112/04/19

The effects and correlation between bio-energy and physical variables during long and short-term Qi Gong regimen exercise practitioners

• CHENG, CHIEN MIN1

• NATIONAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORTS(NCPES)

• NATIONAL KAOHSIUNG UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED

SCIENCES(KUAS),TAIWAN• HUANG, SHIN THO2

• NATIONAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND

SPORTS(NCPES), TAIWAN• Wen Chi Wu3 • Fortune Institute of Technology Kaohsiung,

TAIWAN

112/04/19

• Qigong is a self-healing art that originated in ancient China; also means the art of vibrant health.

• The ancient Chinese exercise system combines a series of graceful movement, meditation breathing techniques, and inspirational visualizations to maintain health; prevent and treat illness; reduce stress; and bring harmony to the mind, body, and spirit.

Introduction

112/04/19

• The word Qi means • “skill,” or to “exercise,” practice,” or “refine.”• Qigong can be translated as “the skill,

exercise, or cultivation of vital energy.” • It enhances the flow of Qi— vital energy —

throughout the body, which can have dramatic effects on one’s personal well-being.

• (Michael Bruney, 2002)

112/04/19

• From 1950s on, Qigong training programs were implemented and sanatoria were built, to the treatment of disease (Zhang E, 1990). For example

• to an increase• in immuno-competence (Ryu et al, 1995),

• changes in ECG patterns• explored for managing gastritis, • and treating hypertension ( Ergil and Micozzu,2002).

• Many intriguing studies of Qi cultivation have been conducted in China and to be explored in the United States.

112/04/19

• The Traditional Chinese medicines thought that each meridian has a corresponding path which surrounds the body surface

• gave twelve kinds of paths that the

abnormalities in a body make some changes on the surface along the paths or in meridians themselves.

112/04/19

• In 1966, Nakatani's Ryodoraku means a meridian-like lines observed on the skin surface called as Ryodoraku Autonomic Nerves Adjustment.

• It’s equal to the positions of the old acupoints along the meridians and the value of conductivities of the points varies effectively with the meridian abnormality.

112/04/19

Aim

• correlation between bio-energy and physical variables depending on long and short-term Qi Gong regimen exercise practitioners.

• base on the Ryodoraku value and physical variables .

112/04/19

METHODS• 70 subjects (M=25, F=45),with• Qigong practicing age from 0 to 12 years• no smoking history and no known

cardiovascular disease • written informed consent. • reviewed by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) • medical screening of K. M. U. Hsiao-Kang

Municipal Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan

112/04/19

Experimental design

• Subjects were divided into 3 groups: • long-term (LT,N=19, m= 9, f= 10),• short-term (3-M, N=25, m= 5,f= 20) • control (CTL, N=26, m=11,f=15) . • LT and 3-M practiced Shiang Kung • practicing 3-5 times per week • and the control group has not any treatment.

112/04/19

• The subject rested comfortably during the measure physical variables and except R-R interval recording for at least 10-15 min in a supine position,

• the other measurement in a sit down position in a quiet semidark laboratory room, maintained at a temperature of 23-25 and ℃relative humanity of 50~55 ％ .

Measurement Procedure

112/04/19112/04/19

Practicing programsPracticing programs Qigong cultivationQigong cultivation callisthenics 20 steps,callisthenics 20 steps, Kan In dance 10 steps,Kan In dance 10 steps, Shiang Kung basic 15 Shiang Kung basic 15

steps and advance 15 steps and advance 15 steps steps

duration 75 minutes;duration 75 minutes; intensity 50-60 intensity 50-60 ％ ％

HRmax HRmax frequency at least 3-5 frequency at least 3-5

times per week. times per week. Audio-video assisted Audio-video assisted

instruction was provided instruction was provided individualized instruction individualized instruction

also emphasized also emphasized

112/04/19112/04/19

Research instrumentResearch instrument Detecting System of Channel and Acupuncture Detecting System of Channel and Acupuncture

Points and Bio-energy (DSCAPB), produced in Points and Bio-energy (DSCAPB), produced in Taiwan. Taiwan.

Polar S810i , created in Finland.Polar S810i , created in Finland.

Fingers blood flowFingers blood flow and and Other physical variablesOther physical variables measurementmeasurement..

