The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
The aim of the study was to evaluate the immunomodulatory activity of the Biofield Treated/Blessed proprietary test formulation consisting of essential ingredients
High incidence of diseases, increased population growth, unemployment, and altered ethical values have been widely dominant in 21st century
As a Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM), Biofield Energy Healing/Blessing Treatment was selected as one of the best approach, which is accepted worldwide using various Energy Healing Therapies
Copper chloride, cholecalciferol (vitamin D3), sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (Na-CMC), and iron (II) sulfate were procured from Sigma-Aldrich, USA. Pyridoxine hydrochloride (vitamin B6), zinc chloride, cyanocobalamin (vitamin B12), magnesium (II) gluconate, and resveratrol were purchased from TCI, Japan. D (+) galactose obtained from Amresco, LLC. All the other chemicals used in this experiment were analytical grade procured from India.
Randomly breed maleSD rats with body weight around 300 gm were used in this study. The animals were purchased from M/s. National Institute of Biologicals, India. Animals were randomly divided into nine groups based on their body weights consist of ten animals of each group. They were kept individually in sterilized polypropylene cages with stainless steel top grill having provision for holding pellet feed and drinking water bottle fitted with stainless steel sipper tube. The animals were maintained as per standard protocol throughout the experiment.
Each ingredient of the test formulation was divided into two parts. One part of each ingredient was considered as control, where no Biofield Energy Treatment/Blessing was provided. Another part of each ingredient was received Biofield Energy Treatment/Blessing by Mr. Mahendra Kumar Trivedi (known as the Trivedi Effect®) under laboratory conditions for ~3 minutes. Besides, three group of animals were also received Biofield Energy Treatment under laboratory conditions for ~3 minutes. The Blessing/Treatment was given to the test items remotely in the laboratory of Dabur Research Foundation, near New Delhi, India. Similarly, the control samples were subjected to “sham” healer under the same laboratory conditions for ~3 minutes. The “sham” healer did not have any knowledge about the Biofield Energy Treatment. After that, the Biofield Energy Treated samples were kept in the similar sealed condition and used as per the study plan. The Biofield Energy Treated animals were also taken back to the experimental room for further proceedings.
Five days after acclimatization, animals were randomized and grouped based on their body weight. The dosing for group G7 and G8 was also initiated on day -15 till the end of the experiment. However, group G1 to G6 and G9 animals were dosed from day 1 till the end of experiment. All the animals except G1 received D-galactose, daily (500 mg/kg;
In order to study the humoral immune response, IgA, IgE, IgG, and IgM were estimated using Mini Vidas, Biomeurix (French) from serum, using commercially available kits as per manufacturer’s instructions. Flow cytometry was used to evaluate the CD4+, CD8+, & CD28+ cells in whole blood as a measure of the cellular immune response using Guava Flow Cytometer, EasyCyte. The mean value was calculated for each group with SEM. The percent change in the Biofield Energy Treated/Blessed group was calculated compared to the vehicle treatment group.
In order to determine the effect of test formulation on blood profile, blood was collected from the retro-orbital plexus using heparinized or non-heparinized capillary tubes in all the experimental animals. Blood was placed in plain bottles for isolation of serum in order to perform the biochemical analysis. The other portion of the blood samples were subjected to estimation of various haematological parameters using Hematology analyzer (Abbott Model-CD-3700). The levels of hemoglobin (Hb), red blood cell count (RBC), packed cell volume (PCV), mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration (MCHC) and platelets were analyzed. In addition, magnesium, blood urea, creatinine, uric acid, calcium, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, and chloride ion concentration were also analyzed.
All the experimental animals were daily analyzed for their change in body weight and feed intake, which was calculated by weighing the daily feed supply and the left-over amount that evaluate the average daily feed intake. The average of the feed intake was computed for every three days of the experimental period. All the data were reported through the study treatment regimen.
All the animals in different test groups were analyzed for various clinical signs and symptoms in accordance with in-house protocol. Abnormal behaviour in animals was recorded with the time of onset and disappearance.
All the rats were subjected to histopathological analysis at the end of the experiment, while the organs of all the animals such as liver, kidneys, heart, spleens, lungs and uterus were excise for relative organ weight. The organ to body weight ratio percentage was identified by comparing the weight of each organ with the final body weight of individual rat. Histopathological examination of all the collected samples was placed in 10% neutral buffered formalin.
