Posted on

The Bio-Electric Field Enhancement, BEFE

QEnergySpa, BEFE (Bio-Electric Field Enhancement) Technology.

The Bio-Electric Field Enhancement Unit (QEnergySpa, BEFE) was presented at the Global Sciences Congress in Colorado in August 1999.  At the time, it was and it still is, the latest in home-based therapies developed by Q-Tech Laboratories (Q the Experience, Future Life Science) in Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia invented by Mr. Terry Skrinjar.  Electric medicine was commonly used last century and early this century until the pharmaceutical industry began supporting medical schools, then the teaching of electric medicine was eliminated.

Some healing systems use a square wave dc pulse to effect the body, but water contains a bio-charge pattern where the frequencies are constantly changing and have patterns within patterns.  Our bodies are electrical and seventy percent water or more, so it is logical that the Bio-Electric Field Enhancement Unit could not only recharge our bodies, and therefore enhance healing and reduce stress, but achieve a rate of success that has not been achieved using any other principles.  It is a therapeutic aid to pain management and healing and much more.

Very few medical devices are as visual as the Bio-Electric Field Enhancement unit.  It is placed in a normal bathtub after the person to receive the therapy is already in the water. The unit delivers a bio-charge to the body’s own frequency, which recharges the body’s electrical system, and gives you an energy boost. The treatment lasts from 25 –30 minutes.  The water becomes interestingly discoloured.  Not that that has anything to do with the Detoxification in any way.

The benefits of the unit are almost unlimited and include increased vitality and energy, pain relief, faster recovery time, improved concentration and sleeping patterns, increased perception and well being improved liver, kidney and endocrine function, as well as reduced inflammation and swelling.  Other benefits include reduced arthritic and menstrual pain, assisting with incontinence, gout conditions, organic toxin neutralization and much more.  The complex magnetic fields of the unit permeate and realign your own body’s energy field which allows the body to function better.

The unit is designed for use by all ages as it has no side effects as the energies are the same and is therefore completely safe.  It cannot be used by people who have battery operated implants such as pacemakers, or implanted organs, during pregnancy or while on a course of life sustaining prescription drugs.  Organic medicines such as herbs are not considered drugs.  Any prescription is best taken over an hour either side of using the BEFE (QEnergySpa, BEFE).

The units come ready to use and have Q-Tech’s (Q the Experience, Future Life Science) guaranteed after sales service to ensure your unit works at peak performance at all times.  All units are built to meet all international electrical medical safety standards and electrical safety standard for use in a bathroom.

Janette Adams

Posted on

Heavy Metal Detox Without Healing Crisis

Heavy Metal Detox Without A “Healing Crisis”

Using among others the QEnergySpa, BEFE Technology
© Copyright 2001 by Timothy Ray, O.M.D., L.Ac., USA
Explore! for the Professional, Volume 10, Number 6


Clinical experience and laboratory evidence demonstrate that it is not necessary for a patient to go through a ‘healing crisis’ to successfully rid the body and brain of heavy metals. A rationale and method for achieving this end, based on the author’s clinical findings, are presented for your consideration.

The Healing Crisis

It is not appropriate to treat a chronic condition in the presence of an acute condition.1 When this basic rule of prioritization is broken, the patient is further compromised by additional and unnecessary stress, thus aggravating the acute condition. Therefore, a ‘healing crisis,’ which is an acute condition, cannot be considered acceptable during heavy metal detoxification, a therapy which is used to address the underlying causes of chronic degenerative diseases.

The symptoms of a healing crisis can include: acute nausea, vomiting, fever, fatigue, muscle weakness, malaise, headache, body aches & pains, back pain, hair loss, flatulence, peripheral neuropathy, sore throat, constipation, abdominal pain, dizziness, confusion, irritability, emotional and mental instability.

Clinical experience shows that one or more of the following causes a healing crisis:

  1. More toxins have been mobilized than the chelator can bind and or the patient’s pathways of elimination can excrete, and that the resulting symptoms are caused by the re-disposition of the remaining toxins in the body.
  2. The chelator is toxic in and of itself.
  3. Over dosage of an appropriate chelator.
  4. An allergic reaction to the chelator or the mobilized metals.
  5. Inappropriate selection of chelator / pathway of elimination.2
  6. The patient has a low battery focus3 and cannot utilize the remedy they need.
  7. There is an unidentified focus with greater priority; i.e. a chronic condition (metal toxicity) is being treated in the presence of an acute 2 condition (such as a ‘healing crisis’, sub clinically infected root canals, sinus, appendix, sudden emotional stress, etc.)
  8. Blocked autonomic regulation.
  9. Instability of the central nervous system (CNS).
  10. Inadequate, inappropriate or toxic drainage remedies. Disruption of homeostasis by any of the above causes weakening of the system that predisposes the patient to either an acute exogenous or endogenous infection, or an acute flare up of their chronic condition. Common sense indicates that if the diagnosis, prescription and dosage are correct the patient will only be and feel better.

Clinical Application of NDF

The method described here is based on a simple clinical observation: Take out the garbage and the system tends to self-regulate. First identify the primary obstacle or toxin in a patient’s system and remove it safely. Do this one step at a time, with one remedy at a time where possible. Wait and observe the impact of that on their system, allowing them time to achieve whatever degree of self-regulation they can without further intervention. Re-evaluate and proceed to the next issue. Attempting to treat diseases or symptoms without doing this first leads to temporary results or side effects, even while using the most advanced therapies and remedies available today. After the detox and the obstacles are resolved, those same therapies and remedies effectiveness are increased by many orders of magnitude. (This is discussed in more detail later in ‘Concluding The Case.’) Because my clinical focus for the last year and a half (out of seven years of treating metal toxicity) has been the treatment of chronic heavy metal toxicity with a MIER Type Chelator (NDF)4, I will outline the method that has worked so well for my patients and then give laboratory and case history examples.

The Questionnaire and Obstacles Worksheet 5

The patient fills in an eight-page questionnaire designed to detect lifestyle and other obstacles that might be causing the condition or preventing effective treatment of the condition. If appropriate, they are given an ‘Obstacles Worksheet’ that identifies the (up to 43) obstacles they must clear up either before or during therapy.

Following is a chart identifying the most critical of these obstacles. 3

Acute illness in progress Address this first
Chronic illness in acute stage Address this first
Severe debility, elimination problems Address this first
Amalgam fillings still in teeth If patient is strong enough, refer to holistic DDS who uses rubber dam, nasal 02, vacuum and materials compatibility testing. NDF protocol during removal.
Root canal teeth Evaluate severity. Better to have amalgams and root canals removed before treatment when possible.
Acute infected root canals, cavitations Refer to DDS. Infection may not clear until metal detox is complete, at least control it.
Poor nutrition Withdraw negative foods per blood type; mostly raw, organic, alkaline forming, local foods; no junk, GM, or artificial foods; possible amino acid / electrolyte supplement.
Not chewing food thoroughly Chew to a liquid, use blender if amalgams still in the teeth
Severe distended abdomen Mayr Cure before and / or during detox.
Mental dysfunction, sleep disorders, addictions, history of brain trauma, concussion Refer to real time EEG neurofeedback first; begin detox after CNS is more stabilized.
Mother had amalgams during pregnancy Start ‘dump’ journal of thoughts and feelings, burn pages daily without re-reading.
Not breast fed first year Do not eat the protein that was in the baby formula (milk, soy, etc.)
On prescription drugs Alert MD that dosages may have to be reduced as detox progresses; also that NDF may recognize some drugs as toxic and eliminate them (synthetic hormones, antibiotics).
Geopathic stress Colloidal Crystal Complex under bed, move
Electro Magnetic Radiation (computer screens, high tension power lines, electric blanket, etc.) Quantum unit, move, grounding
Mold and mildew O3 unit, clean up, keep area lit and humidity down, find out what kind, move
Chemical household and hygiene products Change to non toxic
History of severe allergies Refer to NAET practitioner
Taking multiple supplements Stop 3 days and re-evaluate
Drink or bathe in tap water Trinity water and shower filter
No exercise Minimum short time on rebounder or Qi Machine, personal trainer
Tender scars, adhesions Refer to body work, neural therapy, cold laser therapy
Obesity Weight loss program will begin metal detox, start there, slowly.
Continuing toxic exposure Stop it, move

If I see obstacles that I know therapy and remedies are not strong enough to overcome or keep at bay, I tell the patient they must be resolved before detox can begin or they will be wasting our time and their money. If they still want to proceed, I refer them elsewhere.

The SchwerMetall (Heavy Metal) Test 8

This test is useful for the patient who cannot afford outside lab testing and for a general ‘yes or no’ indication of metals in the urine during therapy. I ask the patient to bring in a cup of 1st morning urine at the first visit, with no supplementation 3 days prior. If no metals are revealed, we move up to a provocative challenge test with NDF, the dose of which is determined by their constitutional strength or by ramping up to the standard challenge dose of 4 – 6 mls.

Heart Rate Variability

This test provides an objective measure of autonomic regulation and clearly shows the patient their general progress. On a scale of 1 to 13 (best), if their symptoms go away at 5, and they started at 4, they can see that they have not achieved any real ‘health insurance’ until they get up to 11 or 12. It can inspire them to persist to completion.

Assessment with the Performance 20019

I follow the testing protocol established by Dr. H. Schimmel MD.  Normal values are between 400 – 800 nA. There are three main categories of readings: 5

Category 1. All points read below 400nA. There is a focal blockage problem, most likely a low battery, blocked regulation or CNS instability.

Category 2. Some points are above and some below normal. Correct the lowest reading as it represents the body’s most urgent need. If possible, find a single remedy that will both correct the lowest and highest reading. The more remedies in the protocol, the more difficult it is to manage the case. Generally, only the remedy corresponding to the patient’s primary need will correct both the lowest and highest reading.

Category 3. All points read above 800 nA. There is an acute state of inflammation, allergy, infection, acidosis, or hyper arousal.

Significance of P-2001 Findings

  1. If the patient is in Category 1 or 3, correct the readings to normal range first before beginning detox.
  2. Remedy testing in Categories 1 and 3 is not accurate, Ingestion Testing is (described below). An examination of the obstacles and symptoms may provide a clue to the first step. Usually these categories require ‘deductive’ therapy (withdrawal of an offending substance) or obstacle correction (sometimes as simple as chewing their food) for a week or so before remedies can be given safely.
  3. NDF-Plus, Inhaled Ionized Oxygen, cold laser or BioPhoton therapy, and the BEFE (Biological Electronic Frequency Enhancement, BEFE) footbath will generally be of benefit in Category 1.
  4. If head trauma or mental dysfunction appear in the history, real time EEG neurofeedback has helped stabilize patients in both Categories 1 and 3.

When the patient falls into Category 2, I do the remedy testing. If metal toxic, I first attempt to correct all points with NDF or NDF-Plus to keep the case as simple as possible. Most of the time it works. The information derived here will represent about 50% of the total picture. This objective measure, and other subjective resonance testing methods, only measure the body’s electrical reaction to the frequency of the tested substance, not the remedies post ingestion 6 chemical effect on the whole body. This gives a good clue, but not a final answer.

Ingestion Testing

I then give the patient a small (usually one drop) dose of the tested chelator/remedies, that they can taste,10 and ask them to go sit in the waiting room for 20 minutes. I then retest the focal points. If they now test within normal range, I know I have a tolerated, effective, minimum dose. I teach the patient how to ramp up the dose and how to use the Coca Pulse Test.11 With the Coca Pulse Test they have an ‘Ingestion Testing’ tool with which to evaluate changing remedy and dosage needs and sensitivities at home.

Window of Improvement

We know from independent real time digital EEG studies of patients with toxic heavy metal burdens that the voltage of their Beta waves tends to be depressed, and that after taking a correct dose of NDF, the voltage of their Beta waves increases into normal range in between 5 minutes to two hours post ingestion. The moment this happens, the patient reports a simultaneous subjective improvement in clarity and / or well-being. The experience of improvement of function has been clinically verified by real time EEG to last at least 4 hours 12 and can actually last for days.

Please note that the arrival at this sense of improvement is concurrent with a major simultaneous increase in the elimination of heavy metals, as verified by independent lab testing13, and thus proves that heavy metal detox can proceed without a healing crisis.

I call this the Window of Improvement.

Ramping up the Dose

The patient ramps up the dose until the “Window” is reached and then stays at that dose until a ‘plateau’ of no improvement is reached – at which point they gradually increase or decrease the dose to once again find the “Window.” Please see the graph below. 7

The correct dose can fall anywhere on this line. Note that if the dose is too small, no effect is noticed. If the dose is too large, the symptoms of a healing crisis will appear. I generally begin ingestion testing with one drop because if tolerated, the patient is safe to begin ramping up.

If one drop of NDF is not tolerated, I change to a photonic potency of NDF (frequency remedy) because the NDF had previously tested positive with the P-2001. In other words, if NDF tests positive with resonance testing, it can certainly be administered as it was tested: as a frequency. It no longer makes sense to me to prescribe a physical dose of a substance when it has only been tested as a frequency without also checking its effect post ingestion. This discrepancy can account for healing crisis symptoms if the person cannot utilize the chelator or remedies that they need.

Ramping Speed and Dose Increment Suggestions

Complex Case

The patient has a history of allergies and sensitivities, multiple chronic illnesses. Start with one drop of NDF in 10 oz distilled or r/o water and let them sip it slowly. Retest with the P-2001 or the Pulse Test. Insure that 10 oz of distilled or r/o water are taken every half hour until the second urination. If they have a low battery focus or debility and mental dullness start with NDF-Plus. Allow to stay at tolerated dose for a few days or a week, then ramp up in 1 drop increments every few days until the “Window” is found or a healing crisis appears, at which point back off to the previous dose and stay there for a week before resuming. 8

Normal Case

The patient still has a strong constitution and a recent onset of symptoms. The dose is variable up to 10 drops NDF in 10 oz distilled or r/o water. Insure that 10 oz of distilled or r/o water are taken every half hour until the second urination. Ramp up in 5 –10 drop increments every few days until the “Window” is found or a healing crisis appears, at which point back off to the previous dose and stay there for a week before resuming.


Acidic water (distilled or r/o) is taken with the dose and up to the second urination following the dose. This facilitates elimination. High quality alkaline water is taken thereafter to buffer the acidity (Trinity has a pH of 9). Drinking lots of water during detox insures against a healing crisis and helps provoke the metals out through the urine instead of the bowel.  The dose is taken first thing in the morning on an empty stomach, and then, after the ramping speed has been established, an additional dose again 2 hours after lunch. A dose twice a day is the target as this can provide a continuous sense of improvement; small frequent doses being more therapeutically effective than large intermittent ones. A dose is not taken at bedtime because the person might not have time to drink enough water in order to urinate twice or defecate before sleep.

As therapy progresses, most patients can tolerate and benefit from an increasingly larger dose. Armed with the Coca Pulse Test and the knowledge that they should only feel better, the “Window” is fairly easy to maintain. A method that I use, especially with patients who have a history of hypersensitivity, is to give the dose as x number of days on / x number of days off: usually 4 days on, 2 days off. One doctor reports that he stops the detox after two months for one week and sees an amazing acceleration of improvements during the rest period.

