Технология ведических вибраций Махариши

North American MVVT Research Report
April 11, 2001
David Scharf, Ph.D.

Section 1:  General Considerations   
Section 2:  Review of Data for First Three Sessions   
Section 3: Average Percent Improvement by Disorder Category   
Section 4:  Detail View of Results by Disorder   
Section 5:  Comparison with Initial Report   
Section 6:  Follow-up Self-Evaluations   
Section 7:  Contributing Factors to Success   

Section 1:  General Considerations

Maharishi Vedic Vibration Technology has been offered in North America for over two years, resulting in more than 4,500 consultations. 

Table 1. Repeat Consultations.

As of March 26, 2001 we had database entries for 4,722 consultations.  At least 1,186 of these were repeat consultations, by the same people, although not necessarily for the same disorders. The actual number of repeats is probably a couple of hundred more than this, since we did not keep track of this datum for the first few months of the program.  Approximately 3,300 is a realistic estimate of the number of distinct persons who have participated in our program.  A summary of our records on repeat consultations is provided in Table 1. 

 For the sake of simplicity we will consider each consultation to involve a distinct participant. 

Table 2. Disorders Addressed

The 4,722 total participants had 8,974 disorders addressed—an average of 1.9 disorders per participant.  2,267 participants had more than one disorder addressed in their consultation.  A summary of the number of disorders addressed and by how many participants is provided in Table 2. 

More women than men participated in our program, 54% or 2,550 women compared to 46% or 2,172 men.  The great majority of participants were middle-aged, with 5% aged 0 to 19, 10% aged 20 to 39, 71% aged 40 to 59, and 15% aged 60 or older.  The oldest participant was a 95 year old man. 

 Self-evaluation (SE) results forms were filled out for each disorder addressed after each session, 7297 after session one, 7033 after session two and 6495 after session three.  Of these, participants provided a numerical estimate of percent improvement for 2223 disorders addressed after session one, 3407 after session two and 3751 after session three.  Our staff made qualitative assessments of comments on several hundred self-evaluation reports where participants felt it was too soon to evaluate numerically.  By and large, the distribution of these qualitative reports was consistent with the numerical results.  For 1640 disorders addressed, 937 participants provided numerical estimates following all three sessions.  These 1640 numerical reports provide the basis for the primary data analysis for the MVVT program. 

Section 2:  Review of Data for First Three Sessions

 Chart 1, below, follows the progress of the participants through the three sessions, and shows that the results are cumulative—the average percent improvement increased from the first session to the second, and again from the second to the third session. 

Chart 1.  Cumulative Results: Average Percent Improvement by Session.

After the third session, the average percent improvement was 44.57%, with 6% or 98 of the 1,640 disorders addressed reported as100% improved. 

Table 3. Quartile Results for All Disorders following Third Session

By dividing the results into four quartiles, as shown in Table 3, we can see how the results were distributed.  Note that 65% or nearly two-thirds of the disorders evaluated improved by more than 25%.  Chart 2 illustrates these results graphically. 

Chart 2. Totals for All Disorders

The cumulative effect noted in Chart 1, above, also applies to repeat consultations for the same disorders.  As one participant remarked, typically, “It worked very well—in fact, I just repeated the disorder … and I am having additional improvement.”  Table 4, below, illustrates that the cumulative effect tends to accelerate with repeated consultations. 

Table 4. Accelerating Improvement With Repeat Consultations

Section 3: Average Percent Improvement by Disorder Category

Table 5 and Chart 3, below, list the categories of disorders from most to least successful.  Table 5 shows the distribution of reports between the four quartiles (75 to 100% improved, 50 to 74% improved, 25 to 49% improved and less than 25%).  The average percent improvement for each category of disorders is shown in the right-hand column, and the number of reports for each category is given in parentheses after the name, in the left-hand column. 
 

Table 5. Disorder Categories Listed in Order of Success

Note: the number of reports for each disorder category is given in parentheses.

Chart 3, below, lists the disorder categories in terms of their average percent improvement.  The number of reports that each average is based on is given in parentheses after the disorder name. 

Chart 3. Disorder Categories

Section 4:  Detail View of Results by Disorder

 Chart 4 and Table 6, below, list the 50 disorders with 4 or more reports, from most to least successful. 