Relative organ weight was calculated using the formula mentioned below-
Relative organ weight = Absolute organ weight (g)/weight of rat on sacrifice day (g) x 100
All the animal experimental data of immunological studies were expressed as mean ± standard error of mean (SEM) followed by Student’s
Immunoglobulin’s levels (IgM, IgG, IgA, and IgE) after treatment with the test formulation are shown in
IgM, IgG, IgA, and IgE are considered as the major immunoglobulins, which regulates the immune system
The test formulation was tested for cellular immune response, which was estimated by calculating the percentage of vital biomarkers such as CD4+, CD8+, and CD28+ and the results are presented in the
Cellular immunity plays a vital role against various antigens, while CD4+ or T4 cells manage infection control and its spread and CD8+ T lymphocyte T8 cells or CD8+
Group | RBC106/ μL | Hbgm/dL | PCV% | MCVfl | MCHpg | MCHC% | Platelet Count (thousand/mm3) | RDW-CV |
G1 | 9.58 ± 0.20 | 16.99 ± 0.25 | 50.36 ± 0.80 | 52.41 ± 0.48 | 17.6 ± 0.19 | 33.67 ± 0.20 | 721.25 ± 89.47 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G2 | 9.51 ± 0.23 | 16.95 ± 0.25 | 50.04 ± 0.91 | 52.05 ± 0.54 | 17.59 ± 0.25 | 33.81 ± 0.25 | 635.00 ± 59.32 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G3 | 9.61 ± 0.27 | 17.08 ± 0.54 | 50.71 ± 1.63 | 51.90 ± 0.81 | 17.40 ± 0.19 | 33.34 ± 0.32 | 781.38 ± 107.76 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G4 | 9.37 ± 0.18 | 16.94 ± 0.22 | 50.13 ± 0.66 | 51.90 ± 1.00 | 17.40 ± 0.28 | 33.68 ± 0.18 | 664.38 ± 64.22 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G5 | 10.03 ± 0.23 | 17.16 ± 0.26 | 45.33 ± 5.91 | 50.38 ± 0.27 | 17.09 ± 0.16 | 34.21 ± 0.39 | 893.38 ± 114.74 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G6 | 9.77 ± 0.16 | 17.00 ± 0.22 | 50.05 ± 0.77 | 50.51 ± 0.46 | 17.09 ± 0.17 | 33.96 ± 0.26 | 812.50 ± 97.11 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G7 | 9.92 ± 0.13 | 17.19 ± 0.27 | 50.98 ± 0.83 | 51.24 ± 0.71 | 17.21 ± 0.25 | 33.68 ± 0.12 | 804.38 ± 90.99 | 0.12 ± 0.00 |
G8 | 9.55 ± 0.23 | 16.94 ± 0.21 | 45.95 ± 4.27 | 51.25 ± 0.26 | 17.15 ± 0.10 | 33.59 ± 0.31 | 880.25 ± 92.74 | 0.12 ± 0.00 |
G9 | 9.91 ± 0.16 | 17.16 ± 0.22 | 50.83 ± 0.86 | 51.29 ± 0.37 | 17.28 ± 0.13 | 33.86 ± 0.28 | 814.63 ± 76.98 | 0.13 ± 0.00 |
G1: Normal control; G2: Disease control (Aging Control D-galactose (500 mg/kg, i.p.)); G3: Resveratrol, 200 mg/kg; G4: Untreated test formulation; G5: Biofield Energy Treated test formulation; G6: Biofield treatment
Overall, the haematological data suggested that Biofield Energy Treated test formulation showed an improved haematological profile of animals. The minerals and vitamins in the test formulation showed improved animal hematology parameters as compared with the untreated test formulation. This suggests that the improved immunomodulatory activity of the Biofield Energy Treated test formulation, which can be significantly active against various inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.