Bare Bones Method

Several recent cases (presented towards the end of this paper under Case Histories) have taught me that it is possible to manage a detox case at a distance and without expensive, difficult to use 9 instrumentation and testing protocols. The following steps were taken:

  1. Take history. Identify and discuss Obstacles. If major obstacles are present, correct them first. If there is a history of head trauma, mental dysfunction, stabilize the CNS with real time EEG neurofeedback first, if possible.
  2. Determine that there is no acute condition.
  3. If clear to begin, use Ingestion Testing. Note the pulse rate.
  4. If the person is debilitated, start with one drop NDF-Plus in 10 oz distilled or r/o water and sip over the course of an hour or more. If not, start with NDF, same method. If the person has amalgams the oral cavity is thoroughly cleansed (with MouthMagic) first and one drop is taken down the back of the throat, followed by the water. Another less popular option for those with amalgams is the rectal implant.
  5. The pulse is taken at 30 minutes and one hour following the dose. If ok, ramp up to the “Window.”
  6. If symptoms appear, stop. Re-evaluate or back up to the previous dose on the following day. Be sure there is proper water intake and bowel function.
  7. It can take some patients an extended time of ramping up the dose before they get to the “Window.” The more toxins and the more severe the metabolic dysregulation, the longer it takes. I encourage them to persist until they do.

Why Use NDF as the Single Remedy?

If the patient is only taking one remedy and their diet stays the same, there is much better control of the case, especially at the beginning. The following list shows the additional benefits of this approach:

  1. There is little to no danger of methylating mercury in the gut.
  2. It prepares the gut for the eventual safe recolonization with beneficial flora because it reduces the amount of metals in the gut and drives out pathogens with the competitive exclusion effect.
  3. It avoids the clear and present danger of heavy metal resorption in ‘leaky gut’ patients and the aggravation of other bowel and liver disorders when metals are mobilized via the liver and bowel because it predominantly mobilizes via the urine.
  4. It provides drainage and nutrient support in and of itself. 10
  5. It takes much of the onus of detox off of the liver and strengthens the kidney at the same time.
  6. If symptoms abate one is more certain that toxicity was the cause of the condition, and the picture is not confused by the superficial treatment of symptoms.
  7. It brings the metals out slowly (dose related), consistently and safely, not in sudden, massive amounts periodically.
  8. A greater, total amount of metals can be excreted safely per month than with other chelators.
  9. It is more cost effective for the patient.

Case Management: Troubleshooting Guidelines

Over dosage: If the patient ramps up too quickly they may provoke healing crisis symptoms. If this happens, they are told to do an organic coffee enema and drink 10 oz. of distilled water every half hour until the second urination following the dose. This gives quick relief. Then back off to the previous, tolerated dose on the following day.

Intermittent Low Battery Focus: This is a challenging case for both the patient and the doctor. One dose is tolerated, but the next is not.  Identify the cause, and in the meantime have them use the QEnergySpa, BEFE footbath or IIO2 (Inhaled Ionized Oxygen Therapy) on a regular basis. One example: a patient tested at 10 on the Heart Rate Variability Monitor (HRV) and within normal range on the P-2001 (good). Right after the test he went and spent 2 hours with his mother in law, and did not have a good time. He then immediately retested his HRV and it was at 3 (bad) and his P-2001 showed low battery.

Sudden Stress: If the patient is suddenly subjected to acute stress, be it infection, financial, from a relationship, or whatever, they are told to pause the detox until they are back to a more normal or stable state and / or avoid the source of the stress.

Constipation: Take 1-2 tsps Epsom Salts, dissolved in 8 ounces of pure, warm water first thing in the morning on an empty stomach. Walk around and occasionally jiggle the belly, or get on the Qi Machine for 15 minutes. Do not sit down or go back to bed. This will usually provoke a quick cleansing of the entire GI tract. 11

Drainage and Metabolic Support Issues & Solutions

Utilizing the combination of clearing the obstacles and the broad based, bioavailable nutrient base provided by NDF, it becomes largely unnecessary to provide additional drainage support. In addition, the following therapies and products have been useful for some patients.

What Not To Do:

  1. Do not take megadoses of proteolytic enzymes until after the second urination following the dose as this may break some of the bonds that are carrying the metals out of the body. 80% of the metals provoked by a dose come out in the first urination following the dose, another 10% in the second.
  2. Avoid sulphur containing remedies (DMSO, MSM) and foods (garlic, cabbage, broccoli, etc.) until after the second urination following the dose as the sulfur may cause some binding in the kidneys.

These precautions are mentioned as theoretical considerations. I have not seen side effects from either of the above. If these or other supplements or remedies are required I give them after the second urination following the dose because urine lab testing shows that roughly 90% of what has been mobilized has been excreted by then, and therefore the active phase of the dose is mostly over.

Acidosis: Alkala is the gold standard. Pines low temperature dissolving Barley Grass not only replenishes the alkaline reserve, provokes the excretion and neutralization of acids, but also provides raw food, bioavailable nutrient support. Take it after the second urination following the dose. Take it before a meal to include weight loss, on an empty stomach for maximum effect, and after meals if the person is too thin. Chew it. Another solution is the use of a Micro

water unit that can produce water at a pH of up to 12.

Dysbiosis: Taking a powerful flora supplement at the beginning of detox can increase the methylation of mercury in the gut14. Both NDF and NDF-Plus prepare the gut for the eventual administration of flora, both by decreasing the metals in the bowel and the competitive exclusion effect. 12

Specific Drainage Support: Any of the Heel, Pascoe, Nessman, or spagyric remedies that pass the Ingestion Test can be of assistance.

Parasitic, Bacterial, Viral, and Fungal Infections: Generally, these conditions cannot be completely cleared until the metals have been mostly eliminated from the body. However, if they reach an acute stage, the following products can be useful to at least reduce the severity of the infections until a cure is possible. Too aggressive an approach can produce side effects, especially the treatment of candida 15.

Parasites: Silver & Clove, K-Min.

Bacterial: First Defence, Colloidal Silver, Sacro-B, Silver & Clove.

Viral: Systemic Formulas X-3 (lomatium) First Defense, olive leaf, c. silver, chaparral.

Fungal: Thorne SF 722 or Undecyn, protease.

All infections: proteolytic enzymes (Biozyme, Wobenzyme, protease) and Pleomorphic (Sanum) remedies.

Liver & Kidney Support: LiverLife taken with the dose of NDF is a useful all-purpose drainage and support remedy.

Lymphatic Drainage: I have about thirty remedies to choose from for this and none test as well as simply having the person use a rebounder trampoline. When lymphatics are a primary issue, having the person hop ten times an hour wherever they are works very well. Lymphatic drainage massage and deep tissue work should be approached cautiously as more metal may be released than can be eliminated.

Other Detox Support Measures: Chitosan / Liposan-Ultra bind fat soluble toxins in the bile, thus preventing them from recycling via the bile recycling system. Activated charcoal helps bind metals and other toxins in the bowel. Clay baths with NDF in the water and Far Infrared

Saunas help pull the metals and other toxins out through the skin, best used 30 minutes to an hour after the dose. The NDF, Castor Oil (Palma de Christi), and green clay (Aztec) poultice combination assists with localized toxic focal areas. Hydrolyzed whey (Immunocal) provides intracellular glutathione for anti-oxidant support. Coffee (organic only) enemas are of great benefit to the whole system 16 when done 3-4 hours after the dose of NDF. Epsom Salts or 13 magnesium peroxide (OxcOxy) 30 minutes to 2 hours after the dose (timed so that the bowel movement occurs roughly 4 hours after the dose) help to flush the bowel. O3 rectal insufflation or ozonated colonics are beneficial. Lots of pure water: distilled or r/o with the dose and up to the second urination following the dose, alkaline water (Trinity, Microwater) thereafter.

Avoid the following during detox: Fish, inorganic foods (pesticides and chemical fertilizers), canned foods and beverages, tap water contact (incl. public swimming pools), untested chlorella, tobacco, ionic mineral complexes, vitamin and mineral supplements that do not have a ‘certificate of analysis’ showing no heavy metals, and inorganic coffee (mercury, cadmium).

A government-sponsored database17 called Nutrient Data Laboratory on the internet had astounding (they are reporting in ppm, not ppb) information about the heavy metal content of foods and herbs, including but not limited to:

Aluminum: cucumber = 21,000 ppm, Echinacea = 12,900 ppm, lima beans = 3,000 ppm, gota kola, pennyroyal = 2,060 ppm, black cherry =1,440 ppm, buchu= 1,360 ppm, carrot, peach, beans = 1,050 ppm, asparagus = 700 ppm, tea = 690 ppm, ginger = 663 ppm.

Cadmium: St. John’s Wort = 7 ppm, spinach = 5 ppm, lettuce = 4 ppm, tomato = 1.7 ppm, dill, corn = 1 ppm.

Uranium: black walnut, filbert and hazel nuts < 1 ppm.

Mercury: Chinese cinnamon = 60 ppm, kelp = 40 ppm, dulse = 26 ppm, Irish moss = 7 ppm, and many Chinese medicinal herbs at about 1 ppm or less.

Arsenic: kelp = 68 ppm, dulse = 33 ppm, Irish moss = 10 ppm, grapefruit = 4.4 ppm, carrot = 1 ppm.

Lead: black cherry = 108 ppm, kelp = 91 ppm, persimmon = 81 ppm, apple = 64 ppm, tomato = 60 ppm, sassafras = 37 ppm, asparagus = 30 ppm, corn = 14 ppm, plum = 11.9 ppm, beans = 10.5 ppm, grapefruit = 7.7 ppm, lettuce = 6 ppm, cabbage = 5.8 ppm.

I suspect that they only tested inorganic foods. The herbs tested were probably ‘bulk’ because we have COA’s (certificates of analysis) on the Chinese herbal extracts I use that show no metal contamination. 14

How many patients are out there treating metal toxicity or their health in general:

  1. By juicing (carrot, tomato, cucumber, spinach),
  2. With weight loss (the grapefruit diet),
  3. The liver flush (apple juice),
  4. With baths (kelp, dulse, Irish moss),
  5. Trying the asparagus cure,
  6. Using buchu for drainage,
  7. The sauerkraut cure,
  8. Chlorella (4 out of 6 brands I tested were loaded with metals),
  9. A Chinese herbal detox program (cook the bulk herbs yourself),
  10. Or simply eating lots of Mexican food (corn tortillas, beans, & tomato salsa) or sushi (some fish contaminated, ginger, low quality beer)?

Although this is an informative site, there are many I foods I searched for, like chlorella, that have not been tested. An independent lab analysis by AMTEST Labs showed that NDF was not contaminated with heavy metals.

Concluding The Case

Generally, as therapy progresses, the patient will stay in the “Window” for longer and longer periods of time until they reach a point of restored health and no evidence of metals in the post

provocation urine challenge. If they haven’t already started real time EEG neurofeedback, I suggest that they do so to repair the brain damage caused by the metals. This crucial modality is the subject of a future paper and I now believe that the full restoration of vibrant, self-sustaining health is not possible without it.

At this stage Dark field examination of the blood and the Pleomorphic18 (Sanum) remedies become extremely effective. Metal toxicity causes acid-base disturbances, which inhibits their effect,19 and the terrain now has a chance to self-regulate, assisted by improved liver, kidney, bowel, lymph, lung and CNS function (elimination of acids). Likewise, now UBI (ultra violet blood irradiation), O2/O3, live cell, complex homeopathy, acupuncture, and other rejuvenation therapies become much more effective. Once the metals are cleared they can no longer sabotage the effectiveness of the other modalities. I think that many of the above mentioned 15 remedies and therapies were created and proved during a time before pollution and metal toxicity became such wide spread problems.

Preventative Maintenance

Depending on where they live and what they consume, small, weekly doses of NDF are suggested instead of a yearly, major detox.

Case Histories

MMR (measles, mumps, & rubeola) Vaccine Damage. Male, age 8.

Symptom onset following MMR vaccine in 1995: stopped smiling, talking, playing and looking at parents, developed yellow, foul smelling diarrhea, disrupted sleep, auto immune disorders, scars don’t heal, irritable bowel, low attention, lost ability to speak, eyes deviated, frenetic, bites hands to point of bleeding, bangs head against the wall, and stimming behavior. He was dropped on his head at 7 weeks but ‘developed normally afterwards’. Recently given DMSA which severely aggravated all symptoms. Mother was hysterical, also mercury toxic, and because of her son had not had a full nights sleep in years. I could not locate a holistic doctor or a real time EEG neurofeedback practitioner in her area so I took the case by phone and fax. We decided to do Ingestion Testing. Beginning dose was 1 drop of NDF in a 10 oz glass of distilled water, consumed slowly over the course of a day, once a day. Within one week he was

sleeping through the night most nights and there had been a significant reduction in all symptoms for the first time. He continues to improve, now taking 2 drops a day. The mother is also taking NDF, same method, and improving.

Mercury Toxicity diagnosed as Multiple Sclerosis

Female, former dental assistant, age 45, previously diagnosed as having MS with tremors and shaking, bedridden, and other symptoms of poor health. Sudden onset of symptoms after improper amalgam removal. Made initial progress using DMSA and other chelators but not restored to health (bowel resorption of metals and liver problems).

Started NDF using Ingestion Testing and experienced abatement of all symptoms. Recent exposure to 100+ degree heat caused an acute aggravation of tremors, took 5 mls NDF and got complete relief. Liver pain gone, kidney function restored. She’s back to work and very happy! She did an NDF provocative challenge: 16

Patient DS overall metal increase (1 challenge dose of NDF, 5ml

Highlights of the test:

  • Mercury from below detectable level to dangerous levels
  • Aluminum 200% increase
  • Cadmium 137% increase
  • Cobalt 141% increase
  • Nickel 203% increase

This is another example of NDF provoking metals that the other chelators couldn’t reach. The actual Great Smokies before and after lab reports can be viewed at Look on the site map for DS Before and DS After. (Several other before and after lab tests, and more case histories, can also be seen at this site.)

Acute Flu and Chronic Seizure

My son Max, age 7, went swimming in a chlorinated pool in the hot sun at a relative’s house. He came down with otitis externa, ‘the flu’, and difficulty concentrating and speaking. He has a history of seizure activity caused by mercury toxicity. The heat and chlorine seriously increased his seizure activity. He has had this happen before, but chlorinated pools are practically unavoidable in Southern California.

Both of my boys (7 & 10) had previously always responded to ChildLife’s20 ‘First Defense’ for cold & flu or any infection but this time I didn’t see the expected dramatic improvement, and suspected an obstacle. The Performance 2001 revealed that all of his points were below 200 uA, a low battery focus. Now, for the second time, I’ve seen that the combination of heat and chlorine creates at least a temporary low battery focus in the metal toxic patient. He was given a QEnergySpa, BEFE footbath in R/O water, re-mineralized with potassium citrate, for

35 minutes. Once again, he showed no improvement immediately following the QEnergySpa, BEFE footbath. However, twenty minutes following the treatment he was given another dose of First Defense. Within 2 hours all symptoms of the flu were clearing and he was becoming his vibrant, smiling self again. Soon afterwards I gave him a dose (10 drops) of NDF. Seizure activity stopped. Because the BEFE raised his ‘amperage’, he was again able to utilize the First Defense and get the benefit, clear up the acute condition, and then move on to dealing 17

with the aggravation of the chronic seizure activity. The big question is how do you keep a kid out of a swimming pool?

