Electromedicine Safety Concerns
To be 'electrocuted' takes hundreds times more electricity than this. The following chart clarifies it all.
DIRECT CURRENT (DC)
60 Hz AC 10 kHz AC
For further reading take a look at:
How electricity harms microbes but not human cells :
Human cells, including blood cells, have an outer protective lipid bilayer which is an oil, fat, or wax which makes the cells insulated to electric current flow. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid) But electrical current can still flow in a human body due to the fact that all human tissue, made up of cells, is bathed in lymph and blood which are both mostly water with electrolytes (mostly salt) making them very conductive to electric current. The electricity flows mostly around the human cells and through the blood and lymph. But most bacteria and viruses and fungi have a cell wall that is not made of lipids which means they have no protection against electricity. So electric current applied to a human can enter and negatively affect the microbes therein while leaving the human cells alone. (see http://tami-port.suite101.com/structural-differences-of-bacteria-and-viruses-a111903)
Also, after 2 months of using blood electrification, my blood was analyzed under a microscope and the doctor said it was some of the healthiest blood he had ever seen. Robert Beck has told of a blood analysis that revealed that blood normally stays alive for 4 days in a microscope slide, but will last for one month if taken from someone who has undergone blood electrification treatment!
Does applied electricity interfere with the electrical impulses of the nervous system? No. That is because the nerve sheaths are electrically insulating. So all externally applied electricity flows around the nerves instead of penetrating them and affecting nerve impulses. The only reason a TENS device can cause muscle twitching is because the electrical current is strong enough to directly cause muscle contractions.
Does applied electricity interfere with the normal functioning of the heart? At the low levels of electrical current used by my devices you would have to apply the electricity directly to the heart (electrodes fore and aft of the heart) and turn the current up (on the Microbe Electrifier and DC Electrifier) to uncomfortable levels. I have used my Extreme Zapper on my heart, when I thought I had an infection there, with no bad after effects.
Does doing blood
electrification from wrist to wrist pose any danger to the heart? No.
Using the Microbe Electrifier with electrodes on the wrist of the left
and right arms does not put any current through the heart
although it flows through the aorta arch which is just a few
centimeters from the heart. Current flows on a path of least resistance
and therefore stays in the bloodstream without traveling off the path.
I have been doing wrist-to-wrist blood electrification for many years
now and still have a good heart and am able to participate in sports.
The current from these devices is actually less than the AMA approved TENS units, and the Pulser delivers only momentary pulses of a magnetic strength that is less than that of MRI (Magnetic Nuclear Resonance Imaging) body scanners. Also please consider the following AMA approved units which use electricity on the body: Muscle stimulators relieve pain, reduce spasms and edema, tonify weak muscles, and assist the healing process, run at from 1 to 130 Hz. TENS units are used to block pain run at about 80 to 90 Hz. Interferential Therapy units are a type of muscle stimulator run at 3000 to 4000 Hz. Bio Feedback instruments used to modify behavior and retrain the nervous and muscular systems, run from below 1Hz to about 40 Hz. Bone Growth Stimulators, used to heal broken bones, run at various frequencies. Deep Brain Stimulators, which use implanted electrodes to impart electrical pulses, run from between 120 and 160 Hz directly to the brain to control involuntary muscular tremors in Parkinson's disease. Heart Pacemakers use an electrical impulse to regulate the hearts rhythm.
Recent studies have focused on
or not prolonged daily exposure to oscillating magnetic
(electric) fields from the electrical power companies transformers
(within a certain distance from the house) have caused or influenced
the creation of cancer in humans. There are reports supporting both
sides of this discussion. For an overview please read Nonionizing
electromagnetic fields and cancer: a review.
But this is different from what your body will be exposed to with these
machines of BioElectric. The only device I sell that produces an
oscillating magnetic field is the OMF Generator which is actually
destructive to cancer cells due to its high frequency (7,000 hertz vrs
the low frequency of 60 hertz of power lines) and intense magnetic
field. Please read the information below on microcurrent therapy and
how it stimulates healing in the body. Also read the online pdf on The
basis for microcurrent electrical therapy in conventional medical
practice from the Journal of Advancement in Medicine, 8(2):107-120,
I really believe that using these devices as recommended poses no health threat, only health benefit. I am living proof of that since I have done blood electrification (wrist-to-wrist) almost every day since 1996. It gives me energy and keeps my blood clean from pathogens. At 52 I am still active in sports and intend to remain so for many years with the help of these devices.