Chart 4. Disorder Detail View

Table 6 shows the distribution of reports between the four quartiles (75 to 100% improved, 50 to 74% improved, 25 to 49% improved and less than 25%).  The average percent improvement for each category of disorders is shown in the right-hand column, and the number of reports for each category is given in parentheses after the name, in the left-hand column. 

Table 6. Disorders Detailed Results

Section 5:  Comparison with Initial Report

The 4,500 plus consultations offered at the time of this writing are more than twice the number of consultations at the time of our initial research report, “Phase One MVVT Research Report,” which was issued September 13, 1999.  Our current results confirm the initial report in most respects.  Most significant, both studies found that two-thirds of participants reported at least 25% improvement by the completion of their third session (see Chart 2). 

The initial report noted a cumulative effect, from an average improvement of 29.84% after the first session, to 38.79% after the second, to 45.35% after the third.  Our current study (see Chart 1) further documents this cumulative effect, from 29.34% after the first session, to 37.50% after the second, to 44.57% after the third. 

Also, the distribution of disorders in terms of success, in this study, is very close to the distribution in our previous study.  In that study, we noted that among the categories for which we had a significant number of reports, seven stood out as most successful.  These were Mental Disorders, Respiratory Problems, Gynecological Disorders, Gastrointestinal Disorders, Pain as the Primary Problem, Cardiovascular Disorders and Musculoskeletal Disorders.  The current study also indicates that these seven are among the most successful (see Table 5 and Chart 3).  In addition, both studies agreed that Vision Problems, Ringing of the Ears and Hearing Problems were the least responsive to MVVT. 

There were some differences between the two studies.  For example Skin Disorders and Dental Related problems did better, in the current study, and Paralysis not as well.  The large gap between the two skin disorders, Eczema and Psoriasis, exists in both studies, suggesting a fundamental difference. 

Section 6:  Follow-up Self-Evaluations

As discussed in Section One, 937 participants completed 1,640 self-evaluation reports for all three sessions, including numerical estimates of percent improvement for each session.  Of these 937 participants, 215 completed follow-up participant self-evaluations (FPSEs) for 317 disorders addressed, including numerical ratings.  The average time elapsed from the date of the MVVT consultation to the date the FPSEs were filled out was 199.65 days, or nearly seven months.  Based on these 317 FPSEs, the average percent improvement after seven months was 43.30%. 

Chart 5. Stability of MVVT Results

By comparing this figure with the 44.57% average improvement reported immediately following the consultation we can calculate an Average Stability Quotient for the MVVT results over time.  Thus, 43.30/44.57 = .97.  This relative constancy is inconsistent with placebo or expectation-based explanations of the MVVT results (see Chart 5).  An expectation-based account would predict a continuous decline in average results over time.

Table 7, below, provides a more detailed account of the long-term results.  The leftmost column delineates the four quartiles (75 to 100% improved, 50 to 74% improved, 25 to 49% improved and less than 25%) immediately after the consultation’s third session.  Column two gives the number of consultation self-evaluation reports for each quartile. For each consultation self-evaluation report there is a matching FPSE (follow-up) report.  Column three gives the average difference between the FPSE reports and the consultation reports.  Column four provides the average absolute difference between the two sets of reports, and column five provides notes on the observed trends within each quartile. 

 Of the 317 disorders addressed, 217 had improved significantly at the time of the consultation.  (Significant improvement is defined as 25% or better.)  Based on the FPSEs, 76% of these disorders (165) were still significantly improved an average of seven months following the consultation.  Although there were a number of cases of declines from initial good results, these instances were largely offset by the opposite phenomenon of deferred improvement. 

Table 7. Follow-up Participant Self-Evaluations (FPSEs) compared to Self-Evaluation reports (SEs) at the time of consultation

Of the 100 disorders originally evaluated in the 75 to 100% quartile, 85% were still reporting significant relief.  52 remained in the top quartile, 24 had declined to the second quartile, 9 had declined to the third quartile and 15 had dropped to the lowest quartile.  Of the 22 initially reporting 100% relief, half (11) were still reporting 100% and only 2 were no longer experiencing significant relief (>= 25% improvement).  11 who had not reported 100% relief in their original SEs were now reporting 100% relief in their FPSEs. 

