The Theory: Three Action Hypotheses of Triaxial Physical Intervention

1. Calming (Physical Anti-inflammation)

In tissues with chronic progression, the conditions of the “field” (microenvironment)—such as circulation, tension, and diffusion—are disrupted, making them prone to inflammatory stagnation. Triaxial physical intervention aims to shift conditions that hinder repair (e.g., hypertonia and circulatory stagnation) toward a “calm” state using deep-penetrating physical stimuli.

* Research Background: There are existing reviews discussing electrical/magnetic stimulation and immune responses, such as microglia (e.g., Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 2022).

2. Reduction of Obstructive Factors (Structural Clearance)

We view “obstructive factors” (e.g., induration, stagnation, accumulation) that impair biological functions as bottlenecks in transmission and metabolism. We examine the possibility that physical stimulation shifts the microenvironment toward conditions where “flow” is restored.
Crucially, we do not assert the decomposition or removal of specific substances. This hypothesis is an exploration of whether changes in microenvironmental conditions can alleviate structural “blockages.”

3. Trigger for Reactivation (Cellular Elicitation)

Once the microenvironment is conditioned and the load of obstructive factors is reduced, electromagnetic induction and other stimuli may act as a “trigger for reactivation.” At our institute, we refer to this framework as “Cellular Elicitation.”
This serves as an explanatory model for the observed physical transitions, referencing established research on energy supply (e.g., ATP) and plasticity-related factors (e.g., BDNF) required for tissue repair.

* Research Background: There are reports investigating rTMS (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation), neuroplasticity, and neural stem cells (e.g., Scientific Reports, 2015).