112/04/19112/04/19

Data AnalysisData Analysis Repeat measure (ANOVA) and ScheffRepeat measure (ANOVA) and Schefféé post hoc tests post hoc tests Dependent and independent t-testDependent and independent t-test Pearson product-moment correlationsPearson product-moment correlations Statistical significance was set at α=.05. Statistical significance was set at α=.05. All values are presented as Mean ± SD. All values are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS for Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS for

windowswindows version 12.0 and Microsoft Excel 2000 for windows version 12.0 and Microsoft Excel 2000 for windows

version.version.

RESULTSRESULTS

Table 1 Subject characteristics Group N Sex Age(yr) Height(cm) Wight(kg) BMI Steps/week

M=9 75. 33± 3. 11 165. 11±2. 77 66. 11± 5. 46 24. 21± 1. 45 6694 LT 19 F=10 67. 00± 4. 20 158. 60±4. 24 61. 60± 9. 44 24. 46± 2. 68 7083 M=5 59. 80± 11. 44 168. 60±3. 28 73. 40± 8. 88 25. 87± 3. 28 6657 3-M 25 F=20 55. 95± 7. 35 156. 80±4. 70 58. 75± 4. 58 23. 91± 1. 61 5313 M=11 61. 55± 9. 95 165. 27±3. 44 66. 09± 7. 37 24. 18± 2. 29 4982 CTL 26 F=15 53. 07± 8. 43 158. 47±2. 78 61. 60± 7. 90 24. 58± 3. 23 6705

Total 70 M=25 F=45 60. 56± 10. 23 160. 60±5. 26 62. 91± 7. 76 24. 35± 2. 40 6407

Table 2 Comparisons of points Ryodoraku bio-energy value of pre and post in groups(unit μ： A) G/TEST LRH1 LRH2 LRH3 LRH4 LRH5 LRH6 LRF1 LRF2 LRF3 LRF4 LRF5 LRF6 MEAN LT/B 85.03 94.79 109.2 87.94 64.56 69.24 98.72 78.68 78.71 124.03 84.23 73.69 87.40 LT/A 67.05 69.55 81.05 61.81 49.84 51.34 79.10 68.55 62.70 112.43 67.12 54.05 68.71 p value p<.01 * 3-M/B 54.28 61.19 67.91 55.01 44.77 47.56 77.59 71.42 64.62 90.54 61.13 57.94 62.83 3-M/A 64.50 68.07 77.56 64.38 46.91 48.57 83.54 80.99 76.66 102.03 73.87 67.04 71.18 p value p<.01 * CTL/B 81 72.5 74.5 79.4 70.3 66.3 95.9 87.3 76 64.5 62 58.2 73.99 CTL/A 78.6 78.2 79.3 85.5 72.8 73.3 97.6 93.1 83.2 84 65.7 68.2 79.96 p value p<.01 *

Note:G=group; LT=Long- te rm group；3-M=Shor t - t erm group; CTL=Cont ro l g roup；B= pre tes t ; A=pos t tes t ; p= p va lue; *= p<.05

There were significant differences between pre and post test in three groups. The LT group’s pre bio-energy value was significantly higher than the post one, whereas the others group’s pre bio-energy values were significantly lower than the post one, and illustrated as figure1, 2 and 3.

Table 3 Comparisons of points Ryodoraku bio-energy value of pre test among groups(unit μ： A)

G/TEST LRH1 LRH2 LRH3 LRH4 LRH5 LRH6 LRF1 LRF2 LRF3 LRF4 LRF5 LRF6 MEAN LT/B 85.03 94.79 109.20 87.94 64.56 69.24 98.72 78.68 78.71 124.03 84.23 73.69 87.40 3-M/B 54.28 61.19 67.91 55.01 44.77 47.56 77.59 71.42 64.62 90.54 61.13 57.94 62.83 CTL/B 81 72.5 74.5 79.4 70.3 66.3 95.9 87.3 76 64.5 62 58.2 73.99 Post hoc LT>CTL>3-M *

Note:G=group; LT=Long - te rm group；3-M=Short - t erm group; CTL=Cont ro l g roup；B= pre tes t ; A=pos t tes t ;

p= p va lue; *= p<.05

LRH1

LRH2

LRH3

LRH4

LRH5

LRH6

LRF1

LRF2

LRF3

LRF4

LRF5

LRF6

MEAN

LT/B3M/BCO/B

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

μ A

Points

Group

LT/B3M/B

CO/B

Figure4. Comparisons of points Ryodoraku bio-energy value of pre test among groups.

