North American MVVT Research Report

June 2004




Section 1:  General Considerations. 2

Section 2:  Review of Data for First Three Sessions and Long-Term Results. 4

Section 3: Average Percent Improvement by Disorder Category. 6

Section 4:  Detail View of Results by Disorder. 7

Section 5:  Follow-up Self-Evaluations. 8

Section 6:  Contributing Factors to Success. 13



Section 1:  General Considerations

Chart 1.  Disorder Frequency Distribution.


Maharishi Vedic Vibration Technology (MVVT) has been offered in North America for over five years, resulting in more than 7,500 consultations with more than 13,500 disorders addressed.  Chart 1, above, provides a summary of the 35 most frequently requested disorders. 


Table 1. Repeat Consultations.

Number of Consultations

Number of Persons



















10 or more




As of June 11, 2004 we had database entries for 7,815 confirmed consultations.  Nearly 40% of these were repeat consultations (repeat participation by the same people although not necessarily for the same disorders).  Approximately 4,800 distinct persons have participated in our program.  A summary of our records on repeat consultations is provided in Table 1. 


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


Number of disorders

How many participants



















10 or more


The 7,815 MVVT participants had 13,570 disorders addressed—an average of 1.7 disorders per participant.  3,248 participants (42%) had more than one disorder addressed in their consultation.  A summary of the number of disorders addressed and by how many participants is provided in Table 2. 


More women than men participate in our program, 54% or 4,284 women compared to 46% or 3,531 men.  The great majority of participants are middle-aged, with 4% aged 0 to 19, 9% aged 20 to 39, 72% aged 40 to 59, and 15% aged 60 or older.  The oldest participant was a 95 year old woman. 

                                                                                          Table 2. Disorders Addressed.


Self-evaluation (SE) results forms were filled out for each disorder addressed after each session, 11,075 after session one, 10,760 after session two and 10,029 after session three.  Of these, participants provided a numerical estimate of percent improvement for 2,941 disorders addressed after session one, 4,600 after session two and 5,181 after session three.  Our staff made qualitative assessments of comments on several hundred self-evaluation reports where participants felt it was too soon to evaluate numerically.  By and large, the distribution of these qualitative reports was consistent with the numerical results. 

Section 2:  Review of Data for First Three Sessions and Long-Term Results


Chart 2.  Average Percent Improvement.

For 2,058 disorders addressed, 1,283 participants provided numerical estimates following all three sessions.  Of these, 272 participants had 385 disorders addressed with numerical estimates for at least one follow-up report.  The follow-up reports used in this analysis were filed an average of six months following the consultation.  Chart 1 tracks the progress of the participants through the three sessions and also shows the long-term follow-up results.  As the chart shows, the results are cumulative through the three sessions of the consultation itself, and stable over time.  The average percent improvement increased from the first session to the second, and again from the second to the third session.  And the follow-up average improvement was nearly the same as the third session results. 


After the third session, the average percent improvement was 48.64%, with 85% reporting at least some improvement (> 0% improved).  An average of six months later the participants were still reporting an average improvement of 47.00%. 


17% reported 90% relief or more immediately following their consultation.  This number had increased to 21% of the long-term follow-up reports.  The cumulative effect noted in Chart 1, above, also applies to repeat consultations for the same disorders.  As one participant remarked, typically, “It worked very well—in fact, I just repeated the disorder … and I am having additional improvement.” 


By dividing the results into five segments—a segment for no improvement and four quartiles for those indicating improvement—as shown in Chart 3, we can see how the third session results were distributed. 



Chart 3.  Results Distribution. 



Section 3: Average Percent Improvement by Disorder Category


The following two charts involve more detailed analysis.  To broaden our data set, we include all participant reports where the participant filed reports for at least the three consultation sessions, regardless of whether they submitted long-term follow-up reports.  Chart 4, below, lists the categories in terms of their average percent improvement.  The number of reports that each average is based on is given in parentheses after the disorder name. 


Chart 4. Disorder Categories.




Section 4:  Detail View of Results by Disorder


Chart 5, below, lists the 40 disorders with 7 or more reports, from most to least successful. 


Chart 5. Disorder Detail View.

Section 5:  Follow-up Self-Evaluations

The average time elapsed from the date of the MVVT consultation to the date the Follow-up Self-Evaluations (FPSEs) were filled out was 169.34 days, or nearly six months.  The detailed distribution of the FPSEs is provided in Chart 6, below.   

Chart 6.  Follow-up Results.


By comparing the follow-up average of 47.00% to the average improvement reported immediately following the consultation—48.64%—we can calculate an Average Stability Quotient for the MVVT results over time.  Thus, 47.00/48.64 = .97.  This relative constancy is inconsistent with placebo or expectation-based explanations of the MVVT results (see Chart 7).  An expectation-based account would predict a continuous decline in average results over time.


