What is the difference between micro current and PEMF?
The simplest and most practical answer is that magnetic pulses work much better (by a factor of 1,000 or more) than microcurrent when stimulating living tissues. Magnetic pulses deliver much more consistent stimulation to much larger areas of tissue much more consistently than microcurrent possibly can.
More technical details:
Electromagnetism is a single force in nature that combines electricity and magnetism, these two aspects interact and change from one to the other and back, and depending on exactly how it is expressed in nature, people can easily confuse the two. But this does not mean that at any moment, electricity is the same thing as magnetism. Really, to understand this, you need several years of intensive study. Unfortunately this is not one of those things you can pick up on a quick google search or wikipedia.
So, we would need to look at it in a very simplified way. Maybe this will clarify it for you:
Microcurrent is electricity. It needs to be conducted, along something like a wire, and it is blocked by insulators like glass, plastic, and dry skin. Electricity can conduct through wet living tissues, but it takes a complex path of least resistance.
Magnetism behaves quite differently: it can easily pass through most insulators like dry skin, but when passing through conductors, if the magnetism changes, the conductor will resist that change in magnetism by generating what is known as an eddy current. Here are some pictures that might help you visualize it:
Microcurrent stimulators may or may not reach the tissues you want because they wander around based on the conductance of the tissues. Magnetic fields pretty much penetrate all of the tissues where they can reach, so when you change the magnetic field (a magnetic pulse is a changing magnetic field), it induces electric fields everywhere within the magnetic field, thus stimulating all of the tissues you are targeting.
So, if you calculate it, magnetic pulses are about 1,000 to 10,000 times more efficient at delivering microcurrents than the simple application of direct microcurrent.
9 Likes
Hi Bob,
Thanks so much for your detailed response. I’ve just found out about micro current and made an investment in a micro current device. I’ve had some reduction of pain in the knee osteoarthritis I have but not as much as I was expecting.
I’m 80 years old. X-rays show a bone on bone condition. What improvement in pain and cartilage rejuvenation can I expect to see if I had your PEMF equipment?
I’m on a keto diet, take supplements in the form of dried herbs, seaweeds, mushrooms and spices daily and I’m willing to make any necessary changes. I don’t want knee replacement surgery!
Any suggestions would be grateful appreciated.
Thanks again,
Marion Ellner
Microcurrent and PEMF seem, in my scientific opinion, to put cells and tissues into a state where they are better able to heal and regenerate. But this is a lengthy process, it is not something that is forced or quick. You might expect to note that once your tissues readjust, the problem seems to slowly get better over time instead of slowly getting worse. The process can take many months or longer, but in my experience it is far better to have things getting better slowly than to have them slowly deteriorating.
That being said, beyond a certain point it appears that getting major joints to begin to regenerate becomes less possible. I know this from anecdotal reports and from personal experience, but there is nothing really relevant in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. In my case, I started using PEMF on my right hip promptly, and it seems to have recovered nicely and has not caused me a problem for more than a decade. I waited too long to do the same for my left hip (about 2 years, to try my gen 6.0 ICES-PEMF on it which I was developing at that time), but the delay was too long, and I was not able to recover with ICES-PEMF, and eventually had to have the left hip replaced.
Also, some badly damaged joints are supported partly by inflammation, so when PEMF reduces that inflammation, the joint can become more unstable and more easily injured. You need to consider that if it happens to you. Your joint anatomy may readjust to the reduced swelling, or it may not. I think individual people vary, so you need to consider this when trying PEMF for a major joint.
Lessons learned:
1 - You can slow or maybe even reverse the degeneration in major joints
but…
2- Do not wait to long to try it
3- Do not expect miracles
4- Be persistent, but not too aggressive
5- Some badly damaged joints are supported partly by inflammation, so be very careful not to risk additional damage or injury.
3 Likes
Marion,
You may want to consider Shockwave Therapy, or ESWT. Do a search and see what you think, also to find out if there is anyone in your area that offers it. It has saved people from hip replacements and knee replacements among many other things.
/Jon
Hi Bob,
When I bought the micro current device I also bought a PEMF pad. It’s
6” X 12” and has 3 Tesla coils. I have no idea what wave it’s functioning on. I used it at 24.30 Hz for one hour with the pad under my knees. I felt a little queasy afterwards and didn’t treat again until today.
I wasn’t able to get off of the bed without crutches before I started micro current treatments. Now I can walk, in the morning without crutches and in practically no pain. So I’m feeling positive about the treatments.
Hi Jon,
Thanks for your suggestions. I live in Bali Indonesia. It’s difficult to find most treatments that are not mainstream. I will look into the treatments you suggested.
I’m trying to buy procaine but can’t find it without an antibiotic in it. I’d like to do prolotherapy. An injection of procaine and ozone into the knee. Procaine is a good for cell proliferation in combination with ozone.
Nissan again,
Marion
Thanks again… spell check!
It sounds like you are more sensitive to PEMF than the average person. So I think it is likely you would be more responsive to micro-current as well. Basically they are the same physical mechanism when you get down to details, but micro-current will be more hit-or-miss, and have variable effects due to changes in skin resistance.