Note: LT/B=LT group pre test；3-M/B=3-M group pre test；CTL/B= CTL group pre test

Table 4 Comparisons of points Ryodoraku bio-energy value of post test among groups(unit μ： A) G/TEST LRH1 LRH2 LRH3 LRH4 LRH5 LRH6 LRF1 LRF2 LRF3 LRF4 LRF5 LRF6 MEAN LT/A 67.05 69.55 81.05 61.81 49.84 51.34 79.10 68.55 62.70 112.43 67.12 54.05 68.71 3-M/A 64.50 68.07 77.56 64.38 46.91 48.57 83.54 80.99 76.66 102.03 73.87 67.04 71.18 CTL/A 78.6 78.2 79.3 85.5 72.8 73.3 97.6 93.1 83.2 84 65.7 68.2 79.96 Post hoc CTL>3-M≒ LT

Note:G=group; LT=Long - te rm group；3-M=Shor t - t erm group; CTL=Cont ro l g roup；B= pre tes t ; A=pos t tes t ;

p= p va lue; *= p<.05； ≒ =approximate value LRH1

LRH2

LRH3

LRH4

LRH5

LRH6

LRF1

LRF2

LRF3

LRF4

LRF5

LRF6

MEAN

LT/A3M/ACO/A

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

μ A

Points

Group

LT/A3M/ACO/A

Figure5. Comparisons of points Ryodoraku bio-energy value of post test among groups.

Note: LT/A=LT group post test；3-M/A=3-M group post test；CTL/A= CTL group post test

Table 5 Comparisons of up and down Ryodoraku bio-energy value of pre test in groups(unit μ： A)

LH1 RH1 LH2 RH2 LH3 RH3 LH4 RH4 LH5 RH5 LH6 RH6 H point F point LF1 RF1 LF2 RF2 LF3 RF3 LF4 RF4 LF5 RF5 LF6 RF6

Mean

LTBH 87.92 82.13 99.06 90.52 112.81 105.58 92.64 83.24 66.62 62.49 71.32 67.16 85.12 LTBF 99.18 98.26 73.38 83.97 79.03 78.39 121.2 126.89 85.02 83.44 72.67 74.71 89.68 P value p=0.52 3-MBH 55.92 52.65 63.42 58.96 66.11 69.72 55.27 54.74 46.27 43.27 49.06 46.06 55.12 3-MBF 80.5 74.68 65.39 77.44 67.16 62.08 92.54 88.53 61.41 60.84 59.52 56.36 70.54 P value P<.01 * CTLBH 57.3 52.2 64.1 58.9 73 67.7 60.2 54.9 47.6 41.6 48.2 46.9 56.05 CTLBF 81.0 72.5 74.5 79.4 70.3 66.3 95.9 87.3 76.0 64.5 62.0 58.2 65.0 P value P<.01 *

Note:G=group; LT=Long - te rm group；3-M=Shor t - t erm group; CTL=Cont ro l g roup；B= pre tes t ; A=pos t tes t ; H= hand po in t s (uppe r body)； F= foot points(lower body)； p= p va lue; *= p<. 05

LH

1 F1

RH

1 F1

LH

2 F2

RH

2 F2

LH

3 F3

RH

3 F3

LH

4 F4

RH

4 F4

LH

5 F5

RH

5 F5

LH

6 F6

RH

6 F6

Mean LTBH

3-MBH

CTLBH0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

μ A

Points

LTBH

LTBF

3-MBH

3-MBF

CTLBH

CTLBF

Figure6. Comparisons of up and down Ryodoraku bio-energy value of pre test in groups

Table 6 Comparisons of up and down Ryodoraku bio-energy value of post test in groups(unit μ： A)

Note:G=group; LT=Long - te rm group；3-M=Shor t - t erm group; CTL=Cont ro l g roup；B= pre tes t ; A=pos t tes t ; H= hand po in ts (upper body)； F= foot points(lower body)； p= p va lue; *= p<. 05

