Studies on the Efficacy of Biofield Therapies

In vitro Evaluation of Biofield Treatment on Viral Load Against Human Immunodeficiency-1 and Cytomegalo Viruses (2015)

Source: Mahendra Kumar TRIVEDI, Alice BRANTON, Dahryn TRIVEDI al. In vitro Evaluation of Biofield Treatment on Viral Load Against Human Immunodeficiency-1 and Cytomegalo Viruses. American Journal of Health Research [online]. Vol. 3, No. 6, 2015, pp. 338-343. doi: 10.11648/j.ajhr.20150306.14. Published online November 9, 2015 [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from:
www.researchgate.net/publication/284513487_In_vitro_Evaluation_of_Biofield_Treatment_on_Viral_Load_Against_Human_Immunodeficiency-1_and_Cytomegalo_Viruses

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal American Journal of Health Research.

Abstract: Viral load quantification is the amount of particular viral DNA or RNA in a blood samples. It is one of the surrogate biomarker of AIDS. High viral load indicates that the immune system is failed to fight against viruses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of biofield treatment on HIV-1 and HCMV in terms of viral loads as surrogate marker. The viral load assay was performed on stored stock cultures of HIV infected human plasma samples before and after 7 days of biofield treatment using Roche COBAS® AMPLICOR analyzer. Viral load (HIV-1 RNA and HCMV DNAaemia) was considered as surrogate marker for assessment of the impact of Mr. Trivedi’s biofield treatment in HIV infected stored plasma samples. The viral load quantification of HIV-1 RNA in infected stored plasma samples was significantly reduced by 65% in biofield treated group as compared to control. Additionally, viral load of HCMV DNAaemia in infected stored plasma samples was also reduced by 80% in the biofield treated group as compared to control.

Because, children are more prone to HCMV infection and adults are generally liable to suffer from HIV-1 infection. As the biofield treatment has reduced HCMV DNAaemia, it could be beneficial for HIV infected children populations. Altogether, data suggest that biofield treatment has significantly reduced the viral load quantification in HIV-1 and HCMV infected stored plasma samples and could be a suitable alternative treatment strategy for AIDS patients in near future.

Biofield therapies: helpful or full of hype? A best evidence synthesis (2010)

Source: JAIN, S., MILLS, P.J. Biofield therapies: helpful or full of hype? A best evidence synthesis. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine [online]. 2010 Mar;17(1):116. doi: 10.1007/s1252900990624. UCLA Division of Cancer Prevention and Control Research, Los Angeles, CA, USA. sjain@ucsd.edu. [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19856109

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal International Journal of Behavioral Medicine – www.sbm.org/publications/international-journal-of-behavioral-medicine .

Detail: Biofield therapies (such as Reiki, therapeutic touch, and healing touch) are complementary medicine modalities that remain controversial and are utilized by a significant number of patients, with little information regarding their efficacy. This systematic review examines 66 clinical studies with a variety of biofield therapies in different patient populations. We conducted a quality assessment as well as a best evidence synthesis approach to examine evidence for biofield therapies in relevant outcomes for different clinical populations.

Conclusion: Studies overall are of medium quality, and generally meet minimum standards for validity of inferences. Biofield therapies show strong evidence for reducing pain intensity in pain populations, and moderate evidence for reducing pain intensity hospitalized and cancer populations. There is moderate evidence for decreasing negative behavioral symptoms in dementia and moderate evidence for decreasing anxiety for hospitalized populations. There is equivocal evidence for biofield therapies' effects on fatigue and quality of life for cancer patients, as well as for comprehensive pain outcomes and affect in pain patients, and for decreasing anxiety in cardiovascular patients. There is a need for further high-quality studies in this area. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

Biofield considerations in cancer treatment (2005)

Source: HIBDON, S.S. Biofield considerations in cancer treatment. Seminars in Oncology Nursing [online]. 2005 Aug;21(3):196200. Student Health and Wellness Center, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA. Hibdon@dsa.admin.unt.edu [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16092808

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Seminars in Oncology Nursing – www.seminarsoncologynursing.com .

Detail: Current research and national reports on biofield approaches in complementary therapies.

Conclusion: Caring for the biofield is important in assisting the patient with cancer to enhance vitality, reduce pain, fatigue, and other side effects as a result of cancer treatments. Cancer care must be holistic to provide maximal healing opportunities for patients. Consideration of the biofield is an important aspect of this care.

The Effects of Oscillatory Biofield Therapy on Pain and Functional Limitations Associated with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Study (2016)

Source: Reza NOURBAKHSH, Thomas J. BELL, Jason Benson MARTIN et al. The Effects of Oscillatory Biofield Therapy on Pain and Functional Limitations Associated with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Study. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine [online]. August 2016, DOI: 10.1089/acm.2016.0083 [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27487406
www.researchgate.net/publication/305826142_The_Effects_of_Oscillatory_Biofield_Therapy_on_Pain_and_Functional_Limitations_Associated_with_Carpal_Tunnel_Syndrome_Randomized_Placebo-Controlled_Double-Blind_Study

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine · August 2016, DOI: 10.1089/acm.2016.0083.