1 Like
Thanks again for your help. It’s very much appreciated.
Warm regards,
Marion
Hi Marion,
Keep in mind that that the body cannot possibly replace nothing with something…I’m referring-to collagen production and specifically ascorbates, vitamin C and perhaps some bio-flavinoids along with PEMF…
You’ll need a properly buffered product, and, as an answer to prayer I found Bronson non-acidic Vitamin C powder. Almost tasteless, I even mix it in water. In times past I could cure almost any bodily ailment by chugging 5 grams of C in OJ or whatever. Now 72 and diabetic, that no-longer works. Seems the old body cannot process highly-acidic C and the sugar. I now take 1/2 teaspoon daily (2 grams).
Best To You,
Riccaro
JonN,
I am interested in purchasing a shockwave machine for craniocervical instability. What are your thoughts on shockwave for ligaments that are in such a sensitive area?
Do you have direct experience with shockwave?
Caroline
Caroline,
Shockwave machines tend to cost $75,000 and up. Also, there is some skill and technique that goes with using them. Also the number of treatments needed is often quite low. Since posting about this I have had a series of 5 treatments. One area I got treated was a knee reconstruction from an injury. The treatment was quite painful, which is an indicator that this is an area in need of the treatment and benefiting from it. Another area was cervical spine. This area was not painful at all to treat and I don’t know in either case if there was benefit. The third area was my ear where an explosion a couple of years ago caused hearing damage. This area was treated with a high power laser instead of the shockwave and I have not been able to identify a benefit. I put A9 coils over each ear 24X7 for several months after the damage. At first it seemed like there was quick progress, then progress stopped. It is generally considered not possible to repair hearing damage after this long, but my thought is that if stem cells in the area are so inclined then anything is possible. I am now trying X39 patches, which have been clinically shown to boost endogenous stem cell activity. I’m also using the PEMF over the ears again while I sleep. Fortunately the clicking does not bother me.
/Jon
1 Like
I used microcurrent for years prior to learning about PEMF.
I used weak machines, so keep that in mind.
It’s not as strong as M1 on 1.
But at the same time the results I got with it was what motivated me to try both photobiomodulation and PEMF. I have stopped using microcurrent and continued the other two.
The electrodes were a pain to deal with. Especially in the heat. I had a tiny machine on my back while going shopping. It slid down my back because of the sweat. I have found it easier to deal with PEMF, though there are microcurrent machines that don’t use stick on electrodes.
1 Like
Hello @Bob,
as I understand micro-current applications use a frequency-pair for different syndromes or diseases. The frequency are quite different and go up (at least) to the hundreds. Its reminds me on RIF(ing), where hundreds of different frequency patterns up to 1000000 Hz are proposed (see for example “Frequencies of Rifing”, Marcello Allegretti).
Q: Could you elaborate why Micro-Current (and RIFE) proponents seem to put so much Focus on frequency (and may be not the wave form)?
I wonder: Is there maybe something to learn or adapt in regard of frequencies? iMRS for example has the Solfeggio-frequency range integrated in a extra program - and yes, I believe its more of an marketing thingy. Still, used as tuning forks or sound tubes there may be “anecdotal evidence” of some positive effect. I for example like my 136,10 Hz Steel and Al-Forks (Earth tone, Om) very much. Also 78 Hz (“Ozone”) and the harmonic spectrum (256-512 Hz)
Best,
Hans
To answer your direct question: I think marketers focus on frequencies because the word “frequency” is much more marketable than the words “wave form”. As a practical matter, frequencies are much easier to understand and quantify than “wave form”. And there is a mystical attraction to vibrations and frequencies.
My opinion is that there definitely is something to “frequencies” as they relate to health (and basic physiologic function). Scientific papers prove this conclusively. However, I think this is the case only for a few specific afflictions, and does not generalize into “Frequency A treats or cures Affliction B”.
Marketers in this area have so deeply polluted the discussion with garbled pseudo-science nonsense that it would take a lifetime to untangle it. Sadly this area is so deeply fraught with marketing fraud that it is impossible to say much about it. I already have more than my fair share of life-long intractable academic career destroying problems to solve. So, I would leave it to two practical approaches:
1- If it works for you, whatever it is, then stick with it.
2- If someone is trying to sell a frequency to you (or a series of ten very precise frequencies for example), then demand proof. (not just hand-waiving and “testimonials”, real proof)
Why am I doubtful? I did the math.
I will leave it at this:
Suppose you were developing a technology that applied a series of 10 different frequencies in sequence to a particular pathogen or toxin to neutralize it.
Calculate based on the stated precision of +/- 1 Hz, in a range spanning 100 kHz
Assume, as stated, that you must use the stated sequence of precise frequencies to destroy or disable the pathogen/toxin.
Calculate that these claims cover 350 pathogens/toxins/afflictions.
Now, assume in the wildest optimistic case that you test each and every one of the above combinations to the stated precision for each of the 350 conditions.
Assume you have superhuman powers, can work 24 hours per day, and that you are immortal, and have had a perfect testing laboratory at your disposal since the first moment of the existence of our universe.