LH1 RH1 LH2 RH2 LH3 RH3 LH4 RH4 LH5 RH5 LH6 RH6 Hpoint F point LF1 RF1 LF2 RF2 LF3 RF3 LF4 RF4 LF5 RF5 LF6 RF6

Mean

LTAH 68.38 65.71 70.58 68.51 81.18 80.91 65.14 58.47 49.31 50.36 50.92 51.76 63.44 LTAF 85.17 73.03 63.49 73.6 61.84 63.55 84.71 83.06 70.84 63.39 53.71 54.38 69.23 pvalue p = 0 .18 3-MAH 66.68 62.32 70.98 65.16 79.51 75.61 69.74 59.01 47.50 46.31 48.46 48.67 61.67 3-MAF 88.02 79.06 77.04 84.94 76.72 76.6 93.94 110.1 75.18 72.56 68.97 65.1 80.69 pvalue p< . 0 1 * CTLAH 71.6 71.8 74.1 71.4 86.5 81.6 75.8 72.1 55.9 56.3 55.9 58.1 69.26 CTLAF 78 .6 78 .2 79 .3 85 .5 72 .8 73 .3 97 .6 93 .1 83 .2 84 65 .7 68 .2 78 .6 pvalue p< .0 5 *

LH1 F

1

RH1 F

1

LH2 F

2

RH2 F

2

LH3 F

3

RH3 F

3

LH4 F

4

RH4 F

4

LH5 F

5

RH5 F

5

LH6 F

6

RH6 F

6

Mea

n LTAH

3-MAH

CTLH0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

μ A

Points

LTAH

LTAF

3-MAH

3-MAF

CTLH

CTLF

Figure7. Comparisons of up and down Ryodoraku bio-energy value of post test in groups

Table 7 The lines and percentage of meridians normal, acceptable normal and abnormal

Group normal (line) normal％ acceptable normal (line)

acceptable normal％ abnormal (line) abnormal％

LTB 7.63 31.8 9.16 38.16 7.11 29.61 LTA 9.26 38.6 8.89 37.06 5.84 24.34 3-MB 8.88 37 9.6 40 5.52 23 3-MA 8.72 36.33 9.72 40.5 5.6 21.73 CTLB 9 37.7 10 41.8 4.9 20.5 CTLA 9.8 40.7 10.1 42.1 4.1 17.1

Note:; LT=Long- term group； 3-M=Short - term group; CTL=Cont ro l g roup； B= pre tes t ; A=pos t tes t

Table 7 show the lines and percentage or meridian in three groups, there were not significantly difference among normal, acceptable normal and abnormal (p>.05).

Table 8 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in LT pre test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI -.173 1

BIOERNERGY .061 .245 1 RRI M .206 .072 .069 1 LF% -.125 -.091 -.037 -.040 1 HF% -.121 .293 .187 .421 -.233 1 LF/HF .009 -.287 -.010 -.251 .468* -.784** 1 SYSBP .046 -.014 .342 .027 .099 -.246 .194 1 DIABP -.446 -.004 .382 -.328 .119 -.299 .316 .502* 1 BF Peak .110 .307 .468* -.028 .193 -.010 .222 .170 .098 1 BF Mean .126 .432 .495* .153 .118 .173 .087 .079 .072 .876** 1

* p<.05; **p<.01

Table 9 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in LT post test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI -.173 1

BIOERNERGY .200 .570* 1 RRI M .177 -.096 .252 1 LF% -.135 -.381 .078 .474* 1 HF% -.232 .443 .472* .359 -.057 1 LF/HF -.141 -.340 -.105 -.045 .574* -.548* 1 SYSBP .028 .300 .523* .193 .182 .395 -.229 1 DIABP -.110 .190 .504* .075 .413 -.006 .355 .724** 1 BF Peak .204 .067 .191 .407 .394 .009 .233 -.009 -.009 1 BF Mean .113 -.019 .303 .404 .565* -.023 .467* .151 .328 .769** 1

* p<.05; ** p<.01

Table 8 and 9 show the correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in LT

pre and post test.