Scientific Committee On
Emerging And Newly Identified Health Risks
MicroCurrent Therapy is a form of electric medicine used to naturally and safely stimulate cell growth, renewal and healing. It uses extremely low amounts of electricity measured in millionths of an Amp that most people can hardly feel.
To give you an idea of exactly how low this is, it would take one million times the units of electricity used in this therapy to light up a one watt light bulb. As most light bulbs used in the home are 60 watts, you would need to multiply this low level of electricity by sixty million times to light up an everyday household bulb.
Sick cells are merely like discharged cells: This may be an oversimplification, but is the best way to explain the technology of MicroCurrent Therapy in lay person terms. Scientists have found that different microcurrent frequencies have different effects meaning this revolutionary medicine contains infinite applications and possibilities, especially in the areas of healthy new cell renewal and stimulation. The applications of MicroCurrent Therapy appear to be endless!
MicroCurrent Therapy – what is it and how does it work
In order to understand how MicroCurrent Therapy is able to achieve such amazing results, we need to explain a bit about how cells get their energy. In layman’s terms, here goes…..
Cell energy – the most important factor in keeping the body well
The cell is the basic component of all living things and they work ceaselessly to nourish, repair, and renew themselves. This ongoing activity, called "cell metabolism", requires energy which is provided by a substance created within the cell called ATP (adenosine-triphosphate).
Cell metabolism generates wastes that the body must get rid of. As well as eliminating these worn-out or dead cells, the body also needs to get rid of undigested or partially digested foods, chemicals taken in from water, cigarette smoking, alcohol and caffeine, the environment, and medications.
When waste products build up, they impede microcirculation to cells and tissues, decreasing the amount of oxygen and nutrients carried to the cells which, in turn, slows cellular activity reducing the amount of wastes eliminated from the cells. As a result, even more waste builds up so the cells function even less. This vicious cycle continues and can eventually lead to very serious health problems and, in severe cases, even death.
Cells and microcurrents
One of the key mechanisms within the cell that eliminates the waste is the “Sodium-Potassium Pump”. This keeps the cell in balance by pumping excess Sodium out of the cell and bringing Potassium into the cell. This pumping action needs a minute amount of electricity which can be measured in microamps (a millionth of an Amp).
When a cell does not function properly it does not generate sufficient electricity for the pump to work – a bit like a torch battery that only has enough energy to make the bulb glow rather than give off a bright beam of light!
In effect, MicroCurrent Therapy is able to ‘jump-start’ the cell by giving it the amount of energy needed to start functioning at the correct level. It should be stressed that the levels of current required are so small that they can not be felt.
As a result of adding low (microamp) levels of electric current, MicroCurrent Therapy mimics the body's own electrical impulses (also in microamps) and can therefore help the body recuperate, promote pain relief, relax muscles, dissolve scar tissue and improve healing, all at greatly accelerated rates. In fact, animal experiments have shown that these benefits can occur up to 5 times faster with MicroCurrent Therapy than in control subjects.
What’s more, once the body has been ‘recharged’ it is able to continue to work at the correct rate, so the ability of the body to repair itself continues long after the therapy session has finished.
An Introduction to Microcurrent Electrical Therapy (MET)
Joseph M. Mercola and Daniel L. Kirsch (1995) coined the term “microcurrent electrical therapy” (MET) to define a new form of electromedical intervention using biocompatible waveforms.
Patrick DeBock (2000), a physiotherapist at the University of Antwerp in Belgium, recently compared MET with TENS based on the Eight Parameter Law which covers every possible influence in electrotherapy.
In his conclusion, DeBock states, “MET has a completely different mechanism, which at this time is not fully understood, but works on a cellular level…It looks as if TENS is going to lose this competition…MET will, in most cases, be much more satisfying than TENS because of the longer lasting and more intense effects.”
