Channel
@EFTtrapy
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
6,806subscribers
-2,634 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001211760804 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @EFTtrapy |
| Description | آموزش رابطه سالم با تمرکز بر تنظیم احساسات، تپینگ (EFT) و حل تعارض برای کسانی که میخواهند کمتر آسیب ببینند، بهتر ارتباط بگیرند و رابطهای امنتر بسازند. @daryaa24 |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 9 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 26 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 9 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/EFTtrapy |
Health & wellness — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 87% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Nov 2026, 11:04 | 6,806 | -4 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 17:29 | 6,810 | -12 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 00:29 | 6,822 | -12 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 08:00 | 6,834 | -14 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 04:25 | 6,848 | -4 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 12:21 | 6,852 | -10 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 01:48 | 6,862 | -11 |
| 18 Oct 2026, 21:00 | 6,873 | -6 |
| 15 Oct 2026, 23:16 | 6,879 | -10 |
| 12 Oct 2026, 14:08 | 6,889 | -15 |
| 5 Oct 2026, 11:55 | 6,904 | -31 |
| 27 Sept 2026, 07:15 | 6,935 | -31 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 20:55 | 6,966 | -23 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 08:18 | 6,989 | -15 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 12:59 | 7,004 | -320 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 10:05 | 7,324 | -315 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 04:56 | 7,639 | -383 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 09:47 | 8,022 | -476 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 09:11 | 8,498 | -131 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 13:05 | 8,629 | first reading |
45 posts held, back to 26 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 46 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 5 of 6 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 10 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 45 (26 June 2026 – 10 November 2026) |
| Views total | 1,237 |
| Reactions total | 22 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Nov 2026, 03:25 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
300 reactions across 39 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 62.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 187 | 62.3% | |
| 👍 | 110 | 36.7% | |
| 👎 | 2 | 0.667% | |
| ❤🔥 | 1 | 0.333% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 41 of the 45 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 306 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 45 most recent posts we hold, published 26 June 2026 to 10 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1 of 6 posts held from the last 30 days (16.7%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
🍀💐🌼 از بهترین و دلنشینترین کانالهای تلگرام لذت ببریم 🧿 انرژی درمانی🔮 @jazbaramashh 🍁 هزارتا چیز که حال دلرو خوب میکنه @Del_Therapy 🍀 آرا حقوقی قضایی و نظریات مشورتی @ARA_HOGHOOGHI_GHAZAIE 🍎 اشعار نو وکهن، مولانا حافظ،شهریار @onlyshear 🌻 متن دلنشین @aram380 🍀 آموزش رایگان مشاغل خانگی @honarkadeh_aftab96 🍎 نگارش دهم تا دوازدهم(نگارش و نویسندگی...) @negareshe10 🌻 تمرکز روی خودم!!! @shine41 🍀 کسب درآمد در خانه برای…
یه سؤال مهم ازت دارم: وقتی دلت برای رابطه قبلیت تنگ میشه، همه رابطه رو به یاد میاری یا فقط لحظههای خوبش رو؟ مثلاً یادت میاد چقدر دوستت داشت، اما یادت نمیاد چند بار منتظر پیامش موندی؟ یادت میاد چقدر باهاش خوش گذشت، اما یادت نمیاد چند بار احساس تنهایی کردی؟ یادت میاد چقدر دوستش داشتی، اما یادت نمیاد چند بار نیازها و خواستههات نادیده گرفته شد؟ گاهی ما بعد از جدایی، به جای یادآوری واقعیت رابطه، نسخهای از اون رو توی ذ…