Text Box: Chart 7. Stability of MVVT Results.


Although there were a number of cases of declines from initial good results, these instances were largely offset by the opposite phenomenon of deferred improvement.  Here are some typical participant comments (with the SE à FPSE numerical ratings in parentheses):



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


Chart 8.  Average Difference between Follow-up and 3rd Session Reports.


For the 25 most frequently requested disorders, Chart 8 summarizes the average difference between Follow-up Self Evaluations and the 3rd Session Self Evaluations immediately following the consultation. For eight of the disorders shown, the difference between the follow-up reports and the 3rd session reports was less than or equal to ± 5.0 percent (blue bars).  In other words, the change was negligible and within the margin for error.  For ten of the disorders shown there was a significant improvement over time, since the consultation (green bars).  And for the remaining seven disorders, the initial results faded somewhat after the consultation (yellow bars).


It is interesting to note that, among the mental disorders, the initial good results for anixiety, depression and grief continued to improve substantially after the consultation, while the initial results for anger tended to drop off some time after the consultation.  Significantly, the good initial results for digestion, asthma and weakness continued to improve over time.  We have anecdotal reports that tinnitus (ringing of the ears) was a delayed improvement.  This research confirms the delayed improvement in tinnitus.  The intial improvement was not striking, but people were consistently experiencing improvement in the weeks and months following their consultation. 


Most people experienced improvement at the time of their consultation and this was usually sustained months later and reported in the FPSE forms.  The FPSEs abound with comments such as the following:

·        “I am very grateful for this technique—very satisfied with the results.”

·         “This disorder was helped a great deal.”

·        “Very good results.”

·        “I don't have that problem anymore.”

·        “The results on this disorder were great!”

·        “I feel that I have a deeper understanding of life and my relationship to the cosmos.”

·        “My neck pain improved completely as a result of my first consultation and has never come back.”

·         “I haven't had any recurrence in the 5 months since my consultation.  The problem seems to be completely cured.”

·        “I am thrilled with the results—no more neck pain.”

·        “This condition cleared up immediately at the first session.”

·        “The consultation exceeded all my expectations and I've  had only a few moments since, where I felt emotional tendencies I once experienced almost continuously.”

·        “Very pleased with the results. Thank you so much!”

·        “I think if I had gone to a neurologist as suggested by my family practice physician I would still be in pain or—worse yet—scheduled for surgery.  And no allopathic physician could have offered such a simple, completely blissful remedy. I am very grateful for this technique.”


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

·         “My first session was a wonderfully nourishing and blissful experience that produced immediate results.”

·        “This consultation created a huge stirring of bliss consciousness in my body, centered at the base of the spine and radiating upward. The bliss and ecstasy were intensely pleasurable—unsurpassed and continued for months and are still present, though more subdued.” 

·        “I attribute this to my change in feeling from discouragement to optimism since experiencing such bliss.”

·        “I had received MVVT for neck, shoulders, head and lower back previously and the benefits were so outstanding that I had it a second time—just to get more benefits.… I have experienced day after day, month after month the intense onslaught of bliss brought on by this consultation.  It was tremendous, but there was also a huge purification. …. I recommend it highly. To this day, about 10 months later, I still have the bliss this consultation enlivened.”

·        “The experience, during the 3 days of receiving the technique, was very blissful. This was a profound "boost" in the direction of healing. I plan to repeat the MVVT in the near future.”


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


·        “Current diagnosis: Don't get excited, but an MRI taken after consultation did not show a brain lesion or demyelination.    MRI taken 4/98 showed brain lesion etc. which can be attributed to head injury sustained 5/93 (onset of fatigue and post-concussion symptoms). MRI taken 7/99, after MVVT, did not show any abnormalities; however the neurologist said could be due to difference in quality of MRI (two different labs were used). I have not noticed improvement in symptoms, but did experience "bliss" during consultation.”

·        “Degree of disability: almost absent.  At first there seemed little difference, but a number of quite dramatic psychological insights/transformations occurred on the conscious level, and at present I feel very little anxiety. What brought it about, I really do not know—MOU? MA in SCI? Vastu school? Reverberation technique? Church involvement?”


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


Section 6:  Contributing Factors to Success

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


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



Chart 9. Use of Stabilizer


Chart 9 shows that there is a significant correlation between use of the stabilizer and successful results.  Between the most conscientious (75 to 100% use) and least conscientious (less than 25% use) there is a gap of 9.8 percentage points.  The biggest step is between those who used their stabilizer less than 25% of the time and those who at least used it 25 to 49% of the time.