Abstract
Objectives: Biofield treatments have been used for pain control in patients with cancer and chronic pain. However, research on the effect of biofield treatment on specific somatic disorders is lacking. This study intends to investigate the effect of oscillating biofield therapy (OBFT) on symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Design: Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study.

Participants: Thirty patients with chronic carpal tunnel syndrome participated in the study.

Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to active or placebo treatment groups. Those in the treatment group received six sessions of OBFT with intention to treat during a period of 2 weeks. Patients in the placebo group had the same number of treatment sessions with mock OBFT treatment.

Outcome measure: The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire; Symptom Severity Scale (SSS); and Functional Status Scale (FSS) were used for outcome assessment.

Results: Both clinically and statistically significant changes in intensity of pain with activity (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-4.2; p = 0.000), night pain (p = 0.000, 95% CI, 3.2-5.7), DASH questionnaire (95% CI, 12.0-21.9; p = 0.000), SSS (95% CI, 0.64-1.15; p = 0.003), and FSS (95% CI, 0.41-0.97; p = 0.029) were found between the treatment and placebo groups. Statistically significant reduction in number of patients with positive results on the Phalen test (87%; p = 0.000), Tinel sign (73%; p = 0.000), and hand paresthesia (80%; p = 0,000) was noted in the treatment group. During 6-month follow-up, 86% of patients in the treatment group remained pain free and had no functional limitations.

Conclusion: OBFT can be a viable and effective treatment for improving symptoms and functional limitations associated with chronic carpal tunnel syndrome.

In Vitro Evaluation of Biofield Treatment on Cancer Biomarkers Involved in Endometrial and Prostate Cancer Cell Lines (2015)

Source: Mahendra Kumar TRIVEDI, Shrikant PATIL, Harish SHETTIGAR et al. In Vitro Evaluation of Biofield Treatment on Cancer Biomarkers Involved in Endometrial and Prostate Cancer Cell Lines. Journal of Cancer Science & Therapy [online]. 2015, 7:8 [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from: dx.doi.org/10.4172/1948-5956.1000358 ; www.researchgate.net/publication/281587211_In_Vitro_Evaluation_of_Biofield_Treatment_on_Cancer_Biomarkers_Involved_in_Endometrial_and_Prostate_Cancer_Cell_Lines ; www.omicsonline.org/open-access/in-vitro-evaluation-of-biofield-treatment-on-cancer-biomarkers-involved-in-endometrial-and-prostate-cancer-cell-lines-1948-5956-1000358.php?aid=58658

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Journal of Cancer Science & Therapy.

Abstract: Increasing cancer rates particularly in the developed world are associated with related lifestyle and environmental exposures. Combined immunotherapy and targeted therapies are the main treatment approaches in advanced and recurrent cancer.

An alternate approach, energy medicine is increasingly used in life threatening problems to promote human wellness. This study aimed to investigate the effect of biofield treatment on cancer biomarkers involved in human endometrium and prostate cancer cell lines.

Each cancer cell lines were taken in two sealed tubes i.e. one tube was considered as control and another tube was subjected to Mr. Trivedi’s biofield treatment, referred as treated.

Control and treated samples were studied for the determination of cancer biomarkers such as multifunctional cytokines viz. interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2R), prostate specific antigen (PSA), and free prostate specific antigen (FPSA) concentrations using ELISA assay on day 10. Experimental results showed a significant reduction of IL-6 level in endometrium (12%) and prostate (98.8%) cancer cell lines while a significant increase was observed in TNF-α level in endometrium (385%) and prostate (89.8%) cancer cell lines as compared to control. No alteration of PSA level was observed in biofield treated endometrium and prostate cell line. Similarly, no alterations were evident in IL-2R and FPSA levels in endometrium and prostate cell lines after biofield treatment as compared to control. In conclusion, results suggest that biofield treatment has shown significant alterations in the level of cytokines (IL-6 and TNF-α) in both endometrium and prostate cancer cell lines.

The Potential Impact of Biofield Treatment on Human Brain Tumor Cells: A Time-Lapse Video Microscopy (2015)

Source: Mahendra Kumar TRIVEDI, Shrikant PATIL, Harish SHETTIGAR et al. The Potential Impact of Biofield Treatment on Human Brain Tumor Cells: A Time-Lapse Video Microscopy. Journal of Integrative Oncology [online]. 2015, 4: 141. doi:10.4172/2329-6771.1000141 [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from: 
www.researchgate.net/publication/283036746_The_Potential_Impact_of_Biofield_Treatment_on_Human_Brain_Tumor_Cells_A_Time-Lapse_Video_Microscopy

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Journal of Integrative Oncology.

Abstract

Study background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common subtype of primary brain tumor in adults. The aim was to evaluate the impact of biofield treatment potential on human GBM and non-GBM brain cells using two time-lapse video microscopy technique.

