11.1  EFFICIENCY of DISTANT INTERPERSONAL INFLUENCE    [ * ]

и     Efficiency and consequently the reality of healing has been proved by the (author (first of all – to himself) in May 1985 (by making a precedent) – in statistically positive experiment, with observance of NAS methodological requirements.
    Many of insuperable (even now, especially – then) organizational, administrative etc obstacles made the author to do this experiment not as medical, but to transfer it to the area of physical culture. Muscular efforts of examinees has been chosen as indicator of the efficiency. As a physical parameter, it can be registered easily, quickly and precisely. As a property of an organism it is inherent to alive, since very early stages of evolution, and, hence, is universal/fundamental, that could only raise importance of results, which were not so much expected by the experimenter, were subjects of his doubts and hopes. The experiment was of a search, "pilot" character, i.e. it was the first trial; it was not clearly a priori, how much the result could be great, how much it could be reliable. Even an inverse, negative result – reduction of force in a working group in comparison with a control one – was not excluded in principle.
    An increase in physical strength and an improvement of health are not connected unambiguously. Therefore it would be methodologicalally more correct to approve healing so how it offered FA. Mesmer in his time (see section 1.6.3 ). But to reveal the reality/existence of DIPI is possible more effectively at (by means of) registration/comparison of only one parameter, than of their complex or of such complex/compound parameter as health.
    The experiment result - that a working force is 7.7% more than control force with 0.1% probability that this result is casual – turns out actual not only for a science, but also for practice because the maximal force increase was 10% absolutely (3% average in comparison with the control) which is enough for a serious attitude to availability of DIPI using in practical work with sportsmen (for example). Instruction of trainers in healing methods would allow to make them active participators in sport competitions, and the methodical base for such preparing of trainers was already ready at '85 year [ 2 ].
    A topicality of this research has not decreased since its performance (1985), because both WHO and Russian Healthprotect Ministry ignore healing a priori, reject approbations of its methods the same way as the Parisian Academy did more than two hundred years ago (see section 1.6.3 ).
    The experiment was fulfilled under aegis of Laboratory of Physical Education of Institute of Psychology [НИИ ОиПП (Scientific Research Institute of the General and Pedagogical Psychology) of АПН (Academy of Pedagogical Sciences) of the USSR, nowadays it is PI (Psychology Institute) of AE (Academy of Education) of the RF] in one (No 91) of experimental schools of the Institute (examinees were 8-form pupils). So it seemed possible to get a sufficient volume of primary experimental material at really accessible to the alone-researcher (in the USSR of 1985!) duration of the experiment, its laboriousness, cost (actually – merely zero), instrument equipment, etc. This supposition was basically justified.
    Force of compression of an examinee's hand into a fist has been chosen as initially registered parameter. More precisely – the maximal at compression of the measuring tool – HPSD, which fixes the maximal force of each pressing.
    The operator-inductor's task (and of the experiment in whole) was to increase examinee-recipients' muscular force in comparison with their background force, i.e. measured up before an operator's DIPI. Both these forces of each object (of each examinee's each hand) were calculated as an arithmetic average the measurements got within 5 days (during a working week), 5 presses daily.
    In order to except influences upon experiment results of any factors, except for DIPI
• examinees have been broken before its second (working) stage into two groups - an experimental one, upon which is exposed DIPI was made in an interval between two (background and working) stages of the experiment, and control one.
• all conditions of measurements, including/considering technical details, such as an individual manner of dynamometer pressing, were kept during experiment as much as possible
• examinees was not informed about the true purpose of the experiment (it was known to the school management); for them it was only a check of stability (in time) of their hands forces; they did not know too that their group has actually been divided at the second stage of experiment.
    The analysis of the preliminary/background results has revealed, that force stability parameters (namely variation factor) of different objects i (hands) are much different So, an attempt was made to balance compared groups by this parameter too – for the most identity of them – instead of divisions by lot.
    Finally the groups were pick up so, that the difference between them by this parameter was in fact less than 1%. A lot has chosen only, which of them becomes experimental one (э) and which – control (к).
    DIPI was a variant of healing [ 1^А ] influences, directed selectively upon forearm tissues (muscles, ligaments, etc.) responsible for compression of fingers in a fist as though they required to be restored after an inflammation, traumas or overloads, in conformity with literally following