The general biochemistry after treatment with the test formulation showed statistically non-significant alterations, which were observed in the following ion panel of parameters across all the treatment groups (G3 to G9) including normal (G1) and D-galactose induced aging group (G2), magnesium, sodium, chloride, potassium, calcium and phosphorus. Besides, the level of creatinine was significantly decreased by 32.14% in the G9 group as compared with the G2 group. However, the detailed analysis of biochemical study after oral administration of Biofield Energy Treated and untreated test formulation are presented in
Group | Magnesium (mg/dL) | Blood Urea (mg/dL) | Creatinine (mg/dL) | Uric Acid (mg/dL) | Calcium (mg/dL) | Phosphorus (mg/dL) | Na+ (Meq/L) | K+(mEq/L) | Cl-(mEq/L) |
G1 | 4.46 ± 0.07 | 29.05 ± 0.81 | 0.28 ± 0.02 | 0.93 ± 0.12 | 9.69 ± 0.04 | 6.31 ± 0.27 | 144.00 ± 0.87 | 4.83 ± 0.14 | 103.66 ± 1.91 |
G2 | 4.56 ± 0.06 | 29.05 ± 0.81 | 0.28 ± 0.02 | 1.39 ± 0.19 | 9.73 ± 0.12 | 6.70 ± 0.53 | 146.55 ± 0.74 | 4.76 ± 0.06 | 108.50 ± 2.03 |
G3 | 4.78 ± 0.06 | 31.53 ± 1.35 | 0.23 ± 0.02 | 0.97 ± 0.16 | 9.66 ± 0.10 | 7.94 ± 0.38 | 145.90 ± 0.91 | 4.81 ± 0.10 | 106.63 ± 2.35 |
G4 | 4.59 ± 0.06 | 30.38 ± 0.64 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 1.41 ± 0.17 | 9.80 ± 0.10 | 7.14 ± 0.31 | 144.78 ± 0.95 | 4.86 ± 0.13 | 102.00 ± 1.82 |
G5 | 4.59 ± 0.08 | 32.96 ± 1.36 | 0.24 ± 0.02 | 1.46 ± 0.30 | 10.08 ± 0.08 | 7.91 ± 0.53 | 144.01 ± 1.10 | 4.80 ± 0.06 | 105.83 ± 2.00 |
G6 | 4.75 ± 0.07 | 30.53 ± 0.47 | 0.24 ± 0.03 | 1.55 ± 0.20 | 9.80 ± 0.20 | 8.03 ± 0.35 | 147.75 ± 0.66 | 4.89 ± 0.11 | 106.75 ± 1.13 |
G7 | 4.34 ± 0.10 | 27.70 ± 1.31 | 0.23 ± 0.02 | 1.26 ± 0.16 | 10.56 ± 0.49 | 7.35 ± 0.22 | 145.90 ± 0.69 | 4.79 ± 0.10 | 108.88 ± 1.53 |
G8 | 4.48 ± 0.10 | 28.70 ± 1.11 | 0.26 ± 0.03 | 1.40 ± 0.24 | 10.65 ± 0.51 | 7.70 ± 0.32 | 146.44 ± 0.64 | 4.86 ± 0.13 | 104.13 ± 1.91 |
G9 | 4.35 ± 0.08 | 28.99 ± 1.42 | 0.19 ± 0.01 | 1.39 ± 0.23 | 10.00 ± 0.23 | 6.46 ± 0.24 | 147.19 ± 1.01 | 4.96 ± 0.05 | 104.50 ± 1.38 |
G1: Normal control; G2: Disease control (Aging Control D-galactose (500 mg/kg, i.p.)); G3: Resveratrol, 200 mg/kg; G4: Untreated test formulation; G5: Biofield Energy Treated test formulation; G6: Biofield treatment
Lipid profile analysis after treatment with the Biofield Energy Treated test formulation as per the experimental protocol showed a marginal increase in the HDL level in the group injected with D-galactose (G2) for 8 weeks (16.63 ± 0.94 mg/dL), when compared to the normal control (G1, 14.85 ± 0.73 mg/dL). However, all the treatment groups showed similar levels as of group G2. Besides, marginal increase in LDL level was also noticed in the group injected with D-galactose (G2) for 8 weeks (31.83 ± 1.75 mg/dL), when compared to normal control (G1, 25.79 ± 1.32 mg/dL). However, all the treatment groups showed similar levels as of group G2. Similarly, data suggested that slight increase in cholesterol level in G2 group for 8 weeks (54.67 ± 2.13 mg/dL) when compared to the normal control (G1, 48.11 ± 2.41 mg/dL). However, all the treatment groups showed similar level of group G2. Besides, marginal reduction in the VLDL and triglyceride level was noticed in the group injected with D-galactose (G2) for 8 weeks when compared to normal control. However, all the treatment groups showed similar levels as of G2, except G5 which was higher than Group G2 and almost equal to group G1. All the results have been compiled in
