Channel
@hellen_lebedeva
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
221subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001986033631 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @hellen_lebedeva |
| Description | Мамам, которые устали кричать, а потом корить себя. Работаю с вашим состоянием и навыками, чтобы помочь восстановить силы и найти общий язык с ребёнком. Клиенты замечают, как возвращаются спокойные реакции и тепло в общении. Читайте и пробуйте. |
| Created | Between 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/hellen_lebedeva |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 10:33 | 221 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 13:04 | 221 | first reading |
13 posts held, back to 5 July 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 1 pageof 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 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 13 (5 July 2026 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 178 |
| Reactions total | 13 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 10:33 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 8 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Measured directly from 2 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
30 reactions across 10 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 46.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 14 | 46.7% | |
| 🔥 | 5 | 16.7% | |
| 👍 | 4 | 13.3% | |
| 🙏 | 3 | 10.0% | |
| 💯 | 2 | 6.67% | |
| custom 5362012836488825443 | 1 | 3.33% | |
| 🥰 | 1 | 3.33% |
Custom emoji. One row above is a Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The count beside it isTelegram’s.
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 11 of the 13 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 30reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 13 most recent posts we hold, published 5 July 2026 to 6 August 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.
Любое отношение матери и ребёнка держится на двух разных иерархиях, которые всё время путаются. Первая — бытовая, возрастная (конъюнктурная). Младенец без мамы не выживет, это чистая физика. Мама без младенца — вполне. Но спустя много лет роли могут незаметно поменяться, и теперь уже постаревшая мать зависит от дочери, как та когда-то зависела от неё. Это конъюнктура, она подвижна. Но есть и вторая иерархия, структ…
❤4🔥2
Video, posted without a caption
💯2🔥1
Парадокс сопротивления в терапии: почему перед самой важной сессией хочется всё бросить? Вы наверняка замечали этот странный феномен: вы движетесь к чему-то очень значимому, важному и потенциально целительному, как вдруг… всё начинает рушиться. Вы начинаете пропускать встречи под благовидными предлогами, забывать об оплате, обесценивать происходящее или чувствовать непреодолимое желание закончить терапию. Это не сл…
Юлия Пирумова вчера написала пост на тему видео выше. А я вот так прокомментировала: "Для меня это ощущается как отсутствие места для благодарности внутри психической реальности, которая полностью заполнена негативными эмоциями к родителям, как переполненный сосуд. И в такой сосуд невозможно налить что-то еще, пока не выльешь то, что уже есть. Т.е. пока не выразишь хотя бы какую-то часть этих застрявших эмоций. При …
🙏2❤1
Video, posted without a caption
"Звучит как анекдот: "У меня нет проблем, я хожу к психологу уже 8 лет". Если человек ходит к психологу, то у него ТОЧНО есть проблемы!" Услышала это мнение вчера и хочу высказаться. У меня подгарает.😁 Да, я согласна, что звучит странно, но не потому, что человек ходит к психологу. Хотя у меня и к психологу в этом случае вопросики. Что интересно он делает такого, что клиент так искренне уверен в отсутствии у себя п…
🔥1
Как соцсети и новости поднимают тревогу, даже если вы это не планировали Всегда замечаю действие большого количества новостей на себе: достаточно увидеть что-то триггерное – и состояние меняется. Появляется напряжение, раздражение или тяжесть. И это вполне естественная реакция нервной системы. Триггеры у всех разные: ● У кого-то это новости про военные действия - после них появляется апатия и ощущение бессмы…
❤1👍1custom 53620128364888254431
Какая категория новостей или контента тревожит вас больше всего?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Voice message, posted without a caption
🙏1
Подкаст о том, как можно помочь ребенку преодолеть скуку через разговор о его состоянии на личном примере с моей дочкой.
❤1
Слишком простой на первый взгляд способ снять тревогу Когда нас накрывает в непонятной ситуации, нам хочется быстро что-то с этим сделать, и мы ищем техники, схемы, быстрые решения, чтобы сразу отпустило. Желательно с ощущением, что вы сделали что-то серьёзное. Почти как «проработали себя». Есть внутреннее ожидание, что должно быть сложно: через усилие, через преодоление. Как будто, чем сложнее путь, тем реальнее р…
❤4👍1🔥1
«...иллюзии художника погружают зрителей и слушателей в мягкий наркоз, который отодвигает на некоторое время трудности жизни и даёт силы для поддержания надежды». З. Фрейд
👍2
Showing the 12 most recent of 13 posts we hold for @hellen_lebedeva. 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.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Какая категория новостей или контента тревожит вас больше всего?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 13 most recent posts we hold, published 5 July 2026 to 6 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
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.
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 8 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ТОЧКА ОПОРЫ” (@hellen_lebedeva), 221 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/hellen_lebedeva.
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.