ARTICLE | stress management |
Measuring stress reduction
using the infrared negative ions
aMethyst BioMat George Grant studies the use of infrared
ray heat therapy as a means of reducing stress and improving the sleep of patients
ABSTRACT
DR GEORGE GRANT is a Canadian Pioneer of Quantum Integrative Medicine.
email:
drgrant@rogers.com
KEYWORDS stress, cortisol, wellbeing, sleep
50 ❚
Background: Twelve subjects were tested before and after using the BioMat for 1 hour daily over a 3-month period using three different biofeedback devices and blood cortisol levels to measure stress reduction. Far infrared/negative ion amethyst BioMat reduces stress by 78%, as validated by pre- and post-biofeedback brain scans, as well as fasting blood test to measure the stress hormone cortisol. The core of the BioMat technology is a combination of far infrared rays, negative ion effects and the conductive properties of amethyst channels. These powerful health stimulators are combined in a single, easy-to-use product with remarkable healing properties. The BioMat delivers soothing, deep-penetrating heat, while stimulating the regeneration of damaged cells in the body. It is a safe and natural way to achieve optimal health now, and maintain a stronger, more resilient body in the future. This effective therapy is now available to medical professionals and home consumers who want to improve health and wellbeing with products based on Nobel prize-winning scientific research pioneered by NASA and developed using pure, natural materials. The BioMat is an approved medical device by Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Objectives of the study: Examine the key benefits of the infrared negative ion amethyst BioMat for stress reduction and fatigue, relieving anxiety and promoting relaxation, improving sleep patterns, reducing inflammation, easing joint pain and stiffness, and eliminating toxins in from body.
Subject selection criteria: Twelve healthy subjects with mild-to-moderate stress were selected to participate in this case study and signed an informed consent. Subjects with medical, psychiatric conditions, and those taking heavy medication were excluded from the study. Subjects were tested using biofeedback devices before and after using the BioMat daily every week, and a blood test to measure cortisol levels was obtained from each subject before and after 3 months at the completion of the case study.
Methods: Twelve subjects were tested before and after using the Bio Mat for 1 hour daily over 2 months using the ICAP brain scan, heart rate variability (HRV) heart scan, and the magnetic resonance bio-analyser. The results were a reduction in stress by 78% among subjects tested and an increased sense of wellbeing. All 12 subjects were tested in Toronto, ON Canada. The
psychometric properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS) were evaluated in a normal sample (n = 12), who were also assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). The DASS was shown to possess satisfactory psychometric properties, and the factor structure was substantiated both by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In comparison to the BDI and BAI, the DASS showed greater separation in factor loadings. The DASS anxiety scale correlated to 0.81 with the BAI, and the DASS depression scale correlated to 0.74 with the BDI. Factor analysis suggested that the BDI differs from the DASS depression scale primarily in that the BDI includes items such as weight loss, insomnia, somatic preoccupation and irritability, which fail to discriminate between depression and other affective states. The factor structure of the combined BDI and BAI items was virtually identical to that reported by Beck for a sample of diagnosed depressed and anxious patients, supporting the view that these clinical states are more severe expressions of the same states that may be discerned in ‘normals’. Implications of the results for the conceptualisation of depression, anxiety and tension/stress are considered, and the utility of the DASS scales in discriminating between these constructs is discussed.
November/December 2011 |
prime-journal.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84