Group | Glucose(mg/dL) | TC(mg/dL) | Triglyceride (mg/dL) | HDL(mg/dL) | LDL(mg/dL) | VLDL(mg/dL) |
G1 | 81.99 ± 3.53 | 48.11 ± 2.41 | 35.73 ± 3.98 | 14.85 ± 0.73 | 25.79 ± 1.32 | 8.18 ± 0.93 |
G2 | 100.59 ± 5.60 | 54.67 ± 2.13 | 32.30 ± 3.09 | 16.63 ± 0.94 | 31.83 ± 1.75 | 5.80 ± 0.61 |
G3 | 68.13 ± 6.96 | 51.25 ± 3.11 | 30.00 ± 2.05 | 16.10 ± 1.01 | 29.24 ± 2.12 | 5.98 ± 0.41 |
G4 | 66.01 ± 7.87 | 50.51 ± 2.36 | 29.50 ± 2.44 | 16.48 ± 0.75 | 28.29 ± 1.92 | 5.84 ± 0.49 |
G5 | 64.84 ± 6.88 | 54.00 ± 2.95 | 37.46 ± 2.07 | 16.29 ± 0.80 | 29.10 ± 1.79 | 7.94 ± 0.59 |
G6 | 59.06 ± 4.32 | 51.46 ± 2.94 | 29.99 ± 1.74 | 16.88 ± 1.13 | 28.33 ± 1.90 | 6.30 ± 0.45 |
G7 | 74.26 ± 10.84 | 56.51 ± 2.01 | 31.27 ± 1.88 | 18.46 ± 0.90 | 33.66 ± 2.03 | 6.71 ± 0.59 |
G8 | 75.35 ± 5.33 | 54.43 ± 2.59 | 25.29 ± 2.50 | 17.80 ± 0.92 | 30.75 ± 1.92 | 5.88 ± 0.95 |
G9 | 75.11 ± 7.16 | 51.40 ± 3.62 | 31.44 ± 1.96 | 16.26 ± 1.28 | 28.94 ± 2.23 | 6.24 ± 0.39 |
G1: Normal control; G2: Disease control (Aging Control D-galactose (500 mg/kg, i.p.)); G3: Resveratrol, 200 mg/kg; G4: Untreated test formulation; G5: Biofield Energy Treated test formulation; G6: Biofield treatment
The test biomarkers used in hepatic and cardiac biomarkers such as serum glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase (SGOT), serum glutamate pyruvate transaminase (SGPT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and cardiac enzyme creatine kinase myocardium band (CK-MB), and others biomarkers such as, total bilirubin, albumin, and globulin showed alterations with respect to other groups, the results are summarized in
Group (G) | TB(mg/dL) | SGOT(U/L) | SGPT(U/L) | ALP(U/L) | TP(g/dL) | A(g/dL) | G(g/dL) | A/Gratio | CK-MB(U/L) |
G1 | 0.10 ± 0.02 | 200.97 ± 20.60 | 46.89 ± 3.00 | 248.61 ± 10.53 | 6.91 ± 0.05 | 3.26 ± 0.05 | 3.65 ± 0.06 | 0.85 ± 0.04 | 166.44 ± 32.64 |
G2 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 184.97 ± 17.87 | 45.78 ± 4.22 | 322.09 ± 32.81 | 7.01 ± 0.09 | 3.26 ± 0.03 | 3.75 ± 0.07 | 0.83 ± 0.02 | 244.83 ± 45.66 |
G3 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 224.51 ± 11.77 | 47.74 ± 3.32 | 326.69 ± 15.28 | 7.11 ± 0.14 | 3.33 ± 0.06 | 3.79 ± 0.10 | 0.84 ± 0.03 | 257.04 ± 28.46 |
G4 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 259.01 ± 9.69 | 53.10 ± 2.41 | 263.63 ± 14.35 | 6.88 ± 0.14 | 3.25 ± 0.05 | 3.63 ± 0.09 | 0.84 ± 0.02 | 301.14 ± 27.72 |
G5 | 0.14 ± 0.01 | 243.49 ± 10.54 | 50.14 ± 1.93 | 271.60 ± 12.79 | 6.96 ± 0.14 | 3.21 ± 0.05 | 3.75 ± 0.11 | 0.84 ± 0.03 | 287.57 ± 28.16 |
G6 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 251.91 ± 9.39 | 48.29 ± 1.99 | 301.16 ± 26.50 | 7.10 ± 0.22 | 3.28 ± 0.06 | 3.83 ± 0.17 | 0.81 ± 0.03 | 278.13 ± 34.79 |