Methods: The human brain tumor, GBM cultured cells were divided into two groups viz. GBM control and GBM treatment. Similarly, human normal brain cultured cells (non-GBM) were taken and divided into two groups viz. non-GBM control and non-GBM treatment. The GBM and non-GBM treatment groups were given Mr. Trivedi’s biofield treatment for the assessment of its potential. Two time-lapse (10 hours prior; 10 hours after) video microscopy experiment was performed on tumor and non-tumor brain cells in six replicate (n=6). For each microscopic field, the total cell number was counted and each cell was tracked over the 20 hours period. The potential impact of biofield treatment was assessed by comparing cell death rate in both GBM and non-GBM cells before and after biofieldtreatment.

Results: GBM control cells showed a basal level of cell death 10 hours prior and 10 hours after the biofield treatment, and the rate remained unchanged over the 20 hours period, while in treatment group of GBM, cell death rate was exponentially increased (41%) after biofield treatment as compared to control. The treated non-GBM cultured cells showed a significant reduction (64%) of cell death rate i.e. protective effects as compared to non-GBM control.

Conclusion: Altogether, data suggests that biofield treatment has significantly increased the cell death rate of treated GBM cells and simultaneously boost the viability of normal brain cells. Therefore, biofield treatment could be a suitable alternate treatment strategy for cancer patients in near future.

Evaluation of Vegetative Growth Parameters in Biofield Treated Bottle Gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) and Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) (2015)

Source: Mahendra Kumar TRIVEDI, Alice BRANTON, Dahryn TRIVEDI et al. Evaluation of Vegetative Growth. Parameters in Biofield Treated Bottle Gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) and Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus). International Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences [online]. Vol. 4, No. 6, 2015, pp. 688-694. doi: 10.11648/j.ijnfs.20150406.24 [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from:
www.researchgate.net/publication/288629552

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal International Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences.

Abstract: The objective of the study was to assess the growth contributing characters of biofield treated bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) and okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) seeds. The seeds of both crops were divided into two groups, one was kept aside and denoted as untreated, while the other group was subjected biofield energy treatment. The variabilities in growth contributing parameters were studied and compared with their control. Further the level of glutathione (GSH) in okra leaves, along with DNA fingerprinting in bottle gourd were analyzed using RAPD method.

After germination, the plants of bottle gourd were reported to be strong and erect with better canopy as compared with the control. The vegetative growth of okra plants after biofield energy treatment was found to be stout with small canopy, strong steam, and more fruits per nodes, that contributed high yield as compared with the control. However, endogenous level of GSH in the leaves of okra was increased by 47.65% as compared to the untreated group, which may suggest an improved immunity of okra crops. Besides, the DNA fingerprinting data, showed polymorphism (42%) between treated and untreated samples of bottle gourd. The overall results suggest that the biofield energy treatment on bottle gourd and okra seeds, results an improved overall growth of plant and yield, which may enhance flowering and fruiting per plant. Study results conclude that the biofield energy treatment could be an alternate method to improve the crop yield in agricultural science.

Impact of Biofield Energy Treatment on Soil Fertility (2015)

Source: Mahendra Kumar TRIVEDI, Alice BRANTON, Dahryn TRIVEDI et al. Impact of Biofield Energy Treatment on Soil Fertility. Earth Sciences [online]. Vol. 4, No. 6, 2015, pp. 275-279. doi: 10.11648/j.earth.20150406.19. [cit. 2018-07-28]. Available from:
www.researchgate.net/publication/288828716

Published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Earth Sciences.

Abstract: Measurement of soil components such as microbial population, minerals and obviously the content of organic carbon play the important roles for the productivity of crops and plants. The present study was attempted to evaluate the impact of Mr. Trivedi's biofield energy treatment on soil for its physical (electrical conductivity), chemical (minerals) and microbial flora (bacteria and fungi). A plot of lands was assigned for this study with some already grown plants. This plot was divided into two parts. One part was considered as control, while another part was subjected to Mr. Trivedi's biofield energy treatment without physically touching and referred as treated.

In the treated soil the total bacterial and fungal counts were increased by 546 and 617%, respectively as compared to the untreated soil. Additionally, the conductivity of soil of the treated plot was increased by 79% as compared to the soil of control plot. Apart from microbes, the content of various minerals were also changed in the biofield energy treated soil. The calcium carbonate content showed 2909 ppm in the control, while in the treated soil it was increased to 3943 ppm i.e. 36% increased. Various other minerals such as nitrogen and potassium were increased by 12% and 7%, respectively as compared to the control.

Besides, the level of some minerals such as potassium, iron, and chloride were decreased by 9%, 23%, and 41%, respectively as compared to the control. Apart from chemical constituents of soil, the content of organic carbon was also reduced by 8% in the treated soil as compared to the control soil. The overall results envisaged that the biofield energy treatment on the soil showed a significant improvement in the physical, chemical, and microbial functions of soil component. Thus, improved the conductance, supportive microbes, minerals and overall productivity of crops. In conclusion, the biofield energy treatment could be used as an alternative way to increase the yield of quality crops by increasing soil fertility.