Life Long Undiagnosed Mercury Toxicity

A male, age 52, was dragged into my office by peer pressure. He had been sick every day of his life, had spent all of his life long discretionary income on doctors, and hated them. I looked at his long list of symptoms and history of diseases and asked him if he had amalgam fillings. He did. I asked him if his mother had amalgams during her pregnancy with him. She had. I was roughly the sixtieth doctor he had seen but the first who had inquired about the possibility of metal toxicity. (Given the polluted status of our bodies and environment, doesn’t it seem like heavy metal toxicity testing should be included in every new patient intake visit!?) After testing I told him I was convinced that mercury was his problem and that I would eat my hat if I were wrong. He told me, in a depressed and very serious tone, that I would also eat his hat if I were wrong. He tested for NDF as the single remedy so I told him to start slowly and work up. He elected to do a full NDF challenge test. The results came back with only a 5% increase in mercury. I wondered what hats tasted like. I called him and asked what dose he had taken. “Five drops, like you told me.” I said it was 5 droppers full, not five drops, and would he like

to repeat the challenge? “No, I don’t need to. I’m feeling better already. I believe you. I’m not depressed any more, but I’m mad as hell that I’ve been walking around poisoned for all these years and didn’t know it.” He came into the office a few days ago to get some more NDF, smiling….!!! He’s currently up to ten drops twice a day.

Low Battery / Metal Toxicity

Male, age 55, history of amalgams since removed, tests as a Category 1 with a low battery focus. He is not ill, simply looking for prevention, but everything he tries makes him feel worse. He is a high-powered, high-stress, successful businessman with 80 employees. Most notable in his questionnaire is that he only chews his food 3-4 times per bite and never relaxes at a meal. He also has a large, protruding abdomen but is not obese. I gave him a choice: “Either I can sell you an $8,000 laser system, a $2800 QEnergySpa, BEFE device or a $3,000 IIO2 unit, because you probably don’t have time to come in to my office 3 times a week for treatments with my units, any of which will temporarily and artificially correct your low battery focus, 18

upon which you may become dependent if you don’t identify and correct the cause, OR, you can try something simple and free that may correct the problem forever and assist you in becoming a self-sufficient and empowered person: chew your food to a liquid at each bite and only sit down to eat at a table with people you adore who won’t talk business with you. If you do have to sit down for a business or stressful meal, drink bottled water instead of eating food because you can’t talk while you’re chewing or digest if you’re stressed.” He decided to chew. I also took him off chicken (Blood Type B). One week later the low battery focus was gone and he then tested positive for NDF. The next step (leap for him) is a Mayr Cure.


Unknown Type of Poisoning

A male, age 35, had been severely fatigued and had cognitive dysfunction for 6 years. He had tried many kinds of treatments to no avail, all of which had aggravated his symptoms and produced a ‘healing crisis’. He was suspicious of doctors and only came to see me because his friend begged him to and had told him that I did not believe in the healing crisis approach. He had his amalgams removed several years back and that had made no difference. His mother had amalgams during the pregnancy, but he attributed the onset of his symptoms to the day he had been surfing near a sewage treatment plant. He never felt the same afterwards. He tested for NDF. I checked in on him a week later and he said, “The fog cleared yesterday for the first time, and it’s still gone today.” He’s taking 1 ml twice a day.


Mercury Toxicity and Hair Loss

A male, age 56, with lab verification of multiple metal toxicity, has been using various chelators and detox protocols, including Chinese herbs, for several years, usually with the unwanted result of increased hair loss and healing crisis symptoms. He says he has come to the conclusion that if the program makes his hair fall out, it’s not for him. He started NDF about three weeks ago, using Ingestion Testing, and reports that hundreds of new hairs are now growing on his head. He is feeling much better. I bring this case up because according to Chinese Medicine the kidneys control the growth of hair, which means that NDF is concurrently healing the kidneys from an energetic point of view. 19


You should see the look on my patient’s faces when, at the end of the first visit, I tell them “If I got the diagnosis, remedy and dosage right, you should only feel better. If you feel worse, it means that I’ve either missed something, the prescription is wrong, or you are not following instructions. Stop and call me immediately.” Most of them are so used to being told that they have to feel worse to get better that this comes as a big, and welcome, surprise.

By using the kind of individualized protocol described in this paper it is possible to go through heavy metal detox not only without a healing crisis, but feeling better constantly during the entire duration of the process. Throughout detox the amount of time spent in the Window of Improvement and the quality of well-being continue to increase as more and more heavy metals and other toxins are eliminated and the system thus has the growing opportunity to self- regulate with minimal intervention.


Resource Directory

  • Pleomorphic (Sanum) Products – 602-439-7977,
  • Qi machine – Dr. Bill Sniechowski DC – 310-459-2209
  • QEnergySpa, BEFE footbath – Debbie Allen, Denver 303 782 4841 or Q the Experience Australia on Kansas Phone: 913 945 1227 (AU Time Zone)
  • NDF, NDF-Plus, LiverLife, MouthMagic, Colloidal crystal complex – BioRay – 310-473-1813
  • Quantum unit, Microwater – Kenneth Muchnij – 818-265-3993
  • Trinity Water – 800-390-5693
  • IIO2, P-2001, Mayr Cure – OIRF – 250-497-6020
  • Pines Dissolving Barley Grass – 800-697-4637
  • Silver & Clove, LiverLife, OxyOxc (mg. peroxide), sacro-b, chaparral – Scientific
  • Biologics 714-847-9355
  • K-min – Daily Mfg. – 704-782-0700
  • Soverign Silver – 888-328-8840
  • Olive leaf – East Park – 702-433-9040
  • First Defense – ChildLife – 310-305-4680
  • Biozyme – PhytoPharmica – 800-553-2370
  • Chitosan / Liposan Ultra – Werum R&D –
  • citrate – Spectrum Chemical – 800-772-8786


  1. Long standing peer opinion in the Biological Medicine field. I don’t know who said it first.
  2. The Mobilization and Elimination of Systemic Heavy Metals in the Context of Biological Medicine” by T. Ray, Explore, V10, #5.
  3. The Low Battery Focus” by T. Ray, Explore, V10, #4.
  4. A copy is posted at
  5. Go to and for information.
  6. Go to for information.
  7. You can find more information about this test at
  8. Information on this testing modality can be seen at or at
  9. George Goodheart DC found out 20 years ago, and Royal Lee before him, that supplements need to be chewed and tasted at each dose to achieve maximum effect. If taken in a gel cap, soft-gel, or entero coated, the sublingual receptors that go to the brain only send the message that what was tasted is coming in, and therefore the brain is not synchronized into the processing of the actual remedy. This method is also of use in pointing out to the patient that some of the stuff they are taking is so disgusting, rancid and nauseating they would never allow it down their throats and past their basic instincs. With some supplements, like HCL and enzymes, only a small taste is required. These are two reasons why I prefer liquid and whole food supplements instead of pills, chemicals and injections (in nature a bee sting, snake, spider or mosquito bite). Medicine, like food, needs to be chewed.
  10. The patient sits down until they are relaxed then takes their pulse rate. The easy way is with an automatic BP cuff, or, count beats for 10 seconds and then multiply by 6. Write down the number. Take a dose. Take the pulse again at 30 minutes and 1 hour. If it has deviated from normal by 10 beats either up or down, the dose or remedy are not appropriate. Wait a few hours and start over. If there is no deviation, try it again at a larger dose until the “Window” is reached. If the pulse stays the same but they feel worse, they are instructed to come in for a visit.
  11. The test subjects ran out of patience after sitting still for four hours.
  12. Preliminary Results Using Real Time Digital EEG to Record the Effects of an Organic Heavy Metal Detoxification Supplement (NDF) on the Brain for 2 Hours After Ingestion” by Dr. J. Randol Christman, D.Ac., unpublished.
  13. The Methylization of Mercuric Chloride by Human Intestinal Bacteria“; Experentia, 31:9; 1975; Sept 15, 1064-5; IR Rowland; P Grasso; MJ Davies; British Industrial Biological Research Association, Woodmansterne Road, Cashalton, Surrey, SM5 4DS, England.
  14. I understand that Diedrich Klinghardt MD thinks that the body actually fosters the presence of candida in the heavy metal toxic patient because its cell wall binds to the metals, providing a measure of protection. If the candida cell wall is lysed, the metals are released. In clinic I’ve seen the candida go away as the metals are removed, without a healing crisis.
  15. See “Coffee Enema Techniques” by Morton Walker in Explore, V10, #5.
  16. and
  17. Pleomorphic (Sanum) Products can be reached at 602-439-7977,
  18. Noted by Dr. Thomas Rau at one of his seminars on Isopathic Therapy.
  19. This company offers an excellent line of supplements for children; it’s founder and formulator, Dr. Murray Clarke, LAc DH, has specialized in paediatrics for many years.

ChildLife can be reached at 310-305-4680. Or, see their website at

Posted on

QEnergySpa, BEFE – Conversion of a Sceptic

Conversion of a Sceptic

I have always been a sceptic. I’ve found it to be a useful trait in this ‘New Age’, in particular when it comes to health and healing.  As a Natural Health Practitioner I have also learnt to keep an open mind, which is just as well of I might otherwise have passes by the Gizmo (QEnergySpa, BEFE), and so missed the most astounding health tool I have ever encountered.

I first saw it bubbling unobtrusively away in a bucket of scummy looking water at one of the mini Health and Harmony expos that’s held at the Raptis Plaza in Surfers every second Friday of the month.  The front of the brochure read BIO-ELECTRIC FIELD ENHANCEMENT UNIT, BEFE. O.K…. “But what does it do? I asked “it’s used in the bathtub to re-balance and amplify the bio-electric signature of your body” explained the man behind the Q-Tech Laboratories desk. “That’s nice” I smiles, trying to look suitably impressed, “but what does it actually DO?” Realising that he was talking to a less than technical being, he started explaining the health benefits of the Gizmo – otherwise know as the BEFE Unit. How it did everything from purify the water to increasing vitality and relieving pain.

I examined the little round plastic and metal unit more closely. It didn’t look all that impressive. “Prove it! Lend me a unit, I’ll use it on a variety of people and test hem to see if it makes any difference.” – As I use Kinesiology as my diagnostic tool, it would be a simple enough matter to establish whether or not it actually did what he said it could do and I am always interested in anything that might benefit my clients.

A few days later I stood looking down at the Gizmo (QEnergySpa, BEFE) in my bathtub, peering anxiously along the cords that went from the unit to the transformer and then into the electricity socket in the wall. “Are you SURE there is no chance of it electrocuting me?” “Absolutely none!” I did one final muscle test to make sure it was safe, turned the power on, and climbed into the bath.

It was a good time to try it out, my body had been retracing and I’d been having a few joint problems. My right elbow had just got to the point of being so sore and swollen that I couldn’t reach to do up my bra – not a good image for a healer!  After a few minutes I decided to lie back and mediate, I’d know soon enough whether or not it worked, and I was O.K. so far. 35 minutes later the timer went off and I opened my eyes… and freaked! The bath water had turned murky, muddy brown with BITS floating in it and the ring around the bath was a couple of inches wide! YUK!! I leapt out, turned it off and examined the water I had been lying in.

When the Q-Tech people had told me that it first filters the water to clear it of impurities, and then proceeds to eliminate toxins from the body, I hadn’t given it much though. Now faced with the mucky evidence I was amazed – and very glad that the icky looking substance around the edge of the bath was no longer in my body! I ran some tests and the results were extremely impressive. Organs, glands, even emotions balanced and enhanced. None the less, I didn’t feels all that different and my elbow was still very sore.

I put judgement on hold and went to bed. The next morning I woke up and my elbow was back to normal! No swelling, no pain, completely mobile! It was time to try it on someone else. MY mother had a variety of health problems. “What will it do?” she asked “Not sure Mum, I’ve only just starting testing it, but I can guarantee it won’t hurt you, and look what it did for me after only one bath!” I happily twirled my new elbow under her nose. She got in the bath without further argument.  45 minutes later I knew two things for sure. I would have to buy some really heavy duty bath cleaner and there was DEFINITELY more to this Gizmo (QEnergySpa, BEFE) thing than met the eye. “Mum, its testing up that it’s taken your bladder function from 55% to 90% and that incontinence has been reduced by 90%!” We looked at each other in disbelief.  16 years ago my Mum had a badly botched operation that resulted in constant severe incontinence. The quality of her life had been greatly affected because of it. How could half and hour in the bath with a Gizmo (QEnergySpa, BEFE) possibly have fixed such a massive long term problem like that?  For the first time in years I actually doubted my testing but the body doesn’t lie and the proof would be in the pudding so to speak. It tested that another bath would take the problem down to 3%, meantime I followed my poor Mum around waiting for her to cough or sneeze. I even frightened her to see if that would have an effect!  NOTHING HAPPENED!!! Time after time she’d cough, I’d make her go off and check, she’d come back to report a completely dry pad.
It took weeks before she could really believe that the problem had gone and that she could live a normal life again. I still find it hard to wrap my mind around!  My research continues with more ‘miracles’ everyday across an astonishingly wide range of ailments. The Gizmo (QEnergySpa, BEFE) works better on some people than on others. Some clients need a full course of 14 baths over a 28 day period to find their way back to wellness; others need only one or two. It depends on the problem and the person.

One thing’s for sure though, I’m no longer a sceptic – as far as the BEFE Unit is concerned anyway. I’ve not only bought one,  I’m now selling them! I still don’t completely understand exactly how they work, (for that you’ll have to ring the technical people at Q – Tech) I don’t even feel the need to know anymore, I’m just happy and grateful that the technology is
available. It’s changed our lives, and the lives of my clients, for ever.

Samantha Joy practices ‘Ultimate Kinesiology’ from her Gold Coast base.  She specialising in relieving pain, stress, illness and negative patterns, and actually guarantees positive results.

Posted on

QEnergySpa, BEFE and Kinesiology

Kinesiology and the QEnergySpa, BEFE

Applied Kinesiology & the QEnergySpa, BEFE

The following trial was performed to estimate the effectiveness of the QEnergySpa, BEFE using kinesiology. Results show a clear, measured improvement in all subjects.

Applied Kinesiology is a system that evaluates structural, chemical and mental aspects of health using manual muscle testing alongside conventional diagnostic methods. The essential premise of applied kinesiology, that is not shared by mainstream medical theory, is that every organ dysfunction is accompanied by a weakness in a specific corresponding muscle, the viscerosomatic relationship.

The following trial used muscle testing (Applied Kinesiology) to ascertain results following QEnergySpa, BEFE sessions.

The trials were conducted between the 30th January, 1998 and the 8th February, 1998.

Subjects in the trial

Subjects Name, age and complaint
S Trial subject 1 S was 37 years of age at the time of the trial. S had bulk body damage from 2 major accidents.
E Trial subject 2

E  was 60 years of age at the time of the trial. E had major issues including low self esteem, was overweight and diabetic.

C Trial subject 3 C was 7 years old during the trial. C’s past history was mostly emotional trauma and also constipation issues, low energy and odd brown patches on body.
J Trial subject 4 J, age 26, had a past drug and alcohol abuse issue with related bodily symptoms. No major physical problems apparent.
G Trial subject 5 G, a 56 year old, had no apparent physical problems. G was a very fit masseuse however he suffered from work-related backaches.
F Trial subject 6 F was was 36 years old at the time of the trial. He has a stress-related skin disorder mainly resulting in his skin peeling from his feet every time he suffers personal trauma.
T Trial subject 7 T age 3 when the trial was performed and suffered from Eczema.
C2 Trial subject 8 C2 was age 40 at the time of the trial and did not appear to have any major problems.
G2 Trial subject 9 G2 was age 45 when the trial was performed and suffered from Chronic Fatigue.
A Trial subject 10 A was age 32 when the trial was performed. No major problems aside from stress and mild scarring.