👍2
تا حالا شده بعد از جدایی، ذهنت مدام برگرده به لحظههای خوب رابطه؟ اون روزهایی که با هم خندیدین، پیامهای عاشقانه، آغوشها، سفرها و لحظههایی که احساس میکردی چقدر خوشبختی… اما عجیب اینجاست که وقتی توی رابطه بودی، چقدر از رفتارهاش ناراحت بودی! چرا بعد از جدایی، خوبیها پررنگتر میشن؟ چون ذهن ما بعد از فقدان، ممکنه برای حفظ پیوند عاطفی، بیشتر به خاطرات شیرین برگرده. گاهی هم دلتنگی باعث میشه قسمتهای دردناک رابطه رو م…
❤3👍2
آدمی هستی که به خاطراتت فکر میکنی ؟ مخصوصا خاطرات خوب وقتی دیگه نمیتونی تجربشون کنی ؟
👍5
✨ وقتی موانع و باورهای محدودکننده مالی پاکسازی میشن، گاهی نتایجی فراتر از انتظار اتفاق میافته! این تجربه، نتیجه انجام پاکسازی و ایموشنکد برای رفع موانع مالیه. اگر تو هم احساس میکنی در مسیر مالی زندگیت گرهها و محدودیتهایی داری، برای شروع پاکسازی و بررسی شرایطت پیام بده. 💚 @daryaa24
❤5
💔 میدونی این رابطه مناسب تو نیست، اما هنوز دلت میخوادش؟ شاید هنوز به امید تغییر، انتخاب شدن یا آیندهای که باهاش تصور کردی، چسبیدی… 🎧 توی این ویس EFT با این کشش و احساسات پشتش همراه میشیم؛ بدون اینکه مجبور باشیم خودمون رو به نخواستنش وادار کنیم. قبل و بعد از تمرین، شدت احساست رو از ۰ تا ۱۰ بسنج و همزمان با ویس ضربه بزن. 🤍
❤5
یک سؤال سخت: واقعاً خودِ اون آدم رو میخوای؟ یا چیزی که فکر میکنی با اون به دست میاری؟ گاهی پشتِ «من فقط خودش رو میخوام» چیزهای دیگهای پنهانه: «میخوام بالاخره منو انتخاب کنه.» «میخوام ثابت بشه ارزش دوست داشته شدن دارم.» «میخوام این داستان یه پایان خوب داشته باشه.» «میخوام اون چیزی بشه که همیشه آرزو داشتم.» «میخوام این بار کسی بمونه.» و اینجاست که ممکنه ما فقط دلتنگ یک آدم نباشیم؛ دلتنگ یک احساس باشیم …
❤6👍3
گاهی کاملاً میدونیم یک رابطه برای ما مناسب نیست؛ میدونیم آرامش نداریم، امنیت نداریم، طرف مقابلمون چیزی که میخوایم رو نمیده… اما باز دلمون همون آدم رو میخواد. 🫠 چرا؟ چون خواستنِ یک نفر همیشه به معنی مناسب بودنش نیست. ممکنه دلتنگِ خودش نباشی؛ دلتنگِ حسی باشی که کنارش داشتی. ممکنه عاشق رابطه نباشی؛ عاشقِ امیدی باشی که شاید این بار درست بشه. ممکنه خودِ آدم رو نخواهی؛ بلکه بخوای بالاخره از طرف او انتخاب بشی. پ…
👍6
💔 چرا نمیتونیم از کسی که رفته دل بکنیم؟ گاهی چیزی که نمیتونیم رها کنیم، فقط خودِ آدم نیست؛ امید به برگشتنش، خاطرات، حس دوستداشتنی بودن یا آیندهایه که باهاش تصور کرده بودیم. 🎧 توی این ویس با EFT قراره با همین احساس کار کنیم و ببینیم شدت اون قبل و بعد از تمرین چقدر تغییر میکنه. قبل از شروع عددت رو از ۰ تا ۱۰ مشخص کن و بعد از تمرین دوباره اندازه بگیر. قبل: ؟ / ۱۰ بعد: ؟ / ۱۰ همزمان با ویس ضربه بزن و فقط گوش نده. 🤍…
❤7
یعنی واقعا طرفدار ویس های که درمانی هستن برا همچین موضوعات مهمی انقد کمه 💔🌹
❤16
موافقید ؟؟ ری اکشن بدید تمرین ای اف تی زودتر ضبط کنم
❤13👍9
گاهی فکر میکنیم نمیتونیم آدم رو رها کنیم... اما اگر دقیقتر نگاه کنیم، ممکنه چیزی که نگهمون داشته اینها باشه: 🖤 امید به برگشتنش 🖤 نیاز به اینکه دوباره انتخابمون کنه 🖤 خاطرات خوب 🖤 آیندهای که قرار بود باهاش داشته باشیم 🖤 ترس از اینکه دیگه کسی مثل اون پیدا نشه 🖤 نیاز به گرفتن یک عذرخواهی یا توضیح 🖤 یا حتی میل به اینکه بفهمه چه چیزی رو از دست داده برای همین ممکنه بگیم: «من فقط خودشو میخوام.» اما اگر از خودت بپ…
❤5👍4
Showing the 12 most recent of 45 posts we hold for @EFTtrapy. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
We recorded 7 posts on @EFTtrapy as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
Named by 48 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
@EFTtrapy named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 7 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 9 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“درمان رابطه با EFT” (@EFTtrapy), 6,806 subscribers as measured 9 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/EFTtrapy.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.