Table 8 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in LT pre test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI -.173 1

BIOERNERGY .061 .245 1 RRI M .206 .072 .069 1 LF% -.125 -.091 -.037 -.040 1 HF% -.121 .293 .187 .421 -.233 1 LF/HF .009 -.287 -.010 -.251 .468* -.784** 1 SYSBP .046 -.014 .342 .027 .099 -.246 .194 1 DIABP -.446 -.004 .382 -.328 .119 -.299 .316 .502* 1 BF Peak .110 .307 .468* -.028 .193 -.010 .222 .170 .098 1 BF Mean .126 .432 .495* .153 .118 .173 .087 .079 .072 .876** 1

* p<.05; **p<.01

Table 9 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in LT post test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI -.173 1

BIOERNERGY .200 .570* 1 RRI M .177 -.096 .252 1 LF% -.135 -.381 .078 .474* 1 HF% -.232 .443 .472* .359 -.057 1 LF/HF -.141 -.340 -.105 -.045 .574* -.548* 1 SYSBP .028 .300 .523* .193 .182 .395 -.229 1 DIABP -.110 .190 .504* .075 .413 -.006 .355 .724** 1 BF Peak .204 .067 .191 .407 .394 .009 .233 -.009 -.009 1 BF Mean .113 -.019 .303 .404 .565* -.023 .467* .151 .328 .769** 1

* p<.05; ** p<.01

Table 10 and 11 show the correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in

3M pre and post test. Table 10 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in3-M pre test

AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean AGE 1 BMI .195 1

BIOERNERGY -.037 .082 1 RRI M -.203 -.396 .356 1 LF% -.167 .127 .054 -.417* 1 HF% -.254 -.039 -.114 .141 -.472* 1 LF/HF .101 .077 .072 -.144 .624** -.753** 1 SYSBP .203 .407* -.156 -.151 -.252 -.066 .000 1 DIABP .334 .597** .040 -.254 -.195 .092 -.120 .809** 1 BF Peak -.018 .510** .104 -.089 .127 .089 -.059 .071 .330 1 BF Mean -.181 .494* .099 -.034 -.024 .169 -.157 .163 .380 .924** 1

*p<.05; ** p< .01

Table 11 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in3-M post test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF Ear T℃ SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI .195 1

BIOERNERGY .095 -.241 1 RRI M -.172 -.113 .166 1 LF% .172 .145 .023 -.180 1 HF% -.047 -.210 .089 .054 -.389 1 LF/HF .113 .320 -.163 -.131 .114 -.702** 1 Ear T℃ .079 -.132 -.039 -.393 .215 -.141 .215 1 SYSBP .225 .368 .423* .096 -.080 .013 .033 -.317 1 DIABP .096 .519** .211 -.120 .001 -.106 .236 -.456* .739** 1 BF Peak .118 .104 .092 .156 -.242 -.250 .184 -.084 .360 .158 1 BF Mean .077 .195 .223 .032 -.250 -.045 .065 -.092 .393 .206 .780** 1

* p<.05; ** p<.01

Table 10 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in3-M pre test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI .195 1

BIOERNERGY -.037 .082 1 RRI M -.203 -.396 .356 1 LF% -.167 .127 .054 -.417* 1 HF% -.254 -.039 -.114 .141 -.472* 1 LF/HF .101 .077 .072 -.144 .624** -.753** 1 SYSBP .203 .407* -.156 -.151 -.252 -.066 .000 1 DIABP .334 .597** .040 -.254 -.195 .092 -.120 .809** 1 BF Peak -.018 .510** .104 -.089 .127 .089 -.059 .071 .330 1 BF Mean -.181 .494* .099 -.034 -.024 .169 -.157 .163 .380 .924** 1

*p<.05; ** p< .01

Table 11 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in3-M post test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF Ear T℃ SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI .195 1

BIOERNERGY .095 -.241 1 RRI M -.172 -.113 .166 1 LF% .172 .145 .023 -.180 1 HF% -.047 -.210 .089 .054 -.389 1 LF/HF .113 .320 -.163 -.131 .114 -.702** 1 Ear T℃ .079 -.132 -.039 -.393 .215 -.141 .215 1 SYSBP .225 .368 .423* .096 -.080 .013 .033 -.317 1 DIABP .096 .519** .211 -.120 .001 -.106 .236 -.456* .739** 1 BF Peak .118 .104 .092 .156 -.242 -.250 .184 -.084 .360 .158 1 BF Mean .077 .195 .223 .032 -.250 -.045 .065 -.092 .393 .206 .780** 1

* p<.05; ** p<.01

Table 12 and 13 show the correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in

CTL pre and post test.