To observe the trial subjects physical reactions to a series of QEnergySpa, BEFE sessions.

The hypothesis was that the QEnergySpa, BEFE sessions would improve the test subjects overall well-being and their internal function to enhance their health status.

All test subjects were monitored during the session with counsellors at hand in the event that they experienced any negative feelings during the session.


The QEnergySpa, BEFE was found to be beneficial, however more research is required to confirm my findings.  I recommend the use of the QEnergySpa, BEFE by healthy people, as a preventative measure, as well as for sick or depressed individuals to aid in their recovery.



Test Subject Results


Test Subject 1 – S


Summary: The results of test subject S show that there was a difference in bodily actions and that by the end of the treatment baths S was nearly fully operational in all areas of her body.  The Baths are also appearing to be beneficial to the patient for the removal of S’s stretchmarks.  All systems tested on S proved to be increased by a large percentage after the baths.  This alone would make a person feel better when all systems are functioning normally at full capacity. If the baths were doing this than the baths would be very beneficial to patients recovering from surgery in hospitals.


After 1st Bath

30/1/98 5.30pm to 6.10pm

Noticed nothing while in the bath, very tired afterward, joints and muscles seemed a little freer.

Testing revealed:

Tissue damage in hips down from 42% now 16%.

Muscle damage was 34% now down to 18%.


After 2nd Bath

1/2/98 9.30am to 10.05am

Yesterday the right elbow was free from pain and restriction. Prior to bathing it had become difficult to bend and do up my bra.  Left knee had also improved although it was not bad to begin with.  Right knee was somewhat improved though still experiencing moderate pain and restriction of movement.  I am delighted and hopeful.

Muscles in right leg tested that soreness had been removed.

Bones in left ankle, both knees and left shin strengthened.

Emotion: Bitter and Numb neutralised.


Right leg muscles extremely sore from calf to hip.  Healing Crisis.  My right arm and left knee are still fine.


After 3rd Bath

3/2/98 35 Minutes

Right leg pain now extends from toe to hip.

Central Nervous Systems from 46% to 100%.

Adrenals from 84% to 100%.

Respiratory System was 100% functioning after last bath, this one integrated it.

Digestive System 87% functioning to 100%.


Entire right leg so bad that I have difficulty in moving, pain cripples and actually has me rolling round as if in severe cramp.


After 4th Bath


The QEnergySpa makes the water very soft and nice to be in.

Cell Function and Structure were 80% now 100%.

Muscle Tissue was 57% now 98%.

Ligaments/tendons was 48% now 99%.

Bones was 79% now 100%.

C.N.S was 58% now 87%.

Brain functions – Ability to trust 48-76, Understanding 60-87, Imagination 80-99.

P.N.S smell was 66% now 80%.

Immune System was 56% now 98%.

Circulatory was 57% now 80%.

Respiratory was 70% now 95%.

Digestive was 66% now 93%.

Urinary was 56% now 77%.

Kidneys were 43% now 89%.

Adrenals were 56% now 70%.

Pineal was 79% now 95%.

Integration was 27% now 67%.

Meridians – large intestine, kidneys, liver, heart.

Stretchmarks were 27% now 8%.

Body Illness was 59% now 64%.



Test Subject 2 – E


Summary: For test subject E, tests showed that there was a main problem with incontinence.  The baths relieved this person of this problem, something which conventional science has yet been able to achieve.  Apart from the incontinence E also had body functions that were low which improved to be nearly 100% in all systems.  Stress was another problem E struggled with. After the baths E was tested and the tests said that on all stress levels she was down to 0% for each.  The diabetes was another factor that requires further research, E had diabetes, which was 15% that went down to 8%, and this is something that has increased E lifespan.


After 1st Bath

31/1/98 9.30 – 10.05am

Pins and needles from the knees down whilst in the bath. Hot afterward for a short period of time.

Testing revealed:

Bladder functioning went from 55% to 100% – this tested up that it would relieve incontinence by 90%.

Circ/Sex functioning went from 72% to 100%.

Stomach functioning went from 78% to 100%.

Pancreas functioning went from 60% to 85%.


After 2nd Bath

2/2/98 10.15 – 10.50am

Incontinence appears to have been resolved; this was caused by a bungled operation 16 years ago.

Pancreas functioning went from 85% to 100%.

Incontinence went from 10% to 3%.

Spleen functioning went from 80% to 100%.

Large intestine functioning went from 69% to 100%.

Stress around Unacceptable went from 95% to 0%.

Stress around Unappreciated went from 66% to 0%.

Stress around Fuming went from 53% to 0%.

Stress around Abused went from 50% to 0%.

Stress around Wounded went from 37%to 0%.


After 3rd Bath

6/2/98 10.15 – 10.50am

Incontinence resolved! She’s coughed, sneezed; I’ve even frightened her, still no problem.  This alone makes the bath worth every penny.

Muscle tissue went from 78% to 87%.

P.N.S went from 89% to 100%.

Digestive system went from 90% to 100%.

Whole body integration went from 53% to 86%.

Horary; Bladder, Circ/sex, Gall bladder.

Emotion: Longing 89% NEC.

Diabetes went from 15% to 8%.




Test Subject 3 – C


Summary: For test subject C, being only a child, the baths were no longer than 17 minutes. The nasty side effects that were seen in the first bath would need further investigation as to wether the QEnergySpa may have to apply restriction for it’s use with children, or limit them to foot baths and not full body baths.  Other than the first two baths the problem did not resurface.  The child’s systems were as with the other patients, improved upon with the baths.  The patchy skin discolouration was starting to improve by the fourth bath.  This result would lead to more trials with skin disorders.


After 1st Bath

31/1/98 10.30 – 10.47am

Some tingling was felt in feet, movement in knees, sharp heat in sternum while in bath.  She was tired, and feeling dizzy and sick to the point of crying when she got out.  Did not want to try the bath again.  Was Ok after an hour.  No visible effect on skin discolouration.

Testing revealed:

Gall Bladder functioning went from 86% to 100%.

Liver functioning went from 90% to 100%.

Small Intestine functioning went from 93% to 100%.

Kidney functioning went from 96% to 100%.

Circulation/sex functioning went from 98% to 100%.


After 2nd Bath

2/2/98 7.00 – 7.17am

Only half the unpleasant side effects after the first bath.

Cellular functioning went from 66% to 100%.

Central Nervous System went from 76% to 96%.

Immune System went from 88% to 98%.

Pulmonary functioning went from 67% to 88%.

Digestive System went from 88% to 100%.

Thymus went from 60% to 87%.

Pituitary went from 80% to 94%.

Emotion:  Ruined N.E.C 57% to 0%.


After 3rd Bath


No nasty side effects.

Smell went from 77% to 100%.

Circulatory went from 77% to 100%.

Skin patches went from 27% to 16% – they are starting to fade on the body but not on the arm yet.


After 4th Bath


No nasty side effects.

Horary: Put back Gall Bladder and Liver.

Patches went from 17% to 7%.

Emotion: Muddled N.E.C 37%.

Splinter accelerated healing and removed infection.



Test Subject 4 – J


Summary: Test subject J, had once suffered alcohol and drug abuse. Her results are beneficial in determining if the QEnergySpa would be able to help people with the problems associated with drug and alcohol abuse.  J also had a marked improvement in her hearing, another thing to warrant further investigation.  As with S stretchmarks had been reduced.  J also suffered from eczema, which was healing and being reduced with the bath treatments.


After 1st Bath

1/2/98 3.15 – 3.50pm

Buzzed the entire bath, felt pressure on throat for a couple of minutes.  Hot, dizzy and sick, still buzzing after the bath for about 20 minutes.

Spleen was 66% now 83%.

Heart was 89% now 100%.

Bladder was 91% now 100%.

Circ/sex was 95% now 100%.

Triple Warmer was 96% now 100%.

Large Intestine was 97% now 100%.

Gall bladder was 99% now 100%.

Called in 6 hours after treatment feeling energized and balanced.


After 2nd Bath

4/2/98 9.15 – 9.50pm

Buzzing in left leg, particularly around dermatitis in ankle, shifted to right leg but not as strongly.  Warmth and prickles on face.  Saw a man’s face while she was lying there.

Results show:

Cellular Activity Level was 86% now 100%.

Bone calcification reduced from 26% now 12%.

Circulatory System was 76% now 100%.

Respiratory System was 88% now 100%.

Metabolic Functioning was 92% now 100%.

Ovaries were 76% now 93%.

Thymus was 82% now 97%.

Eczema, body reduced from 66% to 14%.

Eczema skin reduced from 32% to 13%.

Stretchmarks wee 37% now 29%.

Hearing outer ear improved from 63% now 87%.

Emotion:  Conquered N.E.C 66% now 0%.

Noticed after first bath, no more heart palpitations, more energized generally.


After 2nd Bath

8/2/98 1.30 – 2.05pm

Left foot pulsed and voiding water immediately after bath.

Eczema, body reduced from 22% to 14%.

Eczema, skin reduced from 17% to 15%.

Stretchmarks was 22% now 14%.

Genetic code realigned.

Thermal – Cold.

Inner ear was 82% now 96%.

Pulmonary Function was 88% now 100%.

Small intestine was 50% now 89%.

Emotion: Unlovable N.E.C 32% now 0%.

Bath may not be functioning effectively.  She did not feel the same effect.  She has noticed vaginal muscle tightening.



Test Subject 5 – G


Summary: Test subject G, was more like a control in a case study as to the fact that apart from the rash on the buttocks this subject was very healthy.  Even with this apparent health the bath still increased the body’s functions to nearly 100% an all systems. The bath gave G a tune up, which is a form of preventative measures to ward off ill health and increasing the body’s health to full capacity.


After 1st Bath

3/2/98 10.00 – 10.35am

Felt relaxed, nothing more.

Skin rash on buttocks will clear up in 5 hours.

Large Intestine functioning went from 93% to 100%.

Spleen functioning went from 93% to 100%.

Small intestine functioning went from 94% to 85%.

Kidney functioning went from 95% 100%.

Circ/sex functioning went from 96% to 100%.

Triple warmer functioning went from 96% to 100%.

Heart functioning went from 96% to 100%.

Lung functioning went from 97% to 100%.

Gall bladder functioning went from 97% to 100%.

Tested up he only needed the one bath.  Gave him a good tune up.  He still needs a Heart integration while it’s now functioning at 100% Integration is only 72% with 16% electrical imbalances caused by central and governing meridian problems.  Rash did not completely disappear.



Test Subject 6 – F


Summary: F was another study similar to G as there were no major internal problems with this test subject.  The problem that F faced was stomach muscle that had been torn 14 years previously.  As with the all test subjects the body’s major functions were increased to nearly full capacity in all systems.  As with the entire female test subjects that have given birth the stretchmarks had been reduced.  Also she stated that she could feel the muscles of her stomach firming, this would be a breakthrough for woman and men with wasted muscles.


After 1st Bath

3/2/98 1.00 – 1.35pm

Tingling in legs for a while, when out feet feel smooth and relaxed.

Incontinence reduced from 13% to 0%.

Stomach Muscle was split during pregnancy 14 years ago and didn’t knit back properly.  32% now 2% will close during the next 3 weeks.

Stretchmarks went from 36% to 26%.

Stomach functioning went from 91.5% to 100%.

Thyroid functioning went from 89% to 100%.

Adrenals functioning went from 63% to 96%.

Ovaries functioning went from 86.25% to 100%.

She already feels the stomach firming.


After 2nd Bath

5/2/98 11.00 – 11.35am

Sensation under left arm later confirmed by Lymph reading.

Muscular stomach tissue went from 2% to 0%.

Lymphatic functioning went from 675 to 100%.

Circ system functioning went from 70% to 87%.

Small intestine functioning went from 92% to 100%.

Ovaries functioning went from 86 .25% to 100%.

Inner ear functioning went from 82% to 100%.

Mammary Functioning went from 68% to 100%.

Thymus functioning went from 76% to 100%.

Pituitary functioning went from 76% to 100%.

Stretchmarks reduced from 26% to 20%.

Ability to trust 95% to 100%.

Understanding 87% to 100%.

Resistance to change 97% to 100%.

Imagination 95% to 100%.



Test Subject 7 – T


Summary: Test subject T was the youngest of the trial subjects at the age of 3. The child’s main problem was eczema and as with subject C only in the bath for a maximum of 17 minutes.  Again all systems were improved through being in the bath.  The skin disorder, which she suffers, was showing a marked improvement after the two baths.  With the QEnergySpa not functioning properly the results of the second bath are not as conclusive as the first even though there was still improvement after the second bath.


After 1st bath

4/2/98 3.00 – 3.17pm

No effects whilst in the bath.

Eczema, in body 96% to 56%.

Eczema, on skin 16% to 3%.

C.N.S brain and spine 77% to 96%.

Lymphatic System went from 67% to 98%.

Incontinence went from 57% to 27%.

Adrenals went from 96% to 100%.

Parotid reduced from 98% to 100%.

Scabs reduced from 26% to 0%.

Insect Bites 9% to 0%.

Emotional Conquered 93% to 0%.


After 2nd bath

8/2/98 3.00 – 3.17pm

Skin on back and arms improved after first bath, still heaps left. Not wetting as much.

C.A.L went from 66% to 88%.

Eczema, in body 66% to 26%.

Eczema, on skin 26% to 11%.

P.N.S went from 66% to 77%.

Lymph System went from 76% to 92%.

Respiratory System from 66% to 87%.

Endocrine System went from 76% to 98%.

Miasmas; Syphilitic 78%.

Emotional: overlooked NEC 67% – 0%.

Bath is not functioning. Interesting that it works at all though. Would have thought it would have no effect.



Test Subject 8 – C2


Summary: C2 had three major problems, which were dealt with whilst in the QEnergySpa baths.  The rashes that were present on hands and back both reduced themselves a rather significant amount. The foot problem, which they suffered from, was disposed of entirely.  C2 also noted a rather large change in the energy levels that he experience. Again all systems benefited from the baths and were increased to 100%.


After 1st Bath

4/2/98    3.00 – 3.35pm

Will need three baths to clean up feet issue.

Feet improved by 37%.

Back rash improved from 62% to 17%.

Hand Rash went from 32% to 12%.

Central Nervous System 87% to 100%.

Immune system 88% to 99%.

Pulmonary system 97% to 100%.

Gall Bladder 98% to 100%.

Bladder 98% to 100%.

Thymus 99% to 100%.

Pineal 99% to 100%.

Imagination 77% to 100%.

R.A.S 89% to 100%.

Understanding 94% to 100%.

Stretchmarks 12% to 4%.

Wrinkles 9% to 7%.

Emotion:  Unacceptable N.E.C 27% to 0%.

Stress: Body 52% to 12%.

Stress: Mind 3% to 0%.

This test subject did a meditation whilst in the bath and travelled with the light through the DNA restoring it.


After 2nd bath

6/2/98 1.00 – 1.35pm

Feet are less dry and red, feeling more energised, and hands fluctuate from improved to dry.

Feet 69% improvement overall.

C.A.L 77% – 100%.

Respond ability 80% – 93%.

Understanding 89% – 100%.

Circ system 67% – 96%.

Metabolic System 68% – 98%.

Homeostasis 89% – 97%.

Back rash reduced 27% – 9%.

Hand rash reduced 10% – 0%.

