Nutrition and diet
Collective bio-energetics: food detoxification — II
Abstract
As a second investigation of collective food detoxification, the current study focuses on organic versus inorganic food samples. Divided into two sub-studies, data collection was based on indicators of Applied Kinesiology, a type of muscle-testing (PDM). Initial baseline testing indicated a differential between the two food samples, with the inorganic showing a degree of toxicity, due mainly to trace amounts of pesticides. Following exposure to an Integral Bio-Energetic Field (IBEF) centre, however, the differential toxicity was eliminated, as found for both sub-studies.
Introduction
Divided into two sub-studies, the investigation examined: a. baseline indicators of differential toxicity for organic versus inorganic food samples, with the latter showing an initial degree of toxicity; and b) potential for detoxification of the inorganic sample, following exposure to an Integral Bio-Energetic Field, known as IBEF. Major features of the two sub-studies are set forth herewith.
Basic aspects for two sub-studies
At the outset, several aspects involving the two sub-studies need to be clarified, namely: 1. PDM-testing for degree of toxicity; 2. specific food samples tested for both studies; and 3. the IBEF energy field, exposure to which brought about a degree of detoxification for the inorganic samples.
1. PDM testing
For both sub-studies, data indicators were based on a form of Applied Kinesiology, referred to as PDM, or Pre-Determined Muscle Testing (1). The testing involves a recipient holding separately each food item of the organic sample, followed by holding the corresponding inorganic food item. Steps for the PDM-testing, as well as an alternate form of testing, known as Question-Response Testing (QRT), are described in Appendix 2.
2. Food samples
As mentioned above, both sub-studies utilised PDM-testing for the organic vs. inorganic sets of food samples. The samples included seven food items: an apple, carrot, bell-pepper, potato, ginger-root, onion, and mushroom. Each item was PDM-tested, at pre-post intervals, ie. before and after IBEF exposure.
3. IBEF energy field
An energy field referred to as Integral Bio-Energetic Field (IBEF) had previously been created, sustained, and verified at a local fitness centre in northern California. Designed to promote healing and wellness, the energy field also has been shown to facilitate food detoxification.
Stages for the development and creation of IBEF are reviewed in Appendices 3-7. More detailed aspects were described in a prior NAMAH article (2).
In order to create IBEF, a multi-dimensional vial had first to be generated — it was accomplished by an organisation specialising in these services, Allergies Life-Style & Health Company (ALH) (3). As a complex component, the IBEF vial incorporates a combination of eight core-elements. These were initially identified by the investigator, using Question-Response-Testing (QRT); its procedure is described in Appendix 2.
Examples of the vial’s core-elements include such dimensions as:
1. Bringing about and maintaining a harmonious Brain-Body Field (BBF) — a balanced flow between mental, emotional, and physical energy bodies;
2. Eliminating allergies, involving reactivity to any bio-incompatible substance;
3. Removing excess toxicity, as needed, in the physical body;
4. Dispelling pathogens, including any bacteria, virus, fungus or parasites.
The IBEF vial, consisting of the eight core-elements, was next induced into the fitness centre. It was accomplished with an application of the Nambudripad Allergy Elimination Technique (NAET) — designed to clear/eliminate allergies linked to bio-incompatible substances or conditions. Major aspects of NAET are summarised in Appendix 3.
Two characteristics of IBEF’s energy field may be pointed out, as shown by prior studies (4). First, it was found that IBEF becomes inactive after a one-month period — thereby requiring a reset for re-activation. The reset procedure is described in Appendix 6.
Second, it has been demonstrated that IBEF’s energy field can extend up to about a 5-mile radius from the IBEF centre. However, a simple procedure is required to facilitate the extension, as summarised in Appendix 7.
Initial sub-study
The first sub-study focused on two food samples, consisting of organic and inorganic items — bought at a supermarket within the vicinity of the IBEF centre. The food samples were obtained during the period while a reset for IBEF was required, i.e., its energy field remained inactive.
During this inactive period, PDM-testing of the two food samples disclosed a differential between them. Namely, the organic foods showed no degree of toxicity (non-reactive/strong), whereas the inorganic foods manifested a slight degree of toxicity (reactive/weak). The latter toxicity may be attributed to trace amounts of pesticide, as indicated by PDM-testing with a vial sensitized for pesticide.
Prior to the study’s next stage, a reset procedure was applied — as a result, IBEF’s energy field became re-activated.
Thereafter, the above PDM-testing was repeated. This time, the PDM results showed no differential between the organic and inorganic food samples, i.e., there was no measurable degree of toxicity for either food set. Presumably, the inorganic food sample was, in effect, detoxified subsequent to its exposure to the IBEF energy field.