G7 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 216.71 ± 15.57 | 44.23 ± 2.25 | 219.23 ± 14.54 | 6.73 ± 0.15 | 3.21 ± 0.06 | 3.51 ± 0.11 | 0.88 ± 0.03 | 235.33 ± 30.74 |
G8 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 200.34 ± 18.17 | 48.46 ± 1.97 | 253.40 ± 20.61 | 6.93 ± 0.14 | 3.21 ± 0.06 | 3.71 ± 0.10 | 0.83 ± 0.02 | 223.86 ± 53.12 |
G9 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 210.21 ± 17.45 | 45.06 ± 1.60 | 253.91 ± 13.95 | 6.65 ± 0.18 | 3.20 ± 0.06 | 3.45 ± 0.14 | 0.90 ± 0.04 | 213.47 ± 32.28 |
G1: Normal control; G2: Disease control (Aging Control D-galactose (500 mg/kg, i.p.)); G3: Resveratrol, 200 mg/kg; G4: Untreated test formulation; G5: Biofield Energy Treated test formulation; G6: Biofield Treatment
The test formulation was tested in animals with respect to weight parameters, feed intake, and histopathology against Biofield Energy Treated and untreated test formulation. The results of animal tested organ weight parameters are summarized in the Table 5. The study data suggested that the initial and final weight were changed as per normal physiology pattern. In addition, the relative organ weight parameters did not show any significant change in the tested organ weight throughout the experiment in liver, lungs, kidneys, brain, heart, eyes, spleens, pancreas, thymus, adrenal gland, small intestine, large intestine, testis, prostrate, epididymis, and vas deference. Relative organ weight of rats treated with the Biofield Energy Treatment
Relative weight (%) | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 | G5 | G6 | G7 | G8 | G9 |
Liver | 2.68 ± 0.17 | 2.58 ± 0.12 | 2.54 ± 0.08 | 2.66 ± 0.15 | 2.76 ± 0.18 | 2.50 ±0.19 | 2.60 ±0.14 | 2.41 ±0.09 | 2.82 ±0.17 |
Lungs | 0.61 ± 0.05 | 0.53 ± 0.08 | 0.46 ± 0.05 | 0.52 ± 0.02 | 0.53 ± 0.03 | 0.48 ±0.02 | 0.51 ±0.01 | 0.55 ±0.04 | 0.53 ±0.05 |
Kidney | 0.74 ± 0.02 | 0.73 ± 0.01 | 0.74 ± 0.02 | 0.76 ± 0.03 | 0.74 ± 0.02 | 0.71 ±0.02 | 0.74 ±0.02 | 0.72 ±0.02 | 0.77 ±0.05 |
Brain | 0.47 ± 0.02 | 0.49 ± 0.01 | 0.50 ± 0.01 | 0.53 ± 0.02 | 0.49 ± 0.02 | 0.44 ±0.02 | 0.49 ±0.01 | 0.49 ±0.02 | 0.48 ±0.02 |
Heart | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.30 ± 0.01 | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.29 ±0.01 | 0.34 ±0.04 | 0.31 ±0.01 | 0.31 ±0.01 |
Eyes | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.00 | 0.09 ± 0.00 | 0.09 ± 0.00 | 0.08 ± 0.00 | 0.09 ±0.02 | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.07 ±0.00 |
Spleen | 0.17 ± 0.01 | 0.21 ± 0.04 | 0.17 ± 0.01 | 0.18 ± 0.01 | 0.19 ± 0.01 | 0.16 ±0.01 | 0.18 ±0.01 | 0.19 ±0.01 | 0.17 ±0.01 |
Pancreas | 0.33 ± 0.02 | 0.26 ± 0.03 | 0.32 ± 0.01 | 0.30 ± 0.02 | 0.30 ± 0.02 | 0.28 ±0.03 | 0.27 ±0.02 | 0.29 ±0.01 | 0.26 ±0.02 |
Thymus | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ±0.01 | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.08 ±0.01 |
Adrenal Gland | 0.02 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ± 0.00 | 0.01 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ±0.00 | 0.02 ±0.00 | 0.02 ±0.00 | 0.02 ±0.00 |
Small Intestine | 2.03 ± 0.06 | 1.82 ± 0.05 | 1.97 ± 0.03 | 1.98 ± 0.03 | 1.96 ± 0.05 | 1.79 ±0.04 | 1.90 ±0.05 | 1.84 ±0.05 | 1.82 ±0.06 |