Of the 76 disorders originally evaluated in the 50 to 74% quartile, 32% (24) had improved to the top quartile, 22% (17) remained in the second quartile, 20% (15) had declined to the third quartile and 26% (20) had dropped to the lowest quartile.  5% (4) now indicated 100% relief. 

Of the 41 disorders originally evaluated in the 25 to 49% quartile, 12% (5) had improved to the top quartile, 29% (12) had improved to the second quartile, 17% (7) remained in the third quartile and 41% (17) had declined to the lowest quartile. 

Of the 100 disorders originally evaluated in the lowest quartile, 25% were now reporting significant improvement.  6% had improved to the top quartile, 13% to the second quartile and 6% to the third.  75% remained in the bottom quartile. 

The phenomenon of deferred improvement was observed in every quartile, from the 25% in the lowest quartile, who subsequently reported significant improvement, to the 11% in the highest quartile, who attained 100% relief only after some time.  Here are some typical participant comments (with the SE а FPSE numerical ratings in parentheses):

	“The improvement was gradual.” (0 а 70%)
	“I did not begin to feel any improvement until about 3 weeks. Then improvement began.”  (5 а 70%)
	“Dramatic improvement occurred a few weeks after MVVT.”
	“Not only has the pain diminished considerably much of the time, but also some flexibility has returned. This is absolutely wonderful!”  (5 а 70%)
	“In the 7 months following my consultation for this disorder, a transformation went on … and then … healed. The problem is 95% resolved. I see it as a miracle cure, even though it took 7 months.”  (0 а 90%)
	“I had one or two attacks in the 7 months since my consultation for this disorder. One of them was severe, but it was due to some very wrong food eaten. The other attack was mild and short-lived. The rest of the time I have felt almost 100% cured, which is great, considering that I had an attack almost every month prior to the consultation.”  (10 а 90%)
	“This worked very well!”  (10 а 100%)
	“This did not improve completely right away—it has improved slowly over two months.  (60 а 100%)

Of course, not everyone obtained good results.  One participant commented in the FPSE, “I enjoyed the treatments, but cannot say that I am satisfied with the results.”  Another wrote, “I felt a powerful effect during the treatment and hours after—but it did not last.”  And some who had good results initially found symptoms recurring:  “For four months after the consultation, I experienced a significant improvement.  Then, three months ago, I experienced a recurrence of symptoms (although less severe) that have continued to today.”  (80 а 20%)

But most people (two-thirds) experienced significant improvement, which was usually sustained months later and reported in the FPSE forms.  The FPSEs abound with comments such as the following:

	“I am very grateful for this technique—very satisfied with the results.”
	“I had one or two attacks in the 7 months since my consultation for this disorder. One of them was severe, but it was due to some very wrong food eaten. The other attack was mild and short-lived. The rest of the time I have felt almost 100% cured, which is great, considering that I had an attack almost every month prior to the consultation.”
	“This disorder was helped a great deal.” “Very good results.”
	“I don't have that problem anymore.” “The results on this disorder were great!”
	“I feel that I have a deeper understanding of life and my relationship to the cosmos.”
	“My neck pain improved completely as a result of my first consultation and has never come back.”
	“I haven't had any recurrence in the 5 months since my consultation.  The problem seems to be completely cured.”
	“I am thrilled with the results—no more neck pain.” “This condition cleared up immediately at the first session.”
	“The consultation exceeded all my expectations and I've  had only a few moments since, where I felt emotional tendencies I once experienced almost continuously.”
	“Very pleased with the results. Thank you so much!”
	“I think if I had gone to a neurologist as suggested by my family practice physician I would still be in pain or—worse yet—scheduled for surgery.  And no allopathic physician could have offered such a simple, completely blissful remedy. I am very grateful for this technique.”

Many participants remarked on the blissful character of the consultations which, in many cases, continued in daily life: 

	“My first session was a wonderfully nourishing and blissful experience that produced immediate results.”
	“This consultation created a huge stirring of bliss consciousness in my body, centered at the base of the spine and radiating upward. The bliss and ecstasy were intensely pleasurable—unsurpassed and continued for months and are still present, though more subdued.”
	“I attribute this to my change in feeling from discouragement to optimism since experiencing such bliss.”
	“I had received MVVT for neck, shoulders, head and lower back previously and the benefits were so outstanding that I had it a second time—just to get more benefits.… I have experienced day after day, month after month the intense onslaught of bliss brought on by this consultation.  It was tremendous, but there was also a huge purification. …. I recommend it highly. To this day, about 10 months later, I still have the bliss this consultation enlivened.”
	“The experience, during the 3 days of receiving the technique, was very blissful. This was a profound "boost" in the direction of healing. I plan to repeat the MVVT in the near future.”