Emotion: Unloved NEC 87% – 0%.

Actually felt like a foetus in the bath this time. Allowed a new belief, I am loved, which fits in with the emotional diffusion as above.  He was the 7th son – the mother wanted a daughter.


After 3rd bath

8/2/98 10.00 – 10.35am

Feet have almost cleared up.

Lymph 79% – 100%.

Spleen 68% – 87%.

Viruses 26% – 4%.

Thymus 87% – 100%.

Back Rash reduced 18% – 6%.

Hand Rash reduced 11% – 3%.

Foot rash reduced 6% – 0%.

Emotion: Not heard NEC 36%.

Vision of an older and more relaxed looking child was seen.


Feet still a minor problem the bath was not working properly last time.  Still has some effect though as evidenced above.



Test Subject 9 – G2


Summary: G2 suffered from chronic fatigue.  The baths worked to increase the general health of this subject.  The problems that this person had with her systems was on it’s way to healing.  As with all females stretchmarks were reduced along with wrinkles. This fact is interesting and may point to the QEnergySpa being a link to eternal youth?  G2 also regained some eyesight, another point to be further investigated.


After 1st Bath

4/2/98 11.00 – 11.45am

Cell Function was 72% now 100%.

Muscular Tissue was 96% now 118%.

Bone calcification was 29% now 2%.

CNS was 87% now 100%.

Body Fluid Functioning was 46% now 100%.

Lymphatic was 86% now 100%.

Immune System was 76% now 98%.

Circulatory System was 32% now 68%.

Hear Functioning was 86% now 100%.

Heart integration was 65% now 69%.

Blood vessel flow was 52% now 100%.

Pituitary was 87% now 100%.

Internal Parasites went from 27% to 26%.

Stretchmarks were 51% now 39%.

Wrinkles were 26% now 23%.

Emotion: Bitter – NEC 67% – 2%.

Emotion: Incensed NEC 56% – 0%.

Hypoglycaemic was 19% now.

Stress, Body was 100% now 37%.

Stress, Mind was 26% now 7%.

Understanding 72% now 95%.

Learning and memory 51% now 92%.

Sight was 62% now 73% (extremely short sighted in left eye).


After 2nd Bath

6/2/98 10.10 – 10.50am

They went through the expected healing crisis after the last bath, very tired eyes, headaches, nausea, and extreme exhaustion, not sleeping.  18% improvement from after the initial first bath.

Immune System was 78% now 100%.

Circ/sex was 37% now 67%.

Liver was 66% now 90%.

Pituitary went from 68% to 100%.

Metabolic was 37% now 56%.

Whole body Integration was 36% now 87%.

Emotional: Furious 66% – 0%.



Test Subject 10 – A


Summary: A was also one of the test subjects to have their hearing improved. All other systems were increased to nearly full working order.  Again stretchmarks were reduced.  This would lead to thinking what does it do to scar tissue?  Stress was also reduced and in today’s society this would be a good way to reduce it, have a relaxing bath and feel the stress leave.


After 1st Bath

5/2/98 10.00 – 10.40am

Felt a metallic taste in mouth, slight head pressure felt toxic for a minute; hot and worn out afterward, then energised.

Cellular Activity level 57% – 100%.

CNS Brain and Spine 86% to 100%.

Pulmonary Nervous system thermal 88% to 100%.

Hearing inner ear functioning went from 52% to 77% improved problems with tone by 17% – men’s voices.

Smell went from 89% to 97%.

Immune system went from 80% to 97%.

Circ/sex went from 85% to 99%.

Digestive: Colon went from 67% to 86%.

Large Intestine 37% to 67%.

Small Intestine went from 56% to 76%.

Liver went from 29% to 49%.

Gall bladder went from 88% to 100%.

Endocrine went from 26% to 49%.

Stretchmarks went from 19% to 12%.

Emotion: Despondent NEC 80% to 0%.

Emotion: Ruined NEC 37% to 0%.

Body stress was 66% to 32%.



Posted on

QEnergySpa Egg Plant Life Span Extension

QEnergySpa, BEFE Egg Plant Life Span Extension

QEnergySpa/B.E.F.E. Egg Plant Longetivity Trial


To conduct a longevity experiment in order to show the effects of supplying additional Bio‑Energy to an Egg Plant.  This will be done using the patented QEnergySpa, BEFE from Q the Experience.

It is theorised that increasing the Bio-Energy content in an Egg Plant will have the effect of prolonging the life span (use by date).

1 x 4105 QEnergySpa, BEFE
2 x Egg Plant
1 x containers to charge water and fruit
2 x trays or plates (Dated & ID Charged , Uncharged)

One Egg Plants will be placed into a container of water with an Orb connected to a 4105 QEnergySpa, BEFE and charged for a period of 35 minutes. After the charging session the Egg Plant will be placed on a plate.
The second Egg Plant will have no treatment.
No further treatment of the Egg Plant will occurred and as little handling as possible will be maintained.

The Egg Plants are to be photographed each day and have any observations recorded.

If possible the trials will be left long enough to harvest the seeds so they can be used to research the effect or changes to the next generation in a future trial.

It is expected that the Egg Plant that has been charged with Bio-energy using a 4105 QEnergySpa will have a longer shelf life compared to the Egg Plant that has not been charged.



 Trial commenced 19th April 2004

Charging Egg Plant

20th April 2004

21st April 2004
The skin on the uncharged Egg Plant is beginning to wither

22nd April 2004

23rd April 2004
The uncharged Egg Plant is beginning to soften whilst the charged Egg Plant is still firm.

27th April 2004
The uncharged Egg Plant is showing signs of deterioration; the surface of the fruit is withering and the Egg Plant is becoming visibly smaller. The charged fruit does not appear to have changed.

28th April 2004

29th April 2004

30th April 2004

4th May 2004
The uncharged Egg Plant has deteriorated further whilst the charged Egg Plant appears to remain the same

5 May 2004

6th May 2004

7th May 2004

11th May 2004
The uncharged Egg Plant has deteriorated to the point that fungi has set in and the rate of decomposition is accelerating. The charged Egg Plant is still edible and is showing no signs of deterioration.

14th May 2004

17th May 2004
The charged Egg Plant is still firm but is showing slight signs of withering on the surface.

18th May 2004

At the conclusion of the trial the charged Egg Plant was cut open and was found to be in very good condition. The photo above shows a brown colour on the flesh which began after the fruit was opened to the air.
Whilst cutting the charged fruit it was found to still be very firm and a moderate amount of moisture was present.The uncharged Egg Plant started to show the first signs of deterioration on the 27th April 2004 and the charged Egg Plant remained viable for a further 21 days.The expectations of this experiment was to extend the longevity of an Egg Plant by providing it with extra bio-energy using a QEnergySpa, BEFE. From the photos above it appears it has been achieved.It should also be pointed out that no refrigeration or any other treatment was used on the Egg Plants over the duration of the experiment.Further experiments should be conducted to confirm the above preliminary findings. These experiments should be conducted in a controlled environment for consistency on both fruit in the experiment.


Posted on

QEnergySpa, BEFE Tomato Life Span Extension

QEnergySpa, BEFE vs. Attempted Copy Tomato Trial


The QEnergySpa, BEFE is the original Bio-Electric Field Enhancement (B.E.F.E.) device developed in 1996, the very first to appear on the market worldwide and is the unit upon which all other copies are based.

The concept behind the QEnergySpa, B.E.F.E. is very simple as are the most profound things. Water being the most essential substance necessary for life (containing electrical patterns and memory); with contact of the bio-energized water, one can expect realignment, balance and vitalisation of the cells of all living things.

Illustrated below is the Tomato Trial performed and written by Paul Cohen, Harvest Haven Health and reproduced here with permission. This was executed to determine if there was indeed a life enhancing effect from the QEnergySpa, BEFE as anticipated. The test was carried out with the QEnergySpa, BEFE, a control and one of the ‘better’ attempted copies whose name has been obscured for legal reasons. It would be fair to assume that other copies would fare worse, than seen in this experiment.

QEnergySpa, B.E.F.E. vs. Attempted Copies

Written by Paul Cohen

In this climate of muddied waters, both literally and symbolically, it is hoped that a simple experiment could show whether there is, in reality, the life-enhancing effect the inventor intended with the QEnergySpa, BEFE and if the attempted copies were also achieving the same effect..

With this goal in mind, on September 13, 2007, we tested our QEnergySpa, BEFE against an attempted copy using two sets of tomatoes, one conventionally grown and the other organic, all store bought, of similar ripeness and size. (Conventional means grown with the use of artificial fertilizers and chemical pesticides and herbicides, as opposed to organic which prohibits the use of these and depending on the standards applied, engages more holistic methods of soil management.)

We proceeded to treat one tomato of each kind (conventional and organic) on the respective machines in identical quantities of water from the same source, for the standard treatment session of 35 minutes, with a control tomato that was simply placed in a different container of water for the same amount of time. We took certain precautions, such as adequate separation of test units, to ensure the results would be untainted. We then took the tomatoes home and put them in a place where they would remain undisturbed, taking pictures at intervals to record progression (or regression, depending on how you look at it).


The purposes of this test were to:

  1. See how the different devices affected the condition and longevity of the tomatoes.
  2. See if there was a difference between conventional and organic in storability and onset of decay.
  3. Determine for the practitioner if it was worth investing in another attempted copy or if she should switch to the original invention, the QEnergySpa, BEFE.

Now that the stage has been set, may we have a drum roll as we present the results?

Day 2:

You can see all the tomatoes look good, although with minor blemishes on most of them.

Tomato Trial, Day 2

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 18:

It is interesting to note, how the minor blemishes are areas of weakness that spread deterioration. The conventional AC is beginning to look pretty beat up. The conventional control is not nearly so bad, and the conventional Q has a bad spot. The organics are beginning to shrivel, with the organic AC looking the most weathered.

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 26:

Trends continue.

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 39:

Of the conventional tomatoes, the control still looks best on the outside. The conventional AC is losing shape on several fronts, with blackening and obvious signs of decay, whereas the conventional Q has one major blemish that continues to shrivel, and darken the tomato. The organic AC is now collapsing on one side, whereas the other two are holding shape, with the control showing more wrinkling.

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 51:

While the conventional tomatoes are worse overall than the organic, the control is still standing tall. The conventional Attempted Copy is collapsing, as is the organic Attempted Copy, whereas the other two organic are standing with no signs of doing otherwise. The conventional Q, though deteriorating, is standing tall. It is also interesting how the blemish on the organic Q, visible from day 2, has not spread and the weakness there seems to be isolated.

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 58:

Now it is obvious that all the conventional tomatoes are collapsing, though the conventional Q is not collapsing so much as disappearing while it shrivels. The organics are hanging in there, except for the AC, which looks terrible.

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 65 (Final Day):

While all the conventional tomatoes have deteriorated well beyond a usable condition, there are some peculiar differences. For example, the control has the largest volume, and the Q the smallest. Yet as you shall see when we describe what was found inside these tomatoes, there is no correlation between a larger volume and health as there is in the organic tomatoes, which, except for the organic AC, are still intact and even fit for use.

Conventional Tomatoes-Attempted Copy: 

Conventional Tomatoes-Control:

Conventional Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE:

Organic Tomatoes-Attempted Copy:

Organic Tomatoes-Control:

Organic Tomatoes-QEnergySpa, BEFE: 

Day 65 Cutting Results:

Conventional Attempted Copy:

The inside was all blackened, interspersed with some white specks and areas of mold.

Conventional Control:

Spores puffed out as I cut the tomato in half. This one was full of mold with some blackened parts.

Conventional QEnergySpa, BEFE:

The inside was uniformly black and spongy, like a mushroom. There was no mold and seeds were clearly visible unlike the others.


Organic Attempted Copy:

The core was hard and blackened, with the surrounding area putrefying.

Organic Control:

Small amount of mold on the exterior stem area, easily excised. The interior shows signs of losing firmness and fulness, but it is, otherwise, still fresh and usable. It goes into tomato sauce.

Organic QEnergySpa, BEFE:

The exterior blemished area has no mold, and shows no influence on the interior pristine condition, which is plump and beautiful. Into the sauce it goes!


The results confirm something we have firmly believed because, firstly, we have so much personal evidence proving it is factual: The very first thing one should do is eat organically as much as possible. Without question the organic control tomato fared way better than the conventional control in this test, showing that, without any other influence, organic is superior in life-force to conventionally grown produce.

A clue about why this is so, which we did not appreciate at first but recorded, because it seemed noteworthy, was that the conventional tomatoes all floated when placed into the tubs of water, whereas only one of the organic ones did. Floating is a sign that there is a higher proportion of water in the tomato compared to nutrients. Sinking is a sign, therefore, of nutrient density. The conventional tomatoes were grown in such a way to attain volume with a higher proportion of water to nutrients.

This was demonstrated by the more rapid and complete deterioration of the non-organic, conventional tomatoes, regardless of treatment. Such deterioration is an indicator of lower nutrient density. It is a simple matter why this is so: Conventional agriculture generally puts back into the soil only three or four nutrients, though over 90 nutrients are depleted with the production of a crop. Organic agriculture, if practiced properly, strives to restore all 90+ nutrients back to the soil in a balanced fashion. The resultant nutritional density is the key to non-chemical aided storability.

Fruit with ideal nutritional balance and density will not rot but rather simply shrivel up and dry around the seeds. This ideal was beautifully demonstrated in the organic control and organic QEnergySpa, BEFE tomatoes. If this is not reason enough to eat organic, it must also be considered that organic food does not have literally dozens of different pesticides applied to it, many of which are widely established carcinogens. Organics are also non-genetically modified. Few people realize it, but a very large percentage of conventional tomatoes are genetically modified.

It just makes sense that injecting wholly unrelated genes and putting chemicals on the food you eat, while treating the soil with isolated elements rather than the full complement God made for the sustenance of life, is short sighted and foolish. Look at the pictures and ask yourself, “Would I rather my body was an organic or conventionally grown tomato?” Going conventional, the outside may look good for a while, but so what if death is spreading from within and overtaking all goodness in short order?

While all three conventional tomatoes deteriorated, the manner in which they deteriorated and the end results leave us with an interesting thought. It appears that the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment, while not adequate to forestall the collapse of the conventional tomato, provided energy sufficient to be used in the preservation of its seed as you can see below. The purpose of fruit is to provide a means of propagating the plant, and, in this sense, the QEnergySpa, BEFE was successful, because it appears to have best preserved the seed of all three conventional tomatoes. Of these tomatoes, only the one treated by the QEnergySpa, BEFE had no mold and the seeds appeared healthy. Were we to duplicate this experiment we would spend more time evaluating this aspect.

The principle of life-conserving energies operates with any kind of health treatment. An effective device like the QEnergySpa, BEFE will not perform a miracle beyond the laws of nature. It will assist the natural health processes, which are geared to maintain life. If one is lacking essential nutrients and struggling with the impact of toxic chemicals (as a result of conventionally-farmed products), the living systems become weaker and more vulnerable. The first order of business is to restore what is naturally needed and supportive of life.

The organic tomato, having more nutrients (depending on how organically it was grown, the condition of the soil, and the variety) and less stress from a relative absence of toxic chemicals, was able to utilize the energy from the QEnergySpa, BEFE to maintain a more healthful condition. (It is interesting to note that the organic tomato treated by the Q had the lowest nutrient density of the three, yet fared the best, telling us that the effect of the treatment may have added more benefit than even what is seen in the side by side comparison.)