Large Intestine | 1.48 ± 0.08 | 1.61 ± 0.10 | 1.63 ± 0.13 | 1.45 ± 0.06 | 1.70 ± 0.10 | 1.33 ±0.10 | 1.63 ±0.12 | 1.55 ±0.05 | 1.79 ±0.11 |
Testis | 0.76 ± 0.03 | 0.75 ± 0.03 | 0.78 ± 0.03 | 0.79 ± 0.02 | 0.80 ± 0.03 | 0.74 ±0.03 | 0.81 ±0.05 | 0.76 ±0.02 | 0.77 ±0.03 |
Prostrate | 0.16 ± 0.02 | 0.19 ± 0.03 | 0.16 ± 0.02 | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 0.14 ± 0.01 | 0.13 ±0.01 | 0.16 ±0.02 | 0.14 ±0.01 | 0.14 ±0.01 |
Epididymis | 0.37 ± 0.01 | 0.37 ± 0.03 | 0.39 ± 0.01 | 0.38 ± 0.01 | 0.37 ± 0.01 | 0.35 ±0.01 | 0.41 ±0.02 | 0.38 ±0.02 | 0.40 ±0.01 |
Vas Deference | 0.07 ± 0.00 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.00 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ±0.00 | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.07 ±0.01 | 0.09 ±0.01 |
G1: Normal control; G2: Disease control (Aging Control D-galactose (500 mg/kg, i.p.)); G3: Resveratrol, 200 mg/kg; G4: Untreated test formulation; G5: Biofield Energy Treated test formulation; G6: Biofield treatment
Histopathological findings of skin was evaluated for collagen deposition by Masson’s Trichrome staining for all the groups (G1 – G9), rats treated with Biofield Energy
Histopathological findings of all the organs were evaluated for cellular changes by H&E staining for all the groups (G1 – G9), rats treated with Biofield Energy
Thus, the histological results did not showed any abnormal findings, which suggested the safe animal profile with the test formulation, which showed no toxic implications of the test formulation and treatment. With the above results, it can be concluded that the Biofield Energy Treatment
The experimental data suggested significant activity of Biofield Energy Treated/Blessed (the Trivedi Effect®) test formulation for their significant immunomodulatory activity. Based on the current study findings, cellular and humoral immune response was significantly improved. The level of IgG was significantly increased by 2.18%, 10.70%, and 8.03% in the G5, G6, and G8 groups, while IgE was significantly increased by 7.83% and 5.79% in G5 and G8 groups, respectively after Biofield Energy Treatment as compared with untreated test formulation. Blood profile data showed that the platelet count was increased in the G5, G6, G7, G8, and G9 by 40.69%, 27.95%, 26.67%, 38.58%, and 28.28%, respectively compared with the G2 group. Creatinine level was significant decreased by 32.14% in the G9 group as compared with the G2 group. However, animal body weight, feed intake, relative organ weight, and histopathological findings of all the tested groups did not showed any abnormal findings with respect to the safe and non-toxic treatment strategies. Thus, the present study concluded that the novel test formulation and the Trivedi Effect®-Biofield Energy Healing remotely to the animals significantly enhanced the test formulation’s immunomodulatory and antiaging activities. Therefore, the Biofield Energy Treated test formulation and animals
The authors are gratefully acknowledged to Trivedi science, Trivedi Global, Inc., and Trivedi master wellness and to Dabur Research Foundation (DRF), India for their support.