The blissful character of MVVT is very much a part of the healing process.  Maharishi explains that his purpose is “to make everyone free from disease, pain and suffering, to make everyone healthy.  And healthy means happy.” 

 Ultimately, creating health by means of Maharishi’s consciousness-based programs involves creating Enlightenment.  Maharishi makes the connection between health and Enlightenment explicit: 

One thing more comes out as a reward of this healthy life.  The reward of a healthy life is going to be created simultaneously with good health, and that reward is Enlightenment.  Enlightenment is the reward of this technology which brings relief from pain and suffering. 

Bliss, happiness and, ultimately, Enlightenment reflect the holistic character of MVVT.  It should not be surprising, therefore, that this healing technology has side-benefits.  In Maharishi’s words:

Vedic Vibration is that vibration which is the most fundamental creative process in Nature.  So while eliminating one disorder in a man, because it functions holistically, it influences all kinds of disorders, not only in one man, but also in his friends, his nation, his world, his cosmos.  Everything is made healthier. 

Here is an example of the holistic healing effects from our FPSE records.  This man came for a consultation for a frozen shoulder and found spontaneous relief from a structural problem that he had regarded as permanent: 

The MVVT has meant more to me than you can know.  My frozen shoulder syndrome (one month running in 1998) has been virtually eliminated.  Furthermore, the MVVT work translated down into my back to my pelvic region.  Because of that, my long term pelvic tilt (short leg, long leg syndrome) of the past 36 years has also been eliminated.  I haven't seen my chiropractor for 6 months!  I am most grateful to Maharishi and have told this story to many friends.” 

The physical mechanisms associated with MVVT seem to be more profound than the mechanistic processes underlying allopathic modalities.   It seems likely that a thorough understanding of the science underlying MVVT will involve quantum physics, including unified field theory.  This holistic level of Nature’s functioning supports healing influences from the environment—which Maharishi refers to as the support of Nature.  In one FPSE comment a participant described MVVT’s correction of his high blood pressure as involving a combination of direct physiological causation and indirect receptivity to lifestyle changes: 

My blood pressure is rock solid at 120/80 or better.  It has been completely corrected without medication.  I have been more attentive to dietary considerations and getting exercise.   I attribute this increase in receptivity to what is good for me to my MVVT consultation, in addition to the direct positive effects.

Because these holistic mechanics may be unfamiliar to those of us steeped in the mechanistic paradigm of medicine (and most of modern science, generally), it is possible to fail to appreciate the work of the Vedic Vibrations.  There may be a tendency to disavow apparent healing or to be unsure of whether to attribute it to MVVT.  Perhaps these are examples of this phenomenon:

These uncertainties on the part of the participants are, of course, understandable.  But the holistic quality of MVVT’s healing effect can be tested for statistically, as in the case of simpler quantum mechanical effects. 

Section 7:  Contributing Factors to Success

The Follow-up Supplemental questionnaire together with the FPSE contained questions designed to investigate contributing factors to the success of the MVVT program.  The most important findings are, first, that TM and the TM-Sidhi program are not needed for the success of MVVT and, second, that the use of the stabilizer is highly correlated with a successful outcome. 

Having been instructed in TM or the TM-Sidhi program provided no advantage as far as percent improvement in MVVT is concerned.  However, those who were regular had a decided advantage over those who were not.  Those who practiced TM “Twice a day” had an average 10 points higher percent improvement rating than those who did not.  And Sidhas who practiced their program “Twice a day” had a 14 point advantage over those who were not regular. 

Chart 6. Use of Stabilizer

Chart 6 shows that there is a significant correlation between use of the stabilizer and successful results.  Between the most conscientious (75 to 100% use) and least conscientious (less than 25% use) there is a gap of 9.8 percentage points.  The biggest step is between those who used their stabilizer less than 25% of the time and those who at least used it 25 to 49% of the time. 

© 2000 by Maharishi Vedic University, The Netherlands
in collaboration with Maharishi Ayurveda Foundation, USA. All rights reserved.