What this means is that effective therapies or treatments will enable superior health only if you are doing the right things for your health in the first place, supplying your body with what it needs and not stressing it with what it doesn’t. Otherwise, you can get benefits, but sooner or later the laws of nature and physical realities will catch up with you.

As for why the organic Attempted Copy tomato rotted while the control did not, it is our thought, based on other observations with people using these devices, that imitation machines create energy waves that cause the body, or tomato, to dump valuable minerals, particularly calcium. Calcium is needed to retain vitality and favourable storage properties in fruit and vegetables, not to mention being important in human health. We had one woman using another device, the Bio-Cleanse (formerly Ion Cleanse), who had the sudden appearance of varicose veins after using it. Upon calling the company, they told her to stay off the machine for six months and to beef up her mineral intake.

The QEnergySpa, BEFE does not have this harmful effect on the body, but rather helps it retain what is needful and lose what is not, thereby enabling it to maintain itself at a higher level. We all should do likewise.

Paul Cohen

Posted on

QEnergySpa Cucumber Life Span Extension

QEnergySpa/Befe – Cucumber Longevity (Shelf Life) Trial



To conduct a longevity experiment in order to show the effects of supplying additional Bio Energy to a cucumber. This will be done using the patented QEnergySpa, BEFE from Q the Experience.


It is theorised that increasing the Bio-Energy content in a cucumber will have the effect of prolonging the life span (use by date) and reduce attacks by fungus and fruit flies.

Commencement Date: 14 January 2004


1 x 3100 QEnergySpa, BEFE
2 x cucumbers
2 x containers to charge water and fruit
2 x trays or plates



Two cucumbers of the same size, weight and age were placed into a bucket of water, one cucumber in each bucket. One of these buckets was then charged for 35mins the other left to be used for comparative purposes only. The cucumbers were then taken out of the water and placed onto 2 paper plates appropriately marked and dated.

No further treatment of the cucumbers occurred and as little handling as possible was maintained.

The cucumbers to be photographed each day and have any observations recorded.


On the following pages a selection of photos from this experiment is shown. These photos show the daily progression of the life of the cucumber. However as you can see on the initial photos the experiment started with five different fruits. These other fruits will be discussed in documentation elsewhere due to the fact that the outcome of the charging of the fruit may be different.

Studying the photos we find a gradual degradation of the uncharged cucumber but not really until day 7 is it noticeable, where the skin appears to start to break. It is hard to see due to the marks already on the cucumber. On day 7 and 8 it looks like a slight wrinkling on the tip of the cucumber end facing the charged cucumber. However if you look carefully on the photo from day 5, this appears to be a flaw in the cucumber which have been there from the beginning. Lets go to day 13 where we can see an additional shrinkage in the middle of the cucumber, it almost looks like a knife cut. We still have no change in the charged cucumber. On day 14 the cucumber is starting to change colour and on day 15 this is quite evident as well as some additional shrinkage. From day 16 onwards the uncharged cucumber just dwindles back to nothing. On day 20 the charged starts to change colour slightly. But by day 26 the uncharged cucumber just appears to be dried out, nothing left compared to the charged cucumber which is still more that edible. It does not appear to have dried out or shrunk at all.

The cucumber was then cut open and as shown in that last photo, there is no degradation at all inside.


The Trial


Cucumber Longevity Trial


Day 1: All the fruit was purchased at the same shop and at the same time. Each piece of fruit was treated identically except one group was charged with the QEnergySpa and the other group wasn’t charged.

Charged Group

Uncharged Group

Day 5

Day 7

Day 8

Day 9

Day 12

Day 13

Day 14

Day 15

Day 16

Day 19

Day 20

Day 21

Day 26
Charged cucumber was cut open and found to be still quite firm and edible



From the photos it is quite evident that subjecting a cucumber to Bio-Energetically rich water has the effect of prolonging the life of the cucumber by up to 2 weeks and possibly longer. It has also been shown that fungus and fruit flies have not been a problem with the charged cucumber, but that may have become an issue over the week following had the experiment continued. We will determine that in the next experiment. Hence further testing is being conducted.

Posted on

QEnergySpa, BEFE Cucumber Yield Increase

Increasing Yield of Cucumber Crops by Energising using the QEnergySpa, BEFE Technology.

Cucumber Growth and Yield Trial

By Ivan Krell Serensen  B.Eng. A.D.Eng. A.D.M.C.  BTP.

Since 2012:- Q Biotechnologies Pty Ltd Australia.

Agriculture 98, Hydroponics QEnergySpa, BEFE Treatment Trial



Studying the data presented throughout this document, it is evident that the Q-Tech trading as Q the Experience proprietary designed QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment as applied in a commercial cucumber production facility has had the following effects, noted through observations, measurements and counts

  • Improved plant health. Observed healthier greener colors

  • Improved resistance or tolerance to disease. While untreated plants wilted away while under the attack from unknown disease, the treated plants remained healthier.

  • Improved tolerance to weather conditions. Where the untreated plants received tip burns from excessive temperature, none of the treated plants showed any signs of weakening.

  • Increased growth rate. Noticed, not just from the fact that the treated plants outgrew the untreated, but also from the fact that when the treated plants received less water than that required, they still looked fine, but the growth rate was not as high as that of the untreated. This was then corrected where after the treated plants quickly caught up and then exceed the growth of the untreated and yet, the treated plants still received less water and nutrients than did the untreated; about 60ml less on average throughout the trial.

  • Increased number of Nodes. An increase in the number of points from which a fruit would grow was noticed and hence counted. It was found that the treated plants had between 19% & 20% more nodes.

  • Increased Yield and Hence Profit. Treated Rows 2 & 3 represents 23.3% (less than a quarter) of the overall plants in the shade-house. The remainder 76.7% of the plants were not treated, yet the treated rows produced 30.9% (Close to a third) of the total production in the shade-house. Add to this, the fact that the yield rejection remained mostly the same, decreasing the rejection ratio from 41.4% to 31.6%. On average, the treated plants could produce 9.97 Cucumbers per plants, compared to between 6 and 7 cucumbers per plant using current methods. For a Financial Projection, see Financial Projection. As an increase in Yield is proportional to an increase in profit, we can only conclude that the Q-Tech proprietary designed QEnergySpa, BEFE unit performs as expected. We have to note here that these results were obtained with a device which was not functioning correctly 100% of the time. The treatment was first applied when the plants had reached about 130mm and not from the time of seeding. The plants contracted a disease and were sprayed. This spraying however seemed to harm the untreated plants much more than the treated plants. Please note that no scientific testing has been done on the plant’s ability to withstand or tolerate extreme weather conditions or disease. The grower has made these observations through experience.




Index of Figures

Index of Tables

Introduction to Agriculture 98.

The future of magnetics in agriculture is now set to become a major issue in 1998.  The introduction of new field technologies developed by Q-Tech Laboratories trading as Q the Experience has the prospect of advancing agriculture well into the next century. Agriculture 98 is this year’s push to implement the new technology with the shortest possible lead-time.

The major trial programs to be undertaken this year will be centered on the smaller horticultural enterprises including hydroponics applications. Other trials expand into broad-acre farming in areas relating to chemical usage with the prospect of using less chemicals and including the possibility of entirely replacing ionic surfactants with a the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment.

The QEnergySpa, BEFE units used in these trials are simple, cost effective and easily adapted to suit the trials and other applications.

The major trials conducted by Q-Tech trading as Q the Experience are divided into three groups, based upon method of nutrient delivery and include the effects of the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit on the nutrients, however the major interest is the effects on growth and yield.


These trials are designed to study both the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment delivery system and its effect on growth, conducted for nurseries and small horticultural crops, where the nutrients required are obtained from the soil, also the use of folio nutrients using the same process.

Other trials conducted include seed germination, in which growth rates of seeds, treated with the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit are studied.

These trials require a low volume, water storage facility, where the water is delivered directly via sprinkler or drip irrigation.


These trials are designed to study both the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment application process and its effect on growth of varying commercial crops, conducted for hydroponics applications, where the medium used to grow the plants contain no nutrients.

These trials also require a low volume, water storage facility, where the nutrient enriched water is delivered via reticulation to the roots.


The broad-acre trials to be conducted in this field involve both herbicides and pesticides. The QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment in this case reflects all the preliminary results related to the property changes recorded in treated water. The main focus is on the potential elimination of the need for ionic surfactant  A study of the activity changes in various herbicides and pesticides is foremost. Trials using lower rates of chemicals will also be conducted. Standard commercial spraying apparatus will be used in these trials.


Introduction to the Hydroponics Trial

This document deals with trials related to the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment process of water used in the growth of cucumber plants grown in a shade house by hydroponic means.

The trial was setup to test the efficiency of the current agricultural QEnergySpa, BEFE unit under commercial conditions and to establish the difference in growth rates and yield, between the treated crop and the current growing method.

Throughout the trial, quantities such as fruit yield & abortion were counted from entire rows, whereas some results, such as the growth rates, water measurements, node counts, were based upon a selection of plants taken from each row.

Where a selection was used, ten plants were selected from each row. These plants were selected, not at random, but evenly spaced throughout the rows. That is, the first plant in each row and then one plant in every 6, leaving about 10 plants at the end.


Hydroponics Trial Setup


The hydroponics trial was conducted in Helidon, 19 Km East of Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia, at facilities owned by Mr. & Mrs. Grorud. The Trial was commenced on the 6th of February 1998.

The shade-house utilized for this trial was a steel-framed construction and was covered with clear plastic over two thirds of the surface. The remaining area was covered with a shade cloth on the lower parts of both sides. A Clear plastic cover could also be rolled down over the shade cloth in extreme weather conditions.

The plants grew in 8 rows within the shade house, where each row had been designated a number by the grower as is shown in Figure 1 below. The two trial rows being irrigated with the charged water were in the center of the shade-house with the control row one row across to the right. The plants in the trial row No. 2 grew in sawdust and the plants in row No. 3 grew in coal ash. The control row designated as row No. 1 grew in sawdust. Each row contained a set number of plants as outlined in Table 1 below.

Figure 1, Shade-house layout and water delivery system


Number of plants in each row
Row 8 7 6 3 2 1 4 5
Plants 89 71 72 70 71 71 71 89
Table 1, Number of plants in each row
Note that rows 5 and 8 have an additional 19 plants.


Water Delivery System

The water delivery system already connected to the shade-house was set to pump 80 Litres per minute for a set amount of time, which delivered a controlled quantity of water to the entire shade-house, each time it was watered. Rows 2 & 3 contained 141 Plants of a total of 604 plants, which means that by proportion, rows 2 & 3 should require 23.3% of the total amount of water. However Q-Tech Laboratories P/L trading as Q the Experience predicted that it should require less water and hence the volume was set at a lower value for the trial rows.

It should be noted that the shade-house or any nursery is not a laboratory, with exact water flow control on every dripper. The commercial reality is that you may supply the entire shade-house with a quantity of water, but no two plants in the shade-house will get the same amount of water. It becomes an approximation. It is up to the grower to adjust the delivery system to make sure that every plant gets at least the average water required and also to adjust the system to deliver more or less according to the weather.

The delivery system setup required a charging tank, in which the treatment was to be applied. This tank was tapped directly from the existing delivery line. See Figure 2. Hence, any variance in water or nutrient rates to the shade-house would automatically be applied to the trial rows, unless changed by the grower.

The control tap, determined the amount of water received by the trial unit, which was preset before the commencement of the trial, so that each plant in the trial would receive equal amounts of water and nutrients as the water being treated already contained the nutrients, added by the grower.

Figure 2, Charging tank and control
Figure 3, Actual charge tank

At the output stage of the Charging Tank, the Control Tap, reduced the flow rate to the trial rows. The solenoid is there to maintain the water in the charging tank for the specified length of time. The filter at the end is there to catch any sediment, which may be produced as a result of the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit’s interaction with the water or nutrients.

The treatment process by the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit then took approximately 20 minutes, after which the water was pumped, to the trial rows.

This process was independently controlled, should the need arise to adjust the water charge rates, due to the change of the chemical properties in the water, induced by the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit.

The actual charge tank as seen here, Figure 3, is a 200 Litre drum cut in half and turned, the pump is located underneath. The top section is the charging-tank, where the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit is immersed into, See Figure 4. Once the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit was connected to the power supply, and the charge tank filled with nutrient enriched water, the treatment was commenced. This process was fully controlled by an additional irrigation controller which was synchronized to the existing controller, to ensure the 20-minute treatment process.

Figure 4, QEnergySpa unit & tank


Figure 5, The QEnergySpa, BEFE unit

The QEnergySpa, BEFE early model unit as seen  here  (Then  named Bio-Electric Field Enhancement  or  B.E.F.E.),  Figure 5, is the prototype charging  unit,  which was  placed into the charge tank and  connected  to the  power supply as mentioned above.

The QEnergySpa, BEFE unit is a proprietary design.  Invented and Designed and Manufactured by Q-Tech  Laboratories P/L trading as Q the Experience.

This QEnergySpa, BEFE unit as seen here may not  be  the  commercial model released. 


General Observations

The following observations made throughout the trial were in most cases observed by the grower, but in all cases, the observational differences between the treated plants and the remaining shade-house were quite noticeable. These observations are based upon the experience of the grower.

The plants used for this trial were all seeded on the 27th of January 1998 and planted in the shade-house on the 4th of February 1998. At this time the plants were about 100mm high.

Tip Burns

On the 25th of February 1998, less than half of the plants in the shade-house developed a tip burn. That is, the tip of these plants suffered some form of damage  The degree of damage varied widely from one plant to the next, but the interesting part was that this damage occurred throughout the shade-house, except the treated rows. None of the plants in the treated rows suffered any damage.

Dead Plants

During the trial, a number of plant deaths occurred throughout the shade-house. By the end of the trial, 30 plants of the total of 463 untreated plants in shade-house died  Compare that to one death towards the end of the season, from a total of 141 treated plants. That is a death rate of 6.5% compared to 0.7% respectively.

Wilting of Plants 

During periods of high temperature, the plants had a tendency to wilt dramatically. It was however noticed that the treated plants remained firmer for considerably longer, but did eventually also wilt.

Bottom Leaves

An observation made throughout the trial, concerning the bottom leaves on the plants, was that the lower leaves on the treated plants remained greener and healthier long after the lower leaves on the untreated plants had died. This trend continued late into the growing season, until spraying to control high levels of disease in the shade-house commenced 

It should also be noted here that in the presence of the disease, the treated plants remained greener and healthier and generally appeared to be more tolerant.

Healthier Greener Colour

Comparing the health of the treated and untreated plants throughout the shade-house and during the entire trial, it was clear that the treated plants remained greener, healthier and firmer than the untreated plants.


The drainage left in the sump of the treated plants was consistently observed as having less water than the drainage left from the untreated plants. However we also knew that the treated plants were getting less water, even after the irrigation was corrected. With less irrigation, the treated plants still showed some drainage. This can only mean that the treated plants utilized the water more efficiently. For further information see Plant Growth & Irrigation.

White Spots

While the plants were relatively small, tiny white spots appeared on leaves throughout the shade-house, except on the treated plants. This may mean that the treated plants were a little more tolerant, although the cause of the white spots was not known.


The leaves of the treated plants, although difficult to quantify or qualify, were visibly smaller, with more body. It was also noted that the texture and surface of the leaves was different.

Supporting Stems

The lateral stems on the treated plants had on average, a greater positive incline supporting the leaves. This made the treated plant appear stronger and healthier.