Table 12 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in CLT pre test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI .188 1

BIOERNERGY -.113 .186 1 RRI M .028 -.238 .383 1 LF% .148 -.092 .092 .241 1 HF% -.308 -.539** -.316 .008 .063 1 LF/HF .229 .253 .454* .154 .179 -.760** 1 SYSBP .046 .685** .258 .179 -.057 -.547** .294 1 DIABP .202 .738** .178 -.120 -.077 -.448* .254 .513** 1 BF Peak -.434* .153 .287 .254 -.031 .116 -.187 .180 .063 1 BF Mean -.285 .013 .461* .346 .012 .065 -.053 .188 -.051 .843** 1

*p<.05; **p<.01

Table 13 Correlations between bio-energy and physical variables in CLT pre test AGE BMI BIOERNERGY RRI M LF% HF% LF/HF SYSBP DIABP BF Peak BF Mean

AGE 1 BMI .188 1

BIOERNERGY -.242 .066 1 RRI M .161 -.012 -.316 1 LF% -.013 .353 .143 .078 1 HF% -.212 -.336 -.089 -.055 -.255 1 LF/HF -.256 .165 .358 .044 .584** -.229 1 SYSBP .182 .696** .303 -.126 .285 -.354 .134 1 DIABP -.072 .587** .502** -.209 .242 -.207 .219 .818** 1 BF Peak .486* .584** -.038 .207 .298 -.447* .260 .422* .233 1 BF Mean .619** .350 .069 .076 .030 -.503** .079 .384 .265 .753** 1

* p<.05; **p<.01

112/04/19112/04/19

DiscussionDiscussion

The present result demonstrate the subject The present result demonstrate the subject characteristics of LT are significantly elder characteristics of LT are significantly elder than the other group, and the LT group also than the other group, and the LT group also chosen as long-term Qigong cultivation chosen as long-term Qigong cultivation practitioners.practitioners.

In the Ryodoraku bioenergy approach, the In the Ryodoraku bioenergy approach, the LT group revealed better balance health LT group revealed better balance health state than the other groups, because of state than the other groups, because of long-term Qigong regimen exercise. long-term Qigong regimen exercise.

112/04/19112/04/19

In this study, we obtained a significant In this study, we obtained a significant difference between the LT and 3-M and CTL difference between the LT and 3-M and CTL groups.groups.

Although the LT groupAlthough the LT group’’s pre bio-energy s pre bio-energy

value was significantly higher than the post value was significantly higher than the post one, whereas the others groupone, whereas the others group’’s pre bio-s pre bio-energy values were significantly lower than energy values were significantly lower than the post one.the post one.

112/04/19112/04/19

In the 3-M pre and post test, there were In the 3-M pre and post test, there were positive and negative significant positive and negative significant correlations between Physical variables.correlations between Physical variables.

In CTL pre test, there were negative In CTL pre test, there were negative significant correlations between age and significant correlations between age and peak blood flow, it means the elder one peak blood flow, it means the elder one aging, the blood flow peak is decreasing.aging, the blood flow peak is decreasing.

112/04/19112/04/19

This research reveals that the Long and This research reveals that the Long and short-term regimen exercise affects the ear short-term regimen exercise affects the ear temperature, systolic pressure, diastolic temperature, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, mean finger blood speed peak pressure, mean finger blood speed peak and mean finger blood speed. and mean finger blood speed.

No matter what in the pre or post test, the No matter what in the pre or post test, the perfect well balance state of whole body perfect well balance state of whole body showed that LT was better than the others.showed that LT was better than the others.

ConclusionsConclusions

112/04/19112/04/19

FutureFuture

The The feature of feature of QigongQigong research research will focus on will focus on the comparison of multiple mode or style the comparison of multiple mode or style Regimen Exercise of Regimen Exercise of BodyBody, , MindMind, and , and SpiritSpirit well-being for well-being for anti-aginganti-aging and and health health promotion.promotion.

Multiple parameters of interdisciplinary integration.Multiple parameters of interdisciplinary integration.

International and Cross country cooperation.International and Cross country cooperation. Would you like to join us?Would you like to join us?

112/04/19112/04/19

THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! AUTHOR: AUTHOR: CHIEN MIN CHENG CHIEN MIN CHENG

(JIMMY)(JIMMY)

E-MAIL:E-MAIL: jimmycm.cheng@msa.hinet.net

Website:Website: http://140.127.119.11http://140.127.119.11

COAUTH0R: COAUTH0R: SHIN THO HUANGSHIN THO HUANG E-MAIL:E-MAIL: shintho@mail.ncpes.edu.tw

WELCOME WELCOME TO TO TAIWANTAIWAN