A growing body of research shows the effectiveness of MET to do more than control pain. It can actually accelerate and even induce healing. When a wound is dry, its bioelectric current flow is shut off. Eaglstein and Mertz (1978) have shown moist wounds to resurface up to 40% faster than air-exposed wounds. Falanga (1988) found that certain types of occlusive dressings, like Duoderm, accelerate the healing of wounds. It is probable that these dressings achieve their effects by promoting a moist environment (Kulig, Jarski, & Drewek, 1991). The moisture may allow endogenously produced current to flow more readily through the injury, and thus promote wound healing. Electrical stimulation of the wound has a similar effect, and also tends to increase the amount of growth factor receptors which increases the amount of collagen formation (Falanga, 1987).
Electricity was first used to treat surface wounds over 300 years ago when charged gold leaf was found to prevent smallpox scars (Robinson, 1925). There are several recent studies supporting the beneficial effects of treating wounds with an artificial current (Goldin, 1981; Jeran, 1987; Ieran, 1990; Mulder, 1991). Experimental animal wound models in the 1960’s demonstrated that electrical intervention results in accelerated healing with skin wounds resurfacing faster, and with stronger scar tissue formation (Carey & Lepley, 1962; Assimacopoulos, 1968).
Assimacopoulos (1968a) published the first human study using direct current for wound healing. He documented complete healing in three patients with chronic leg ulcers due to venous stasis after six weeks of electrical therapy. One year later Wolcott and Wheeler (1969) published the most frequently cited work in the history of electrical wound healing.. They used direct currents of 200-1,000 microamperes on 67 patients.
Gault and Gatesn (1976) repeated the Wolcott and Wheeler protocol on 76 additional patients with 106 ischemic skin ulcers. Rowley et al. (1974) studied a group of patients having 250 ischemic ulcers of various types. These included 14 symmetrical control ulcers. The electrically stimulated ulcers had a fourfold acceleration in healing response compared to the controls. Carley and Wainapel (1985) performed one of the only studies on this subject published with equal and randomized active and control groups. All of these studies documented significant accelerated healing from electrical stimulation.
One additional consistent observation in these studies was a reversal of contamination in the wounds. Wounds that were initially contaminated with Pseudomonas and/or Proteus were usually sterile after several days of MET. Other investigators have also noticed similar improvements and encourage the use of this therapy as the preferred treatment for indolent ulcers (Kaada, Flatheim, & Woie, 1991; Barron & Jacobson, 1985; Lundeberg, Eriksson, & Malm, 1992; Alvarez et al., 1983). Additionally, no significant adverse effects resulting from electrotherapy on wounds have been documented (Weiss, 1990). A review of the literature by Dayton and Palladino (1989) shows that MET is clearly an effective and safe supplement to the non-surgical management of recalcitrant leg ulcers.
Some of these studies used unipolar currents that were alternated between negative and positive based on various criteria. Some researchers initially used negative current to inhibit bacterial growth and then switched to positive current to promote healing. To date no study has compared this variable of MET. However, there is some compelling basic science research, and one animal study suggesting that a biphasic waveform, which provides both negative and positive current, may be better in that it both sterilizes the wound and promotes wound healing (Stromberg, 1988; Windsor, Lester, & Herring, 1993).
In the 1960’s Robert O. Becker (1985) demonstrated that electrical current is the trigger that stimulates healing, growth, and regeneration in all living organisms. He found that repair of injury occurs in response to signals that come from an electrical control system, and suggested that this system became less efficient as we age. Becker developed his theory of biological control systems based on concepts derived from physics, electronics, and biology. He postulated that the first living organisms must have been capable of self-repair, otherwise they never would have survived. The repair process requires a closed-loop system. A specific signal is generated, called the current of injury, which causes another signal to start repair. The injury signal gradually decreases over time with the repair process, until it finally stops when the repair is complete.
Such a primitive system does not require demonstrable consciousness or intelligence. In fact, many animals actually have a greater capacity for healing than humans. Science has amassed a vast amount of information on how the brain and nervous system work. Most of this research involves the action potential as the sole mechanism of the nerve impulse. This is a very sophisticated and complex system for the transfer of information. It is helpful to compare this conceptualized concept of the nervous system to a computer.
