Bryant Myers reviews Micropulse ASIS

[JillLash]

I recently listened to Bryant Myers YouTube channel and shared my experience with Micropulse. Below is his response. I wonder if Bob would care to remark regarding his statement here:

“Thanks for sharing your experience!

Everyone is different and not every device works for everyone, but I have found the iMRS works the best for the most people.

Pulse centers is too high of an intensity in my opinion but it is ok to use short term or intermittently, I just would not use ongoing. ICES is a great squarewave but the coils are small. I affiliate for a PEMF loop with just as good a squarewave as ICES but more energy and flux (which means a better slew rate deeper in the tissue) then ICES. But the ICES/ Micropulse is good and has an excellent squarewave with a really good slew rate (just not deeply penetrating). Healthyline ….”

[TajD]

flagging @Bob to see your post

[OptimalHealth]

note that he also has a financial interest in imrs. while Bob does too with his tech you’ll find it interesting that his most expensive brand new device is more than half the price of the cheapest USED imrs product on eBay that is not even calibrated.

Bob’s devices are not sold thru any mlm (multi level marketing) scheme. and if you wanted to have full body coverage, you could still purchase 2 c9s with fuller coverage and even frequency strength if that’s what you were after (but really don’t need for biological benefit).

it’s quite frustrating to see the hype in the market and overpriced, non scientific products out there that put out high intensity magnetic frequencies peddling the idea that more, stronger, higher is always better.

i hope you get to spend some time in the forum to read about other people’s experiences. pemf is still an area that is not yet fully understood by our current science, but if you’re going to find anyone in the industry who understands the application of this tech, you’ll find that Bob is the closest you’ll get to an expert in this field.

[Bob]

Thanks @TajD,
Overall I generally respect Bryant. I think some of his technical points are correct, and some are incorrect. For example, we do not use square waves in ICES-PEMF.

But I think he is correct about Pulsed … way too much power IMO, mostly wasted energy IMO.

Bryant is also correct: everyone responds differently.

Bottom line: you need to determine what works best for you as an individual.

[sbrink]

Hi, I use micropulse, there are several intensity levels that you can use, and I started initially with lower intensity. In the begining I did find a sensitivity in a couple of areas and did go lower and built up slowly. Now I do not have an issue anywhere. For lower body, particularly arthritis I need higher to manage pain. Upper body is where I started low and worked up to higher and have no problems at all.

[hcf]

I own iMRS (2000 and Prime Hybrid) and ICES M1 & B5. For me there is not even an argument of what works “really” and what “may” work “somehow” but “diffuse”.

With ICES I get direct, reproducible, consistent result with different people for the same condition. Nothing else stops migraines in a similar way. Fullstop.

iMRS Prime Hybrid is good for full body relaxation, especially with FIR. But you pay big $$$ for that. Local applicators may work or not, but you can’t walk around with them the whole day. I never got the patience for them, because I’m limited by the cables.

Best,
Hans

[gunplt]

@JillLash I like Bryant’s presentations, he is very clear and concise. I have been considering a mat for a while myself. However when I talked to Bryant I didn’t feel like I was getting a completely straight answer when asking him specifically why he recommended the IMRS line so much more than say the Vasindux mats, both of which he affiliates for. All he would say was that the signal was better in the IMRS line, but he didn’t elaborate beyond that. For me, at that price point, I would need more proof of effectiveness. I can be a bit of a tightwad, but when I know something delivers and it is what I need, then I am willing to spend. As such I have bought 5 ICES devices since March; 2 A9s, 2 P9s, and a C5. I plan to buy more because I always want a backup, and I keep giving mine to friends and family. For the prices they want for these mats, and knowing what I do about the components inside them and the costs of such, I have decided to experiment and build my own mat. So far I have only built 1 and it is a small mat I incorporated into a dog bed for my old cane corso. I will build another for our old ACD when I get back home. I’m traveling for work at the moment. I am not happy with the output of my current bed so while I am out on the road I am theorizing on various ways to improve the slew rate. It does still seem to help the dogs, but I know it could be much better, and this was just my first prototype, so I know I can make it better. I just need the time at home to do it. If I spend $400-$600 to build my own mat and it turns out to be reasonably effective then it will be worth the time and effort as opposed to paying thousands to buy one of dubious efficacy, because of how much I will learn along the way. Then I can use what I learned to build mats as gifts for family and friends in the future, and that way I can more easily afford to share this amazing gift of health Bob has worked so hard and long to bring to all of us…

[JILL]

Thank you for sharing this, “Gunpit.” I like how you are thinking. Please let us know how your experiments go and when you will be selling them

[hcf]

@gunplt

I didn’t feel like I was getting a completely straight answer when asking him specifically why he recommended the IMRS line so much more

If you take a look info the provisions paid by *** you may have “an” (not the) answer

I have been following Meyers a certain time and his book and infos where helpful for me to get an entry into PEMF. Without him I would not be where I am. But there are very strange holes in his presentations. For example: He points out that T/s (mag. flux density change) is fundamental important - but never stresses that topic later.
That is strange - or not. Then ICES is the only product to my knowledge with an high T/s rate. No other manufacturer even states that value or an estimate - only @Bob!

Best,
Hans

[JillLash]

That is an interesting point. I find in this day and age, that we have to be very careful adopting experts opinions, but I too, felt most comfortable with Bob’s approach and humble yet brilliant lessons on the subject. Now, I don’t understand every aspect of the technologies., and I do have to go on intuition which for the most part has been very reliable. I am glad to see that others like yourself here are checking on the experts and keeping the public informed.
I still did not understand why Pulse Centers equipment works the best for me overall given what Bob and other experts know. I am inclined to think that it has to do with individual nervous system “wiring & firing.” It’s quite common to hear one brand works for folks but not for others. Or why high or low intensity seems to work best for some but not others. I’m very curious about these individual differences so that someday we could know exactly which instruments, settings, and applications will help each individual best.

[Lineweaver]

I’ve been going through your papers trying to understand the concept of dB/dt. https://pemfbio.com/2024/10/24/slew-rate-and-ices/ Do your devices allow the user to test out different wave forms for the same problem area? Also, is there the option of reversing the polarity? One would think for clearing out inflammation, this would be a good plan. If stimulating the Vagus nerve or Quieting down the sciatic nerve, maybe note? I think it would have been really cool if you had gone plus or minus blue light for your seed germination studies with cryptochromes being antenna for magnetic fields and blue light. Just very intrigued by the versatility of your products and potential marketing opportunities.

[Bob]

Well, summarizing a quarter century of my work in a few words:

Different waveforms?: Not really. I spent decades and more money than I care to recall finding the best waveform, that uses the minimal amount of energy to get the greatest biological effects. That one waveform is built into ICES-PEMF products, and is not an adjustable variable. I explain this at length in many locations on this forum.

Reversing polarity?: Also discussed at several other locations on this forum:
This is possible, but takes some work since it is not really something that improves the actual performance or value of ICES-PEMF products IMO, so it is not a selectable, calibrated variable. But it is possible to do if it is important to you:
1 - choose a setting with a unipolar magnetic pulse mode
2 - measure the magnetic polarity
3 - flip the coils over to get the reverse magnetic polarity if that is the one you want.

+/- blue Light?: In science, it is essential to focus on a manageable number of variables under test. Test too many… and the significance of the results dwindle towards nothing.
But the seed germination experiments are well described in my corresponding papers. Several people on this forum have suggested other variables to test. I think they are all interesting, and anyone with an ICES-PEMF model B5 or C5 can repeat these experiments and test those variables. Please be sure to tell us what you find. I am excited to hear your results.