Inter-Node Spacing

One of the more interesting observations made, was that the inter-node spacing on the treated plants appeared to be closer. This effect was so visual that it was decided to count the nodes present on the plants. The information obtained from this count is detailed under Nodes.

Fruit Abortions

As you will see on page 13, during the trial, a number of fruit throughout the shade-house aborted, meaning that the fruit withered away after short time  It was noted that this occurred during a particular period of extreme hot weather. The treated plants seemed to abort more fruit than any untreated plants. However as this report shows, the treated plants have more nodes to grow fruit from. Overall the treated plants still produced more fruit.

Plant Growth

Initially, the growth of the treated plants was lagging behind. Q-Tech Laboratories Pty Ltd trading as Q the Experience expected better results, hence upon inspecting the crop, it was found that the treated plants were not getting the required water. After this was corrected, the treated plants out grew the remainder of the shade-house. For further information see below – Plant Growth & Irrigation.

Shade-House Yield

This report clearly demonstrates the increase in yield caused by the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment. This however was not an obvious observation and was not noticed until the picking of the fruit.


Test Results

Plant Growth & Irrigation

During the trial, the heights of the plants were measured at regular intervals, to obtain a comparison of growth rates between the QEnergySpa, BEFE treated and the untreated plants. The actual records of these readings are presented in the Cumulative Plant Growth, Appendix A.

Appendix B contains the actual growth of the plants over the time between two sets of readings, where the interval is listed at the top of the table.

For example, for plant number five in row two.

When the trial was started, the plant was already 150mm high, 3 days later the plant had grown 30mm, 3 days later again it had grown 40mm and was now 220mm high.

This plant had grown an average of 52mm per day over the entire trial period.

Appendix C contains the average daily growth rates. This table is identical to that presented in Appendix B, except that the figure shown is the average per day over the interval between readings, whereas Appendix B was the total over that period.

Each of these tables contains the minimum, maximum and average reading from each row of 10 selected plants.

Comparing the average growth of the three rows in the trial as shown in Figure 6, it becomes evident that the two trial rows were actually lagging behind in growth, up until after the 26/2/1998. This date is important, in that this is the date when the water delivery was corrected. It was found that the treated rows were not receiving sufficient amount of nutrient enriched water.

The treated rows were purposely given less nutrient enriched water, as it was suspected that the treated plants required less water and/or nutrients. However, as it was noticed that the medium used to grow the treated plants were not as moist and had no run off. It was decided to increase the nutrient enriched water to the treated row.


Figure 6, Average plant growth

Increasing the nutrient enriched water delivery to the treated rows produced the desired results as seen in the chart, Figure 6 by the increase in growth rate. This increase is also evident Figure 7 Figure 8, which compares the cumulative growth for each row. Each bar in Figure 7 is broken up into the minimum, average and maximum growth from the 10 selected plants. From this it also becomes evident that the minimum plant growth in the untreated row (1), exceeded the average growth of both the treated rows, up until the 26/2/1998. From this date, the chart also shows that the maximum plant growth occurs in the treated rows. Row 3 more so than row 2. From these charts, Figure 6 and Figure 8 we can with certainty say that the treated rows outgrew the untreated row.

Studying the table “Water Delivery Records” in Appendix D, it is however obvious that even though the supply of nutrient enriched water to the treated rows were increased after the 26/02/1998, the treated plants still received on average almost 60ml less. This table contains three sets of water measurements, which were measured twice after the water delivery was corrected. The last water reading, on the 9/03/1998, showed that the nozzle to plant 7 in Row 2 was blocked, which had the effect of bringing the average delivery of row 2 down. The data in Table 2 below, extracted from Appendix D, also shows that, for this reading, the treated plants, row 3, on average received more water than did the untreated row, although one plant in the untreated row received 400ml, 10ml and 20ml more than rows 2 and 3 respectively. The three watering measurements are inconclusive on their own since no further water measurements were taken after this point. Hence, we cannot, with these measurements alone say that the increase in growth was due to variable water rate.


Water Delivery per plant per watering 09/03/1998 (mL)
Row Minimum Average Maximum
1-Untreated 200 259 400
2-Treated 0 231 390
3-Treated 150 272 380
Table 2, Water delivery extract

However, we can with some degree of accuracy estimate the total amount of nutrient enriched water supplied to the treated rows.

The shade-house water delivery system was pumped through at a rate of 80 litres per minute as measured by the flow meter attached to the delivery line. This was always kept constant. This rate of water was delivered for a period of 2minutes and 45 seconds, although varied by the grower as necessary.

Lets assume for the moment that this water delivery stays constant at 2minutes and 45 seconds. This will give a total of 2.75 times 80 litres or 220 litres of water for the entire shade house. The mark left by the nutrient enriched water in the charge tank used for the treatment was at a height of 165mm and the tank had a diameter of 560mm. Since the 40.6 litres were drained from the supply to the shade-house, that means that the remaining shade-house received 220 – 40.6 litres totaling 179.4 litres. When the grower changed the watering amounts, only the length of time would change, hence the division of water usage to the treated and untreated rows would vary proportionally.

The treated rows contained 141 plants of a total of 604 plants. This means that the treated plants would receive on average 288ml of nutrient enriched water per plant and the untreated plants would receive 387ml of nutrient enriched water per plant. If some plants received less than this quota, then other plants would receive more due to the delivery method used.

Hence, on average the untreated plants received 34.4% more nutrient enriched water, the normal amount of water given, yet the treated plants outgrew them.

On growth, the treated plants grew taller by about 4% on average, but the interesting part is not that the treated plants grew taller, but that they initially grew slower and then accelerated and passed the untreated plants, provided that the nutrient and water supply was sufficient. This is evident in Figure 7 and Figure 8 below.


Figure 7, Cumulative growth – Rows 1, 2 & 3

Figure 8, Cumulative growth & water consumption



While studying and comparing the plants from separate rows, the grower noticed that the number of nodes from whence a fruit would grow were different between rows 1 (Untreated), 2 (Treated-Sawdust) and 3 (Treated-Coal Ash). Ten evenly spaced plants where then chosen from each row and the number of nodes were counted, as tabled in Table 3.

Nodes Plant
Row 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Min Avg Max
1 20 22 22 24 20 25 21 19 19 19 19 21.1 25
2 25 25 26 24 25 27 26 25 24 27 24 25.4 27
3 24 25 24 24 25 28 24 25 27 26 24 25.2 28
Table 3, Number of nodes


When comparing these numbers it becomes quite evident that the treated plants produce on average an increased number of nodes, with an increase of about 20%, See Table 4. A greater increase was found on some of the treated plants, with an up to 32% increase.

Perhaps more interesting is that the minimum number of nodes in the treated rows is only just less than the maximum number of nodes in the untreated row. This may be better demonstrated in the graph, Figure 9 below.

Figure 9, Node comparison

Percentage Increase in Nodes compared to control
Row Avg. %
1 21.1 NA
2 25.4 20.38%
3 25.2 19.43%
Table 4, Percentage node comparison


With an increase in the number of nodes on each plant by about 20%, the potential of the plant to produce more fruit is increased. If we assumed that all the nodes were to bear fruit, then that would mean an increase in production of 20%.

 Fruit Abortions

During the trial, a number of fruit throughout the shade-house aborted, meaning that the cucumber withered away after short time. It was noted that during a particular period of extreme weather the plants aborted more fruit than usual and as a matter of interest for comparison, the number of fruit aborted were counted, as tabled in Table 5 below.

Fruit Aborted


Row 1, Untreated

Row 2, Treated Saw Dust

Row 3, Treated Coal Ash

Fruit Aborted 220 239 277
Table 5, Fruit abortion

It was suggested that the cause of this abortion was due to excessive temperatures, during the summer period. When comparing the number of aborted fruit from each row, it was noted that the treated rows actually aborted more fruit than did the untreated row. Where rows 2 and 3 aborted 8.6% and 25.9% more fruit, respectively.

Comparing this increase in fruit abortion to the increased number of nodes as shown previously.

Should we hypothetically assume that all the nodes on every plant would bear fruit, then as shown in Table 6, we would have produced 1498, 1803 & 1764 cucumbers in Rows 1, 2 & 3 respectively.   The amount of cucumbers aborted would be 220, 239 & 277 in rows 1, 2 & 3 respectively. With the remaining fruit being 1278, 1564 & 1487 respectively.    

Fruit Abortion & Node Comparison
Row Average Nodes No. of Plants Total Fruit Aborted Fruit Remaining Fruit
1 21.1 71 1498 220 1278
2 25.4 71 1803 239 1564
3 25.2 70 1764 277 1487
Table 6, Fruit Abortion & Node Comparison


Figure 10, Fruit abortion & node comparison

In the graph, Figure 10, each complete bar represents the hypothetical total number of fruit which rows 1, 2 & 3 would produce.  The top area of each bar represents the aborted number of fruit.  Hence the bottom section of each bar represents the remaining fruit.

Studying these, it becomes evident that even though the treated rows lost more fruit, these rows would still be well ahead in fruit production.  This is clearly demonstrated in Table 6 and Figure 10.

As a percentage of each row’s production, the plants aborted 14.7%, 13.3% & 15.7% fruit for rows 1, 2 & 3 respectively.  This percentage seems to be closely related.


Picking Record for Row 1 (Control Row)
Date Market Rejects Market Rejects
10/03/1998 46 22 46 22
11/03/1998 20 1 66 23
13/03/1998 45 2 111 25
15/03/1998 56 0 167 25
17/03/1998 29 1 198 26
19/03/1998 14 18 210 44
21/03/1998 7 10 217 54
23/03/1998 15 26 232 80
25/03/1998 17 19 249 99
27/03/1998 22 22 271 121
29/03/1998 20 23 291 144
31/03/1998 16 20 307 164
02/04/1998 18 12 325 176
04/04/1998 11 4 336 180
06/04/1998 12 11 348 191
08/04/1998 10 11 358 202
10/04/1998 6 11 364 213
13/04/1998 15 21 379 234
15/04/1998 10 6 389 240
17/04/1998 5 13 394 253
20/04/1998 11 9 405 262
22/04/1998 1 8 406 270
24/04/1998 7 8 413 278
27/04/1998 4 20 417 298
30/04/1998 11 7 428 305
03/05/1998 3 0 431 305
Plants 71
Average 6.07 4.3 Per Plant
Table 7, Picking Records, Row 1

The yield in this trial is the final measure of the success of the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment. As such, every cucumber picked from the plants on all rows in the shade-house were recorded. The table of complete picking records is listed in the Crop Yield Records, Appendix E.





Table 7, Table 8, Table 9 and are extracted from the table in Appendix E, which contain the picking records for the trial rows 1, 2 & 3 respectively, but also includes the cucumbers, which grew to a marketable size but were rejected by the grower for reasons of suitability.

In Table 7, we find that the row, which was picked to be the row for comparison (Row 1), produced only 431 marketable cucumbers, with 305 rejected cucumbers.

Compared to Table 8, which is the picking records for row 2, treated and growing in sawdust and producing 617 marketable cucumbers and 319 rejected.










Picking Record for Row 2 (Treated Row)   Picking Record for Row 3 (Treated Row)
    Cumulative       Cumulative
Date Market Rejects Market Rejects   Date Market Rejects Market Rejects
10/03/1998 12 8 12 8   10/03/1998 16 7 16 7
11/03/1998 15 6 27 14   11/03/1998 24 2 40 9
13/03/1998 67 6 94 20   13/03/1998 76 5 116 14
15/03/1998 64 7 158 27   15/03/1998 82 6 198 20
17/03/1998 41 1 199 28   17/03/1998 39 0 237 20
19/03/1998 25 14 224 42   19/03/1998 16 14 253 34
21/03/1998 5 6 229 48   21/03/1998 6 5 259 39
23/03/1998 25 28 254 76   23/03/1998 14 40 273 79
25/03/1998 22 23 276 99   25/03/1998 42 22 315 101
27/03/1998 38 22 314 121   27/03/1998 41 13 356 114
29/03/1998 40 20 354 141   29/03/1998 34 23 390 137
31/03/1998 36 20 390 161   31/03/1998 50 16 440 153
2/04/1998 23 22 413 183   2/04/1998 29 20 469 173
4/04/1998 19 2 432 185   4/04/1998 24 10 493 183
6/04/1998 17 12 449 197   6/04/1998 12 4 505 187
8/04/1998 8 9 457 206   8/04/1998 8 20 513 207
10/04/1998 25 12 482 218   10/04/1998 15 17 528 224
13/04/1998 25 26 507 244   13/04/1998 28 26 556 250
15/04/1998 19 12 526 256   15/04/1998 27 17 583 267
17/04/1998 17 14 543 270   17/04/1998 22 4 605 271
20/04/1998 14 12 557 282   20/04/1998 27 15 632 286
22/04/1998 15 20 572 302   22/04/1998 11 7 643 293
24/04/1998 11 8 583 310   24/04/1998 12 13 655 306
27/04/1998 9 4 592 314   27/04/1998 9 9 664 315
30/04/1998 16 5 608 319   30/04/1998 16 7 680 322
3/05/1998 9 0 617 319   3/05/1998 18 0 698 322
Plants 71       Plants 70    
Average 8.69 4.49 Per Plant   Average 9.97 4.6 Per Plant
Table 8, Picking Records, Row 2   Table 9, Picking Records, Row 3


Table 9, which is the picking records of row 2, treated and growing in coal ash, producing 698 marketable cucumbers and 322 rejected cucumbers.

These numbers would seem to indicate that the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment has increased the number of marketable cucumbers, without increasing the number of rejects proportionally, which may have been expected. This is clearly demonstrated in Figure 12 where the increase in cucumbers from row 1 to row 2 is 186 cucumbers with only 14 additional rejects and compared to row 3 with an increase of 267 cucumbers and only 17 additional rejects.

In terms of percentages, Figure 11, 41.4% is currently rejected from every plant. After the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment, this is reduced to 34.1% in row 2 and 31.6% in row 3.

To get an idea of the total yield, that is the Marketable plus the rejected cucumbers, refer to Figure 13, which shows a comparison of rows 1, 2 & 3, the trial rows.

The bottom part of each bar in this chart indicates the marketable cucumbers and the top part the rejected. This clearly indicates that initially the untreated row 1 produced a better yield, however after the 15/3/1998, the treated rows outperformed the untreated row used for comparison.

This chart also shows that row 3, produced a yield of 1020 cucumbers, row 2 with 936 cucumbers and row 1, the untreated only 736 cucumbers, that is ignoring the rejects, from which no financial gain could be achieved. However the plant still produced the fruit.

If we study only the marketable cucumbers, as shown in Figure 13, which is just the top of the bottom section of each bar. Eliminating all other information we have Figure 14, which shows the marketable cucumbers throughout the trial. Again it is quite clear that the treated rows performs exceeding well.

Due to the fact that the row picked for comparison turned out to be the worst row, let’s include each of the other rows in the shade-house.

Rows 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 produced a yield of 505, 520, 515, 488 and 481 cucumbers respectively.

Figure 11, Marketed & Rejected Yield Comparison

Figure 12, Season End Marketed & Rejected Yield


Figure 13, Cumulative Cucumber Yield

Figure 14, Cumulative Marketable Cucumber Yield

Examining Figure 15 below, it becomes quite evident how bad the row chosen for comparison (row 1) actually was compared to the rest of the shade-house. However, this does not even take into consideration that each row has a different number of plants.

