No, unfortunately I was not able to do that because of safety issues.
Recall: “Samsung Galaxy 7 battery explosions”
This is such a great article thank you for sharing. This type of exercise increases the nitric oxide in our bodies which is so vital to our heart health.
1 Like
I understand that higher power doesn’t make it any better and that using ICES technology, increased benefit come with more time rather than higher power.
I wonder if anyone tried to see if greater benefits with ICES technology can be achieved with more coils?
For example if with the M1 the maximum area of wide coverage would be 1 4x4 coil, but with a C5 we could use 4 x 4x4 which would increase the square inches of the area of the body exposed.
So although the power output per square inch may be the same from 1 4x4 coil with an M1 but by using a C5 we could increase square inch coverage over the body by a factor of 4, using 4 of the 4x4 coils.
I wonder if anyone tried an A B comparison, to see if healing might be greater, faster or more efficient using a C5 with 4 of the 4x4 coils rather than using an M1 which is only capable of only 1 4x4 coil?
I have spent many years and thousands of hours of time working on design optimization, and it is a very very technical subject to even discuss in its most basic form.
Briefly, if you use the device as it is designed, it works reliably well for a remarkable range of conditions. If you need to cover a larger area, you might need a C5 instead of an M1 or A9. That is one of the main reasons I designed the C5: it is electronically identical to four M1 units, all acting synchronously.
Any changes that we have tried (such as changing coil windings, etc.), or anyone else has tried, so far as I know, either have no detectable effect, or make the system work less well.
But testing for the subtle changes in biological effects of these sort of design changes is nearly impossible, since the differences in the effects are so small, they are almost always impossible to detect, usually impossible to measure, and take weeks to months to show up, if they ever do appear.
So, the short answer is YES, I have tried (and tried and tried and tried, for more than a decade) to make every improvement and tweak possible. I am pretty sure at this point that no obvious or easy changes would improve the effectiveness of the system by very much.
1 Like
Thank you very much for your reply.
I wasn’t asking about changing anything nor about perfecting anything in your product. I’m sure that it’s already as perfect as can be.
I was inquiring, not about the product it’s self but about it’s application, as to when it’s advantages to use your M1 perfect product with 1 4x4 coil as apposed to your other perfected product, the C5 with capability of 4 4x4 coils.
And your answer seems to be that based on your experience, you found that more coils may be advantages, when a larger area, needs to be covered.
One more thing which I was trying to understand:
You mention that the A9 Model uses ICES generation 5 Technology, whereas all your other current models use ICES generation 6 Technology.
What are the advantages of Gen 6, over Gen 5?
I definitely do not think ICES-PEMF is perfect. But I can assure you, I have tried everything I can think of to make it better. Some day, hopefully, someone smarter than I am will come along and make something much better.
The rest of this gets kind of technical, because the questions you are asking are fundamentally technical.
Using 2x2 coils with the M1 is not such a great Idea mostly because of the limitation of the camcorder battery. Here is why:
- The 2x2 coils are wound as a parallel pair of the standard single coils.
- This means their electrical load is double that of a standard pair of coils
- Therefore, at any particular setting, they will draw double the current
- DLI88 camcorder batteries have advantages and limitations
- they are standard, inexpensive, commonly available, and very light weight
- But they do not contain a lot of energy, and they have limited ability to generate current
- Therefore, they are very good for low-load portable applications, but not as good for high-load applications with much larger power sources
At double the load (with 2x2 coils), the camcorder battery in the M1 simply can not supply enough power to fully energize the double load, so you end up getting less power to each coil, so for some applications it will not work as well.
This is a necessary trade-off: some people need low weight and portability, others need more power but can do with less portability.
All practical things in life have this limitation: there are trade-offs. For example, you can design a vehicle to be a dump truck, or design it to be a sports car, but you can’t design it to be both at the same time. Everything in the real world is like this.
Unlike the model M1, the models C5 and B5 use different power sources. Either they are plugged in to a USB charger port, or they are using a much larger battery pack than the M1. This allows them to deliver full power to all of the coils in a 2x2 coil array. So, if you need to use a 2x2 coil array, then I suggest a model C5 or a B5, not an M1. There is another option though…
The Model A9 uses a 9V battery, which operates at a higher voltage than the DLI88 camcorder battery in an M1, and it is able to deliver more peak power, so it can handle a 2x2 coil array better than an M1. So, if you need portability and the use of a 2x2 coil array, I suggest using the model A9 instead of an M1.
Are more coils advantageous? That depends on the nature of your injury. Some injuries are deep and focal, and the best arrangement is usually stacked or opposite side coils. But some injuries respond best to side-by-side coil placement. And larger, very superficial injuries (such as large skin or rib cage injuries, for example) respond better to a larger array of coils (2x2), with less penetration. But the rules for this are not hard and fast, so for any particular injury you need to use good sense, try different coil types and placements, and observe what works best in any particular case.
ICES generation 5 (model A9) versus generation 6 (models M1, C5, and B5):
The main differences between gen 5 and gen 6 are the electrical circuit architecture. Generation 6 is more electrically efficient and more reliable (will probably last longer), and it is more flexible and programmable, with a more advanced internal microcontroller chip.
