Flux Health Forum

Bioresonance and PEMF... is that the same?

Hi Dr. @Bob,

i came across this article and have also heard reference to bioresonance being used to help diagnose ailments/health issues.

here’s the article:
http://waverlywellness.co.uk/future-diagnosticism/

do you know if bioresonance the same thing as PEMF? if so, is it a big jump to use your tech for diagnostics as the article suggests?

I have very unpopular opinions on this topic, so be aware of that. If you really “want” to believe in this technology, it is probably best for you to stop reading here: .

Let’s start with some background: people bring up “bioresonance” every few years. It is usually packaged somewhat differently to make it look and feel fresh, but it is generally the same thing, year after year.

Several years ago I was asked by an alternative electro-magnetic marketing company in China to look into the technical details of the bioresonance device company they were going to purchase (one from Eastern Europe). I did a lot of technical digging and took some direct measurements. This company wanted to enter the (then) lucrative bioresonance market in China, which already had a well-established (and premium-priced) product in the Chinese market.

First conclusion: PEMF is very many different things (more diverse than the word “chemical”, so, I suppose at some level all chemicals are alike, but some are helpful and some are harmful and some are benign). That being said, bioresonance is not really PEMF by even my broadest definition, but then again, there is no formal definition for which part of the electro-magnetic spectrum is and is not PEMF. But also, bioresonance is not well-defined. So, it is hard to say what it is, and what it is not. Is “noise” the same as music? You could argue this for a lifetime and never get closer to the truth.

Bioresonance, my findings:
Based on my direct and detailed research, I concluded that all of the claims made by this company, and the device itself, were entirely fraudulent. The technology I was studying in detail was just generating plasma-arc EMI, basically the same electro-magnetic noise you can get by standing next to old industrial motors or poorly-maintained power substations. Their “scan” ended up being simple galvanic response (skin resistance).

The claims for the use of this technology were clearly fraudulent. I actually carried out a sting operation at a scientific meeting. I got a scan in a bioresonance vendor booth. It was extremely detailed, about 6 pages long with very attractive graphics. I then went elsewhere, but waited until the booth was switched to a new person to run the scans. I went for another free scan (about 40 minutes after the first). The results were entirely different.

To make sure they could not generate the same random information from my name, I registered the first time as “Bob”, and the second time as “Rob”.

Just as the results from my second scan came out, and I had a chance to review them, the first guy who scanned me saw me at the booth and ran over. He busted me for running side-by-side tests, and immediately began to justify the totally incompatible results as “normal human dynamic variation…”

I pointed out that if a person’s entire scan changed every few minutes, then how could they possibly use this system for clinical diagnostic purposes. He mumbled something about the results remaining consistent on the “quantum plane”, slapped his device into a hard case, and closed the booth as I sat there (during their peak sales time).

Earlier, a colleague of mine had posed as a clinician who wanted to use the device in their practice. The bioresonance marketer told them how the device could be programmed to make diagnoses based on what the clinic specialized in, and then to suggest products based on what the clinic offered in its product line. Then the bioresonance marketer went on to say how much their device had driven up sales for several large clinics by pushing their main product lines…

Anyway, you can probably see where this is going, and it just makes me angry again to recall the details. The story is much longer than this, but either you get my point by now, or you do not. More details and facts will not move the needle.

In summary, my opinion is that bioresonance is not the same as PEMF, it is fraught with fraudulent marketing claims, it may have some detectable biological benefit, but that is not well established, and it probably has no diagnostic value except as a marketing tool.

I wrote all of this up in a technical report to my colleagues in China, but they had $$ signs in their eyes. They bought the bioresonance company against my advice…

Shortly thereafter, the Chinese government clamped down on this sector of their alternative market in response to widespread reports from Chinese consumers of fraud. Everyone involved lost a lot of money and credibility. The people I was working with lost their jobs.

But keep in mind, I could be wrong about this technology.

1 Like