Taking that into consideration, we get an average number of cucumbers per plant, however, this affects only rows 5 and 8, which have an additional 18 plants in each row.

Figure 15, Total Yield

This actually makes rows 5 and 8 worse than our control row, picked for comparison, with and average of 5.84 and 5.4 cucumbers per plant respectively compared to 6.07 per plant in row 1.

Figure 16, Average Yield per Plant

Let us compare the average of the treated rows to the entire shade-house, Figure 17 below. Here we notice that on average the treated rows outperformed the entire shade-house by up to 3.6 cucumbers per plant and if sawdust was used instead of coal ash, 2.34 cucumbers per plant. Even if we were to include the two best rows in the shade-house, rows 4 and 6, with and average of 7.11 or 7.15 cucumbers per plant respectively. The treated rows are still ahead by 2.82 cucumbers per plant.

Figure 17, Average Yield Compared to Entire Shade-house

Comparing each row average as a part of the entire shade-house, we notice that the treated row 2, makes up for 15% of the entire yield and row 3, 18% of the entire yield. The nearest competitive row is row 6 with 13%.

Figure 18, Row Average Comparison

Rows 5 and 8 are as expected the worst at 9% and 10% respectively. This is due to the additional 18 plants in those rows.

Studying the picking records as presented in Appendix E. We find that apart from the first picking on the 10/3/1998. The treated rows consistently produced a higher yield throughout the entire trial. This is perhaps more evident in Figure 13.

Summary and Conclusion  

Note : Wherever the word treatment is used, QEnergySpa, BEFE is implied.

This trial has dealt with the application of the Q-Tech proprietary (QTheExperience) designed QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment to that of a commercial crop of cucumbers. This treatment has involved a pre-charge of the nutrient enriched water, before delivery to the crop. The crop involved 8 rows of cucumber plants placed in a shade-house, where only two rows were treated using the above mentioned device and one other row chosen for comparison, although a comparison with the remaining shade-house has also been performed.  

This document has compared observations of health, resistance or tolerance to disease and growth rates, but in particular, the number of nodes present on the plants resulting in increased yield and therefore increased profits. These observations were made, based upon the experience of grower.

In terms of health, the treated plants were observed to be greener and generally healthier than the untreated plants. This is based upon observations made in regards to supporting stems, tip burns, leaves wilting, dead plants and color.

Resistance or tolerance to disease was based upon the attack on the plants by a fungal leaf disease, where the QEnergySpa, BEFE treated plants were observed to cope more efficiently and remain greener and healthier for longer, even after the shade-house was sprayed.

Looking at the fruit abortions, it has been made clear that all plants aborted fruit, and that the treated plants aborted more fruit compared to the remainder of the shade-house, when counted during a particular period of extreme temperature. However the treated plants also had more fruit to loose, as judged by the increased number of nodes. The treated plants actually produced up to 20% more nodes from whence a fruit would grow, at the time the nodes were counted. Throughout the trial, all plants randomly aborted fruit, however, no further attention was given to this.

The QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment had the effect of increasing the growth rate of the plants. This was particularly noticed due to the initial lack of nutrient enriched water, which when corrected produced a significant growth in the treated plants. Regardless of the fact that on average they were still supplied with about 60ml less nutrient enriched water that did the untreated plants. Also interesting is that the treated plants were on average about 80mm taller.

Finally, the reason for the trial, the increase in yield and hence profit. The QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment has increased the yield from an average of 6 to 7 marketable cucumbers per plant to and average of nearly 10 cucumbers per plant, which is an increase of about 57%.

While the rejected cucumbers remained about the same across the rows, treated and untreated, this had the effect of reducing the fruit rejection from 41.4% to 31.6%.

Please note that this trial has been conducted in an actual commercial environment, where the judgement of the grower has been relied upon to vary conditions as necessary. This means that the plants were subjected to weather conditions and diseases as any commercial crop would and hence give a more accurate picture of the improvements provided by the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment.

Please also note that while the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment has indeed increased the final yield, the QEnergySpa, BEFE treatment was not functioning at its optimal capacity throughout the trial. Through one period of about 4 to 5 days, the unit was not functioning at all. The reason for this is that the unit has been used in an application requiring a greater capacity than it was designed for. The commercial edition of this device has been modified to cope. What this means, is that the yield improvements shown in this document may just be a small sample of what the commercial device may be able to provide.


Growers Statement

B & M Grorud Lot 2 Warrego Highway Helidon 4344B & M GrorudOn the 8/3/98 I began picking continental cucumbers from one of our hot houses. I was participating in an experiment conducted by Q-Tech Laboratories. There were three rows of plants, Number one being the control row, number two being a row growing in a sawdust medium treated by magnetized water and number three being a row of coal ash medium also treated by magnetized water. During the growth stage of the plants I did notice the plants in the two magnetized rows seemed to be stronger and had a greener color to them as compared to the control row. Also the inter-node spacing was much closer on rows two and three. I did not have any deaths of plants in either of these rows as compared to the control row, which had quite a few. On picking I recorded all fruit I’d picked off all the rows. I found that row three had by far the most marketable amount of fruit with row two next in productivity and the control row with the weakest amounts.Row 3 – Produced 698 pieces of fruit;Row 2 – Produced 617 pieces of fruit, and;Row 1 – Produced 431 pieces of fruit.It appears to me by this first experiment that the magnetized water treatment did have an influence on the performance of the plants and their productivity.

M. Grorud


Yearly Yield Projection

As this trial successfully shows, the proprietary treatment applied to the production of cucumbers has increased the growth rate and yield. The effect of which, if applied to an entire farm and not just a few rows is quite significant.

If we use the production figures as shown in Appendix E for the entire shade-house, excluding the treated rows, we would produce an average of 6.35 cucumbers per plant, compared to the 8.69 and 9.97 cucumbers per plant for the treated rows. In effect this means that if a hydroponic grower were to plant the crops in sawdust and treat the crop with the Q-Tech proprietary (QTheExperience) designed QEnergySpa, BEFE unit, the grower could expect in excess of 30% increase in yield. Should the grower utilize coal ash instead, then the increase in yield could exceed 50%. In terms of actual number cucumbers, see Table 10 or Figure 19 below.


Yearly Yield Projection
Treatment Avg. Cucumbers per Plant Number of Plants
5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
Untreated 6.35 31749 63499 95248 126998 158747 190497 222246 253996
Treated – Sawdust 8.69 43451 86901 130352 173803 217254 260704 304155 347606
Treated – Coal Ash 9.97 49857 99714 149571 199429 249286 299143 349000 398857
Table 10, Yearly Yield Projection

Say a grower’s capacity is 20,000 plants per year. In this year, the grower can currently expect to collect around 126,998 cucumbers. If the entire yearly crop were grown in sawdust and treated then the grower could expect to collect 173,803 cucumbers, but should the grower utilize coal ash and subject the plants to the QEnergySpa unit’s treatment, then the grower could expect to collect around 199,429 cucumbers. That is, an additional 72,431 cucumbers.

Figure 19, Yearly Yield Projection


Financial Projection  

To continue the example set out in the Yearly Yield Projection above, an additional 72,431 cucumbers per year at $0.60 each could produce (the word ‘could’ is emphasized here) an extra $43,458 per year to the grower of 20,000 plants. For farms of other capacities, please see Table 11 and Figure 20 below.

Please note that this projection assumes no unforeseen effects from other factors such as extreme weather conditions or disease, which may or may not be mentioned in this report. It is merely a projection based upon the data collected during this trial.

Full Year Financial Projection
Treatment Avg. Cucumbers Per Plant Number of Plants
5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
Untreated 6.35 $19,050 $38,099 $57,149 $76,199 $95,248 $114,298 $133,348 $152,397
Treated – Sawdust 8.69 $26,070 $52,141 $78,211 $104,282 $130,352 $156,423 $182,493 $208,563
Treated – Coal Ash 9.97 $29,914 $59,829 $89,743 $119,657 $149,571 $179,486 $209,400 $239,314
Table 11, Financial Yearly Projection

Assuming that this projection is attractive, the next question will most likely be “What will it cost the grower to implement the treatment on an entire farm?”.

Like most new installations, there is an initial setup cost. In this case the QEnergySpa, BEFE unit, capable of treating up to 10,000 gallons of water at a time, is the only additional expense. Ongoing expenses are minimal with just the weekly replacing of cost effective consumables. Based on the above projections any installations will have paid for themselves within a very short period of time.

Figure 20, Financial Yearly Projection


Click on tables to enlarge  

APPENDIX A, Growth Records – Cumulative


APPENDIX B, Average Growth


APPENDIX C, Average Daily Growth


APPENDIX D, Water Delivery Records


APPENDIX E, Crop Yield Records

Posted on

QEnergySpa, BEFE Pumpkin Trial

QEnergySpa, BEFE Pumpkin Trial

Meringandan Pumpkin Trial

Jap Pumpkin Trial


Jap Pumpkin Trial Log (Meringandan)

Day 1


The trial commenced on the 23rd October 2003 at Freda Garret’s property at Meringandan in Queensland, Australia.

A fenced area was provided to conduct the trial. The preparation of the seed mounds required the ground to be dug and potting mix applied and mixed in with the soil of each mound.

Prior to the charging session a pH and conductivity test was done on the bore water.






8 Jap Pumpkin seeds were placed in a 10 litre container and covered with water.

A 3050 QEnergySpa, BEFE and Orb were used to charge the water for a period of 35 minutes on low setting due to the high conductivity of the bore water.

After the charging session the seed was planted into the mounds with 4 seeds per mound and planted at a depth of 40 mm. After planting, each mound was identified according to the type of water treatment it was to receive.

Each mound was watered with 20 litres of water according to its water rating.

                                    Figure 1 – Fenced area for the trial
                                    Figure 2 – Four (4) mounds prepared for planting
                                    Figure 3 –  Taking pH and Conductivity Readings
                                    Figure 4 – Charging the pumpkin seeds
                                   Figure 5 – Planting out the trial. Latex gloves were                                                                                                     worn to  prevent contact with the seeds.




31st October 2003

Trial pumpkins monitored and it was observed that seeds in the groups had emerged.

Only one seed had struck in the uncharged seed and charged water group.

Each group was watered according to its treatment.

Readings of pH 7.8 and Conductivity of 1.8 mS/cm were recorded after the water had been charged.


Uncharged seed, charged water

1 seed germinated

Charged seed, charged water

3 seeds germinated


Charged seed, uncharged water

3 seeds germinated

Uncharged seed, uncharged water (control)

3 seeds germinated


 18th December 2003

Uncharged seed, charged water Charged seed, charged water


Charged seed, uncharged water Uncharged seed, uncharged water


27th February 2004


Charged Seed Charged Water

7 fruit in the first fruiting, average 2 1/2kg

Largest area covered by plant

A lot of fruit in second fruiting being formed


Uncharged Seed Charged Water

First to form Fruit

1 fruit in first fruiting 3kg

Second fruiting already evident 1kg


Charged Seed Uncharged Water

Slow to form pumpkins

3 fruit in first fruiting 2kg

Second fruiting just evident


Uncharged seed Uncharged Water

Very late to form fruit

First fruiting 3 pumpkins

Second fruiting 2 pumpkins

Not much time between fruiting


5th March 2004

(A)     Uncharged seed and uncharged water.

Brix leaf reading   2

Weight   # 1 – already picked

               # 2 – 1.5 kgs

               # 3 – 2.7 kgs

               # 4 – 2.6 kgs

Measurement (diameter)   # 1 – already picked

# 2 – 190 mm

                                         # 3 –  200 mm

                                          # 4 – 200 mm







(B)     Uncharged water charged seed

Brix leaf reading   3.4

Weight   # 1 – 4.2 kgs

               # 2 –  3.4 kgs

               # 3 – 3.9 kgs

Measurement (diameter)     # 1 – 245 mm

                                                        # 2 – 220 mm

                                                        # 3 – 235 mm


Left # 1   Right # 3




(C)    Uncharged seed charged water

Brix leaf reading  4

Weight    # 1 – 4.8 kgs

               # 2 – 3.2 kgs

               # 3 – 2.5 kgs

Measurement (diameter)  # 1 – 245 mm

                                                    #  2 – 210 mm

                                                   # 3 –  220 mm









(D)     Charged seed charged water

Brix leaf reading  4.4

Weight    # 1 – 4 kgs

               # 2 – 3.2 kgs

               # 3 – already picked

               # 4 – 2.1 kgs

               # 5 – already picked

               # 6 – 2.3 kgs

Measurement (diameter)       # 1 – 230 mm

                                                # 2 – 230 mm

                                                # 3 – already picked

                                                # 4 – 190 mm

                                                # 5 – already picked

                                                # 6 – 210mm











19.03.2004 – Brix test readings and conductivity

Group A – uncharged seed, uncharged water 6.8 flesh sap 16.5 9.4 mS/cm
Group B – charged seed, uncharged water 5 flesh sap 10.3 8.1 mS/cm
Group C – uncharged seed, charged water 5.6 flesh sap 8 6.9 mS/cm
Group D – charged seed, charged water 6.8 flesh sap 13 6.8 mS/cm
Comparing each of the pumpkins, the riper the pumpkin the darker the colour of the flesh and the higher the brix level.






A Sample from each of the trial pumpkins was taken, cooked and mashed for a taste test.

Each taster was asked to rank the pumpkins in order of sweetness and texture.

The following is the majority preference (1 being the most preferred).

(A) Uncharged seed, Uncharged water 3
(B) Charged seed, Uncharged water 5
(C) Uncharged seed, Charged water 4
(C2) Uncharged seed, Charged water 2
(D) Charged seed, Charged water 1
Pumpkins B, C & A were not quite mature.
Pumpkins C2 & D were ripe.

Pumpkin C2 was extra to the trial.


Note the colour difference between the pumpkins

Posted on

Cellular Detoxification


Water Colors & Smells: The bio-electric field effect and or energy quality from the use of the QEnergySpa, BEFE is derived from the interaction of the complex resonant field created within the water by the water module, the ORB. All ionic or electrolysis processes ONLY results in discoloration and precipitation within the water and although interesting and a point of discussion, it is irrelevant to the process and effect. There are far too many parameters that affect the colors and smells of the water after use of the QEnergySpa, BEFE (or any other similar kind of technology) and although every person’s outcome in the water is different (you affect the outcome, but it does not come from you), please remember that you cannot and should NEVER diagnose or rely on the water colors and or smells in any way.

Point is: That all colors, dirt and smells are irrelevant. Ignore them

Disclaimer: Please note. Q the Experience, Future Life Science and QBiotechnologies Pty Ltd has no medical staff. All articles written and all texts published, unless otherwise stated are purely from an engineering perspective with 20 years experience with the technology and online related research. All medical facts and statements should be independently verified.

Disclaimer: Please note that the QEnergySpa, BEFE Technology  is not offered, nor intended to diagnose, cure, mitigate, prevent or treat any disease or health condition and is not a medical device. Use only as directed and consult your primary health care provider if you have any medical concerns and/or if symptoms persists.

Disclaimer: All information relative to the product on this website is intended for educational purposes ONLY.

Disclaimer: The QEnergySpa, BEFE was listed with the TGA Australia (FDA equivalent) for many years as a water treatment device/technology. [break]This original technology is still the same as when test and listed and has expanded and evolved significantly since.

This product in it’s current evolved form, has not been evaluated by the FDA/TGA as a medical device