All of these improvements make the generation 6 devices better electronically, but that does not mean that they have better biological effects than a generation 5 product, such as the A9. As far as I can tell, their biological effects are essentially identical. But the improved circuitry of the generation 6 allows more programs to be stored and more pulse patterns to be selected, allows the use of OLED displays, and overall is about 15% more energy efficient than generation 5, which means that batteries will last longer. This all allows a 25% reduction in size and weight of the model M1 when compared with the model A9. And it allows the synchronization of multiple output channels, as on the models C5 and B5. And the generation 6 circuits work well on 5 volts (USB), whereas the generation 5 devices required 9 volts.
1 Like
Sorry I’ve been missing - trying to do some catch-up here now.
Just wanted to add that from a brain-health perspective, I prefer to have people start with less and only do more of anything if that seems needed.
When I was using ICES coils on people’s heads, I tended to use 4-5 on most people and that gave them a nice response without much in the way of headache or other less-desirable effects. Some people were very sensitive after concussion and needed even less. I didn’t find anyone who needed more. I generally positioned the 2x2 coils, doubled, on each side of the head, hoping the doubling gave more penetration.
On myself, I’ve used the single coils and the 2x2 on my forehead for migraines, set at 3 and found it useful for the headaches and for my aging brain. 
1 Like
This is very insightful, thanks. I really do find, at least 8 times out of ten, that less intensity is better when it comes to long-term PEMF benefits.
on the m1 frequency/pattern chart, i see an option for a9 and another for omni 8… if a9 uses omni 8, what is the a9 on the chart?
It is the slightly older original version of the A9 protocol, slightly different mode timing
@Bob, Bob would you have any suggestions for a tube or sleeve I could use to snake the wires through for the ICES coils. This might help extend the life of the coils.
we reinforce the coil cables as well as is possible. We have looked for (and paid quite a lot) to find other methods for coil reinforcement. But none of these turn out to be satisfactory (but they all cost a lot anyway). So far as I know, there is no tube, tape, or other thing that can be added to reinforce them further, or we would already have done so.
The coils can be made to be virtually indestructible, but they would weigh as much as a major appliance, cost as much, and be stiff as a telephone pole. If you take care not to pull too much or too often on the coils, we have basically reached a “design minima” for the cost, where the cost of replacement is less than the extended life adjusted for the cost of reinforcement.
The unfortunate fact is that anything you wear around in close proximity to your body will get a lot of wear and tear.
The best that can be done I think is to tape them up securely with a medical-grade cloth tape, being sure to secure enough of the length of the black vinyl cable to provide a strain relief. But this will not last forever.
1 Like
i tried your reinforced ones and they lasted a little longer… have you seen those strain boots they have for network wiring… maybe making a jacket with that might work
just thinking out loud. regardless, I’m still happy we have these devices in the first place👍🏽
yes, the question is: how do you get it on once the coil has been molded. It has been impossible to get good strain reliefs molded directly into the TPR mainly also because the TPR (rubber) does not bond well to the black cable (vinyl). Many engineers/companies have said “that’s easy to fix!”, but none have been able to actually do so on the coils. The plug end is no problem though.
hopefully i can come up with a feasible solution…
oo… I’ve heard of these, but have never tried. do you know anyone who has a 3d printer or has used one for prototyping. i just looked this up in searching for product design when curious about some ideas i had. talk about savings in prototyping products without paying exorbitant fees just to prototype!
It is not clear to me what your question is, but the short answer to what is an ostensibly simple question, but one that actually requires a lot of detailed mechanical engineering insight is:
Unless you REALLY know what you are doing, using a 3D printer to prototype any component for any product that will be produced by any process other than 3D printing is not at all as simple as it would appear. It certainly is possible to do, but unless you have a lot of knowledge and experience with Design for Manufacturing (DFM is a sub-field of mechanical Engineering in which I hold a degree), 3D printing is just a fun toy, or can be used for very short-run (small batch) components, and only with a very limited range of materials, and always produces parts with relatively high-variability dimensions (it is not precise and repeatable, like injection molding), and comparatively low-performance mechanical properties.
Also, in reality, 3D printed components each have a final cost of about $25.00 (no matter what they may claim), compared to about $0.02 for equivalent small, common-plastic, injection molded components, so for any given 3D printed component, in mass production it will cost about 1000X more than an equivalent injection molded component, roughly.
There is a lot of incentive to misrepresent (i.e. “lie”) about this, but that is the simple truth.
1 Like
For what it’s worth I’ve had success protecting the connection where the coil meets the wire using a 3 or 4 inch length of foam tape. I thread it halfway through the coil and then bend it down to cover where the wire enters the coil.
Although it doesn’t stick well to the coil rubber, it sticks very well to itself and stiffens the joint. It does stick to the vinyl sheath around the wire.
This is obviously an end user solution, not a manufacturing solution. If you don’t care about pretty it works fine.
we reinforce the coils in a similar way, and it works very well.
1 Like
Hi Bob- I just paid for my C5 unit to be repaired, ORDER #11399. What is the address I should mail my unit? The problem is, the probe that the power cord plugs into, broke off inside the power cord. I am not rough with the unit, however, I do use it a lot. Moreover, while you have it, could you please replace 3 of the 4 rubber feet on the bottom of the unit, replace the power cord and look at inner components to see if anything looks loose. Thank you. I would like to get it off to you today. I use this thing a lot and look forward to getting it back. Thanks Bob.
Sure. Any questions relating to price, availability, shipping, returns, warranty repairs, packaging, fulfillment, etc., should always be directed to the contact information located at:
This will always be our most current and updated contact information, which at this precise moment is:
Please email support@micro-pulse.com or call 1-833-627-8573
But you should always check at the indicated web page (not this thread) for the most current contact information for service, etc.