The fundamental signal in both the computer and the nervous system is a digital one. Both systems transfer information represented by the number of pulses per unit of time. Information is also coded according to where the pulses originate, where they go and whether or not there is more than one channel of pulses feeding into an area. All our senses (e.g., smell, taste, hearing, sight and touch) are based on this type of pulse system. Like a computer, the nervous system operates remarkably fast and can transfer large amounts of information as digital on and off data.
It is unlikely that the first living organisms had such a sophisticated system. Becker believes they must have had a much simpler mechanism for communicating information because they did not need to transmit large amounts of sophisticated data. Accordingly, they probably used an analog system. An analog system works by means of simple DC currents. Information in an analog system is represented by the strength of the current, its direction of flow, and slow wavelength variations in its strength. This is a much slower system than the digital model. However, the analog system is extremely precise and works well for its intended purpose.
Becker theorizes that primitive organisms used this analog type of data-transmission and control system for repair. He postulates that we still have this primitive nervous system in the perineural cells of the central nervous system. These cells comprise 90% of the nervous system.
The perineural cells have semiconductor properties that allow them to produce and transmit non-propagating DC signals. This system functions so vastly different from the “all or none” law of propagation of the nerve action potentials that Becker called this the fourth nervous system.
This analog system senses injury and controls repair. It controls the activity of cells by producing specific DC electrical environments in their vicinity. It also appears to be the primary primitive system in the brain, controlling the actions of the neurons in their generation and receipt of nerve impulses. Accordingly, as knowledge of this aspect of our nervous system is uncovered, another mystery of brain physiology may be explained, including the regulation of our consciousness and decision-making processes. Given this understanding, the application of the correct form of electrical intervention is a powerful tool for treating pain, initiating the endogenous mechanisms for healing, and altering states of consciousness.
Chang (1982) proposed another mechanism for MET. His research showed that microcurrent stimulation increased adenosine triphosphate (ATP) generation by almost 500%. Increasing the level of current to milliampere levels actually decreased the results. Microcurrent was also shown to enhance amino acid transport and protein synthesis in the treated area 30 to 40% above controls.
It would be helpful to review the cellular nature of an injury to fully appreciate the importance of Chang’s research. Becker (1985) has shown that trauma will affect the electrical potential of cells in damaged tissues. Initially the injured site has a much higher resistance than that of the surrounding tissue. Basic physics dictates that electricity tends to flow towards the path of least resistance. Therefore endogenous bioelectricity avoids areas of high resistance and takes the easiest path, generally around the injury. The decreased electrical flow through the injured area decreases the cellular capacitance ( Windsor, 1993). As a result, healing is actually impaired. This may be one of the reasons for inflammatory reactions. Pain, heat, swelling, and redness are the characteristics of inflamed tissues. Electricity flows more readily through these hot inflammatory fluids. The correct microcurrent application to an injured site augments the endogenous current flow.
This allows the traumatized area to regain its capacitance. The resistance of the injured tissue is then reduced allowing bioelectricity to enter the area to reestablish homeostasis. Therefore microcurrent electrical therapy can be viewed as a catalyst helpful in initiating and sustaining the numerous chemical and electrical reactions that occur in the healing process.
When a muscle experiences trauma it goes into spasm to protect itself. This decreases its blood supply reducing the amount of oxygen and nutrients that reach it. The decreased circulation causes an accumulation of metabolic waste products. This acts as noxious input resulting in pain.
Adenosine triphosphate is an essential factor in the healing process. Large amounts of ATP, the cell’s main energy source, are required to control primary functions such as the movement of vital minerals, like sodium, potassium, magnesium and calcium, into and out of the cell. It also sustains the movement of waste products out of the cell. Injured tissues are deficient in ATP. As MET restores circulation and replenishes ATP, nutrients can again flow into injured cells and waste products can flow out. This is necessary for the development of healthy tissues. As ATP provides the energy tissues require for building new proteins, it also increases protein synthesis and membrane transport of ions.
Chapter Reprint: A Practical Protocol
Electromedical Treatment of Pain in Pain Management: A Practical Guide
for Clinicians. by Daniel L. Kirsch, Ph.D., D.A.A.P.M., Mineral Wells,