For additional verification on two occasions, the investigator randomly PDM-tested a wide variety other than the samples specified above — of organic vs. inorganic food items at the same supermarket. During his first visit, IBEF required a reset, i.e., was inactive. PDM-testing at that time revealed again differentials between the two food samples, the inorganic foods showing a slight degree of toxicity, due to trace amounts of pesticide. By the time of the second visit, the IBEF reset had been accomplished. Thereupon, the differential obtained with PDM-testing for the two food sets was no longer evident – the inorganic food sample did not indicate a degree of toxicity.
Second sub-study
The second sub-study again focused on the above two types of organic and inorganic food samples; however, these food sets were bought at a supermarket located over 5 miles distant from the IBEF centre, i.e., beyond its extended IBEF energy field.
To obtain baseline data, the two food samples were initially PDM-tested at the distant supermarket. As found above, the organic food items were non-toxic, whereas the inorganic foods revealed a slight degree of toxicity, due to trace amounts of pesticide.
For the next stage, the two sets were brought within the vicinity of the IBEF centre, and again PDM-tested. This time, the testing indicated non-toxicity for both the organic and inorganic food samples.
Conclusion
The two sub-studies can be said to confirm IBEF’s detoxification effect, involving the inorganic food samples. It would appear that IBEF’s vibration field, with its eight core elements, brought about the effect. On a higher level, I presume that the detoxification dynamics for both sub-studies manifested within the realm of the Integral Yoga, as enabled by the Grace of the Divine Mother.
References
1. Seckel JP. Creating a healing atmosphere within centres and for a spiritual community: an investigative study — I. NAMAH April 2015; 23 (1): 22.
2. Seckel JP. Creating a healing atmosphere within centres and for a spiritual community: an investigative study — II. NAMAH July 2015; 23 (2): 26-34.
3. Allergies, Lifestyle & Health [Online]. Available from www.alhvials.com, FAQ [Accessed 11th April, 2015].
4. Seckel JP. Creating a healing atmosphere within centres and for a spiritual community: an investigative study — III. NAMAH October 2015; 23 (3): 38-40.
5. Seckel JP. Creating a healing atmosphere — I: 25-9.
6. The Journal of NAET, Energetics and Complementary Medicine 2005-2009; Vol. 1-9.
7. Seckel JP. Creating a healing atmosphere — II: 29-30.
8. Seckel JP. Creating a healing atmosphere — III: 40-1.
9. Ibid., : 39-40.
10. Ibid., : 38-39.
Appendices: establishing IBEF
In order to create, sustain and verify IBEF existence at a centre, several preparatory phases were required – these are summarised below in Appendices 1-7.
Appendix 1: Divine Guidance
In the spirit of Integral Yoga, I first ask the Divine Mother for Guidance and Grace toward creating the IBEF healing atmosphere. As a devotee of the Integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, the practitioner would be an aspirant toward a higher consciousness, familiar with and dedicated to their Yoga teachings.
Appendix 2: PDM- and QRT-Testing
To create IBEF, detect its presence and verify the effects, Pre-Determined Muscle Testing (PDM) derived from Applied Kinesiology, as referred to above, is utilised.
To conduct PDM-testing, the practitioner presses gently on the recipient’s down-turned wrist, arm extended, while the latter is holding a water-filled vial. The vial’s water had been electronically sensitized, its molecular vibration corresponding to the frequency of the substance to be tested. For the testing, normal muscle strength indicates a non-allergic response — by comparison, a degree of weakness indicates an allergic reaction, or response to the presence of a bio-incompatible substance/condition.
The validity of vial testing can be verified, as follows. If instead of testing the vial, the actual substance were tested, the same result – allergic vs. non-allergic reaction — would have been obtained.
In addition, a form of self-muscle testing, known as Question-Response Testing, (QRT), can be employed. It involves: a) asking a specific health-related question; b) receiving a relative muscle-strength answer, indicating ‘Yes’ (strong) or ‘No’ (weak). The QRT muscle-testing can be done by pressing the tip of the middle-finger upon the top of the index finger (above the nail), thereby determining relative muscle strength.
Appendix 3: NAET – Allergy elimination
As a major functional component of IBEF, the Nambudripad Allergy Elimination Technique (NAET) facilitates application of IBEF’s eight core elements. Based largely on principles of Oriental Medicine, NAET is not only a method for detecting and clearing allergies. Its scope is broader — employing measures of reactivity to detect and clear bio-incompatible substances and related types of energetic imbalance. Thus, its PDM-testing includes reactivity to pathogens, toxic elements, imbalanced body components, as well as allergic response to another person.
