I didn't see the abstract leave alone the article. Perhaps it is poorly written or the study itself was below standards.
What puzzles me is that current cellular biology totally ignores the general control system of the cell, what we call the BIOFIELD. The bravest refer to the Ling's concept, which in my view is inadequate. But the concept of BIOSTRACTURE proposed by Romanian Academician, Eugen Macovschi back in the 60's-70's, is exceptionally interesting and well-grounded. According to him, molecules encomassed in the biostructure (and it is only a part of the cellular material) show various chemical properties that are different from those in isolation -- not in the living cell.
Isn't it clear that the sequence of processes in a living cell is NOT RANDOM and chemical signals are coming from programs of the control system?
Thanks for your information. However, I'd just like to point out what I've found in the
first abstract I looked up....dealing with PI3K which is very interesting to many
researchers nowadays. PI3K is a kinase enzyme which is present in [probably all cells]
and has divergent functions in different cell types and functions which are modulated
in various directions by diffrent external agents. This is routinely understood. This
abstract seems to take this enzyme outside of any context. ...not bothering to
mention even the cell type in which the research was done....and not seeming to be
aware of the established patheways by means of which [in particular cell types and in
interaction with other particular cell types and through well-defined channels of
interaction with precursor enzymes PI3K is modulated. These researchers, in order to
make their research have any impact on anyone who is familiar with molecular
biology would have to [a] indicate what cell types they were working with in their
peculiar invitro culture....and [b] they could have.......and SHOULD HAVE.....also
indicated what the status of other enzymes on the different pathways for inactivation
or inactivation of PI3K were influenced and how they were influenced......and in which
cells.......since not all cells in the same culture [if they are of different type] will show
the same pattern.
You can see how this study [as presented] in this abstract is essentiallya waste of
time to read...........and certainly to publish.......since it cannot convince anyone of
anything ...........because of its patent lack of appareant "thoughfulness".......except
that Qigong is "kewl"..........
Sorry to be so down......but that is my first impression on reading this piece of
"research".......WHY WOULD ANYONE EVEN BOTHER DOING IT IF THEY UNDERSTOOD
ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT the mechanisms of actions, subtleties or relationship of
"PI3K" to other enzymes.?????????????????????