Now assume that you are such a spectacularly skilled scientist, with infinite resources and luck, that you can test and verify (or exclude) every possible frequency in the above stated technology in only 1 minute for each.
Question: How long would it take you to determine the ten precise frequencies for each of the 350 conditions if you were able to show a reliable response with only 1 minute of testing at each of the necessary combinations?
Answer: back of the envelope, this would take you, a supreme, perfect, immortal scientist, 47 times the life of the known universe to develop this set of magical frequencies.
Somehow, I have doubts…
2 Likes
Thank you for your answer. Your point is compatible with my reasoning and good, that you explain it in that manner. Its tempting to elieve “someone figured it out”.
Based on that reasoning all complex lists of frequencies, especially when they are “very exact”, like the thousands of proposed Rife-Frequencies with seemingly no connection to each other, are with high probability nonsense. Maybe marketing-bohoo to push the sales of Spooky2 & the like.
Not that frequencies, like music, tuning forks, brainwave entrainment do not work. There are frequencies “that work”, but is preposterous to claim having figured out 8000 complex sets of it.
Also to propose a special frequency for and illness associated with an RNA-Virus that, based on the theory, is a quasi-species and ever changing due to the nature of RNA transcription is totally without logic, even if one presumes that proposed RNA-Viruses are replication competent in any relevant manner.
I find it telling that basically most RIFE, PEMF, LLLT-company do not release specs of their technology and a real scientific primer or reasoning on what grounds and assumptions their device was build.
But “hope-ium” sells…
Best,
Hans
I agree with you on all points:
The temptation is to think someone has worked it all out. But simple math suggests this is not possible.
Some applications of various frequencies definitely do work, but I think not like the energy medicine charlatans claim.
And definitely you are correct to point out that one specific frequency (usually claimed to be “resonant”) for a molecule that changes and evolves, this is nonsense. And it is also orders of magnitude off for a structure of that size… and the dimensional analysis and dimensionless numbers characteristic at that scale makes such an assertion rather silly.
And finally, I know for a fact that many companies that market energy medicine/Rife/PEMF devices have no Idea how their own products work. I know this with 100% certainty because several of them have asked me confidentially to help them figure out their own products, which typically are pirated versions of a cloned device from many decades ago.
This is not to say that some of these do not work. I merely assert that they are fraudulently marketed by people who do not understand what they are selling.
2 Likes
My reasoning is build,up, to large parts at least, based on lots of your articles and videos I’ve read and listened to over the years.
For an Blog-Article I wrote a summarized “warning”, which may be interesting here. Here is the deepl.com translation to English:
"It is mathematically implausible that “someone” has discovered, for example, 8000 frequency series, possibly consisting of 3-10 individual frequencies, and tested their effect on several people, especially if they are supposed to be suitable for the treatment of hundreds of symptoms. This also includes the reproducible construction of a technical device, whether with magnetic coils, plasma tubes or alleged scalar wave antennas.
This “assumption” or working hypothesis is circulating, for example, with the numerous RIFE and Spooky2 devices. It may be that some of these devices help with some things because they do “something”, hit the frequencies “somehow” and in some cases biologically effective windows. But it may also be that these devices do nothing or even cause harm that has a short-term positive effect (ala Nrf2 activation). Of course, it is tempting to believe miraculous stories or that “some genius” has “figured it all out”, possibly by accident. However, the reality, especially when money is involved, and also the probability that something like this has happened, is mathematically or statistically much lower than winning the lottery.
Best,
Hans
2 Likes
Hi Hans,
Just for the sake of brevity I did not mention this, but to add to the improbability, and most people would not know this unless they have done biological dose-response experiments: The reality is that for each individual frequency/cell type/disease state, of which there will be many millions of combinations, the act of setting up each experiment, with a biological sample, determining an appropriate biomarker, and all of the other many details that are involved, it is typical for each assessment of this type to take many hours as a minimum, but not unusual to take weeks, months, or even years to get a good measurement. So assuming that each of these tests could be done in “one minute” is an exercise in extreme absurdity, but I stated it this way to make a point.
Both the simple math and the practical reality of biological experiments makes such claims as these utterly impossible.
But as I said earlier, that is not to say that these devices do not work. To the contrary, I am confident that some of them do have biological benefit. But their working is not constrained to the claimed scope nor precision stated. The analogy I use is crude, but helpful.
A charlatan sells what is claimed to be the world’s best door-stop.
He claims that his works best because it is exactly 2.54379 kg, about the same precision as some RIFE devices claim for their “frequencies”.
When challenged, the charlatan angrily responds that he has many testimonials from customers who use his “optimal” door-stop. Clearly it works. But he misses the point that door-stops work over a very wide range of masses, probably about 0.5 to 5 kg, or even wider, to accommodate doors of different size, etc. The stated importance of the precision of the mass, the fact that it is somehow special, is the fraud. The suggestion is that not just any reasonably sized brick or rock would do the job. No, it has to be special, and therefore expensive.
When I hear almost any of the product claims made by the universe of marketers of these kinds of devices, I think it is easily possible to see through their claims with this sort of clarity.
1 Like