The basic NAET procedure involves a series of PDM muscle tests. Throughout these steps, the patient holds a water-filled vial which was electronically sensitized for a given substance, a potential allergen. Using PDM, the practitioner determines whether or not the patient is allergic to the designated vial substance. The subsequent treatment mainly applies configurations of acupressure points along the patient’s thoracic and lumbar vertebrae.
Overall aspects of the NAET procedure are described in a prior NAMAH article (5). It is noteworthy that peer-reviewed, experimental studies have consistently proven NAET’s effectiveness, as detailed in NAET research journals (6).
Appendix 4: IBEF Vial
As stated above, IBEF is generated by utilising a complex water-filled vial – produced by subjecting the water molecules to vibrations of electrical impulses (VEI) with a special apparatus. The VEI thereby rearranges the electrical pattern of the molecules to be in synergy with the bio-energetic pattern of given substance(s) or allergen(s).
It is of interest that PDM-testing would have shown the same result if, instead of holding the vial, the patient had held the actual allergen/substance.
As mentioned above, a leading organisation for producing the bio-energetic vials is Allergies,Lifestyle, and Health Company (AHL).The investigator requested AHL to generate a multi-dimensional vial, for the creation of IBEF. The resulting vial consists of seven core-elements, which he had initially identified by means of muscle-testing.
It is of interest that PDM-testing of the IBEF vial would ordinarily reveal reactivity (weak muscle response) only within the IBEF centre, but not outside or nearby (strong response). This finding can be said to verify the presence of IBEF’s healing atmosphere within the centre. However, the vibration can be extended by using a special procedure, as explained in Appendix 7.
Appendix 5: Induction of IBEF Vial
Following development of the IBEF vial, the next step was to induce its vibration into a centre in order to create the IBEF healing atmosphere. As mentioned earlier, the procedure for this induction was detailed in a prior NAMAH article (7).
IBEF was first induced for a fitness centre located in northern California (NC). Later on, it was induced for four additional centres, including an Integral Yoga Ashram. Moreover, IBEF was also induced for the Integral Yoga community of Auroville in southern India.
The foregoing IBEF activations were verified by means of two research designs. One of these involved pre-post testing with PDM using the above core vial, so as to verify IBEF existence at the centres and at Auroville.
The resulting PDM-tests showed that: a) before the induction, there was no reactivity; and, b) after the induction, the tests indicated consistent reactivity, confirming IBEF existence.
The second research design employed pre-post testing of 53 case-study subjects – before and after their IBEF exposure. PDM-testing prior to exposure indicated that every subject needed at least one healing for an allergy or related disorder (ADR). After their IBEF exposure, PDM-testing revealed that the allergies and ADR’s had been eliminated for all subjects, i.e., no additional healings were needed (8).
Appendix 6: IBEF reset
As explained earlier, IBEF becomes inactive after one month and a reset is required. It is based on a multi-step procedure:
1. The practitioner asks an assistant at the IBEF centre to hold the IBEF vial;
2. Then, PDM-tests the assistant — expect non-reactivity, relatively strong/normal muscle response;
3. State: “With Divine Guidance, may IBEF be re-activated”;
4. Apply NAET method: practitioner places thumbs between the assistant’s right and left side-vertebrae, presses down gently once between the vertebrae, from top to bottom of the 12 thoracic and the 5 lumbar vertebrae;
5. The practitioner PDM-tests the assistant again for reset attainment: expect IBEF re-activation — with relatively weak muscle response (9).
Appendix 7: IBEF Extension
It has been found that IBEF’s healing field can be extended beyond its centre. For this extension the practitioner states: ‘With Divine Guidance, may IBEF’s energy-field be extended’.
Following the statement, the IBEF extension would be manifested. It could be detected with PDM-testing while holding the IBEF-vial at some distance from the centre. It would be present approximately within a 5-mile radius and effective for a period of about two days.
The extension effect may be verified as follows:
1. Move away (at least one mile) from the IBEF centre. While holding the IBEF vial, PDM-test — it will indicate (no reactivity/normal strength) that IBEF does not exist in this location.
2. Still holding the IBEF-vial, ask as in the above for Divine Guidance. Then, apply a second PDM-testing (at least one mile distant from the centre). If done correctly, the testing will now indicate a (reactive/weak) response, confirming that IBEF has been extended (10).
Joachim P. Seckel, M.A., Acupr., NAET is a researcher based in Albany, California.
Share with us (Comments,contributions,opinions)
When reproducing this feature, please credit NAMAH,and give the byline. Please send us cuttings.
