be related with some significant side-effects such as scarring. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of Biofield Energy Treatment (Consciousness Energy Healing Treatment-The Trivedi Effect®) in the HFF-1 cell line (Human Foreskin Fibroblast) and DMEM (Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium) for evaluation of skin health parameters such as proliferation rate and collagen level. The cell growth rate was evaluated at 24, 48, and 72 hours and the results observed with a significant growth in the Biofield Treated DMEM group compared with the Biofield Treated HFF-1 cells. The HFF-1 cellular proliferation rate was significantly (p≤0.001) increased by 85% in the Biofield Treated DMEM, while positive controls, ascorbic acid (10µM) and FBS (15% fetal bovine serum) reported with increased cell proliferation by 21% and 44%, respectively. Similarly, the collagen level was significantly (p≤0.01) increased in the Biofield Treated DMEM by 44.2%, while the Biofield Energy Treated cells did not showed significant change in collagen and proliferation rate as compared with control. Hence, the results concluded significant improved collagen and proliferation in the Biofield Energy Treated media (DMEM) for improving skin health. It can be concluded that The Trivedi Effect® might be a complementary and alternative approach with respect to the skin health, anti-aging in DMEM as compared with the HFF-1 cell line.



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