Flux Health Forum

Improve vision with ICES

Eye Conditions
#57

not exaggerating, but i’ve been sleeping w/them on. but not like i’m getting as much sleep as i’d like (YET). I have been doing 4hours at a time (only 2x so far)… i stop at 4 bc of a slight headache that comes on… i’m at power level 8 for omni. just from 2 days alone, my left eye that’s usually blurry (has become more so in the last few years) has been surprisingly and noticeably clear. i don’t want to jump to any conclusions yet and will get a baseline measure of vision now using eye chart to gauge at home just to see if my vision has improved any from now and 30days later.

but for CERTAIN, i can tell my left eye is better in the morning and throughout the day even. again, too early to say and it is hard to not be hopeful/excited about it. just hate the part about if this is premature and subjective/placebo.

#58

How deep does the coil reach? For example, the back of the eye if placed on the eye.

How much deeper will waveform reach if stacking the coils on one eye?

Does increasing the intensity power over time cause greater results if not seeing beneficial results at mid power level? Or is the opposite true, a lower power level may produce better results?

#59

Fields easily reach to the back of the eye.
Depth depends on a lot of factors, highly technical, more important is your sensitivity to the fields. The only way to know is to try and keep track of effects. ICES-PEMF technology requires a bit of attention for optimal effects, just like anything else that is real.

PEMF marketers of other products will tell you anything you want to hear to make a sale, but the truth is: it depends on a lot, there is no way to calculate it for individual people and injuries. Generally though, the fields reach deep enough for most people for most types of injury.

General rule of thumb: MORE POWER IS NOT THE ANSWER for PEMF. A properly designed PEMF waveform can easily be more effective than a crude PEMF waveform at 500 times the power.

You should start at mid levels of intensity and increase in steps, but generally, with efficient PEMF waveforms, the dose response curve is not simple linear; more power does not equal more effect. It is more sigmoidal (“S” shaped), and once you are getting good biological effects it is generally best to stop increasing power. Beyond this, more power generally results in less effectiveness and more irritation due to the excess energy.

1 Like
#60

My own recent experience treating an eye problem with the Micro-pulse M1 and my review of other posts on eye conditions both suggest starting with the lowest intensity setting and keeping close track of both benefits and possible side effects (sometimes called healing crises, detox reactions, etc.). The problem I have been dealing with is floaters. Initially, I was getting headaches after applying the coils close to or directly on my eyes. @Bob has a theory that this may be related to pressure changes in anatomical cavities as inflammation decreases. That makes a lot of sense to me.

Interestingly, the headaches would not generally be in the same location where I applied the coils. In fact, they were often in the occipital region of the back of my skull, which is associated with vision in traditional Chinese medicine. I could reliably treat the headache by using the M1 directly on the acupuncture points in that area. It’s almost as if pressure was released from one area (in the eyes themselves) but stagnated in another section of the associated acupuncture channel, which then required direct treatment itself. Or, I should say the headache was resolved rapidly when direct treatment was applied to the local area. I suspect it would’ve resolved on its own anyway. I haven’t had any headaches since I switched to using the lowest intensity setting, although it may be a coincidence. It may be that the inflammation was largely resolved and the pressure in my skull largely equalized by the earlier treatments and so I was no longer experiencing the “side effects.” As things are going well for me right now, I’m not really willing to experiment with a higher intensity setting to test the hypotheses.

I’ve also had a couple experiences that lead me to believe that putting the coils directly on my eyes even at the lowest intensity setting may temporarily aggravate the floaters. My floaters are due to what is called posterior vitreous detachment. As I understand it, there are strands of the vitreous gel floating in my eyeball. It is generally thought that the symptoms of PVD will resolve spontaneously over a few months as the strands of gel settle in the lower portion of the eye and no longer pass through the field of vision. However, as they are still currently “floating,” it makes sense to me that applying a stimulus directly on the eye might be analogous to lightly jostling a bowl of still water with a little bit of sediment in it. Further confirmation that this may be what is happening is that when the acute exacerbation of the symptom occurs, it typically resolves within about 15 minutes. Just as a jostled bowl of water would eventually settle down if no further stimulus was applied to it.

#61

@Anomaloid, This is really helpful input, thanks for chiming in. :slight_smile:

#63

@Leo_Yang

This is very cool. It partially solves one of the problems I have when putting the coils directly on my eyes, which is I have been covering them with some type of bandage or band that I cannot see through. However, it only partially solves my problem, because there’s a limit to what I can do without actual lenses in my glasses. At least with your solution, I can still move around the house, eat, drink tea, wash dishes, and do minor things on my phone like select a podcast or audiobook for listening. However, what also might be cool is to create the equivalent of clip-on sunglasses using PEMF coils instead of the plastic polarized lenses. Then, you could apply the magnetic fields close to your eyes while still being able to do all of the things that require sharp vision.

1 Like
#64

What settings and intensity levels were you using?

#65

How would one know whether the effect is positive or less positive and what would they look for to determine? For example, intensity may feel good or not so good depending on the individual. Same with pressure, there is positive pressure and negative pressure. Symptoms might be optimal or less than optimal. Weight training causes some pain and recovery but it is for benefit. But there is some pain that is not beneficial and may cause harm via an injury.

#66

I haven’t seen a change with floaters using M1 on Omni8. Running 1 cycle twice per day. Coils placed directly on eyes.

#67

This is not easy, so in order to undertake things like PEMF requires attention and intelligence. It is definitely not for everyone. Many things, important things, simply cannot be quantified. Let me give you an example:

Pain

There is no way to directly measure pain. No matter what anyone tells you, it can’t be done. Yet about 1 in three adults suffer from it. And we cannot measure it. Please do not send me endless links to fraudulent “pain-o-meters”, such things do not work.

Yet people know when they are in pain, when they are not, when it gets better, when it gets worse, when it changes in nature, and many other things. Some people are much more aware than others, some ignore it, some block it with medications, etc. etc. Then of course there is the major issue of placebo effects.

Some people can monitor pain more or less intelligently, some can not. if you are using something like PEMF on something like pain, you need to pay a lot of attention and try to make objective observations, probably keep a log or journal.

Other things can be directly quantified, like blood pressure. You can monitor this, or someone else can monitor it for you, track changes, and use specific, repeatable numbers to guide treatment.

Some things like exercise can start by making you feel worse, others have no change in sensation at all.

With all of this said, most things related to health are just hard to get a full grasp and a quantitative number for progress. This is why some people just need to place their health into the hands of someone else, such as a physician.

Efficient PEMF will often not have a direct sensation. Effective PEMF may take hours or days or weeks. Tissue just must be allowed time to heal and regenerate, and PEMF evidently accelerates this process, but it still takes time. Different injuries, in different tissues, for different people, at different ages, under different conditions, will have different time courses of healing and recovery. The effects can be profound or subtle.

With our present state of knowledge, putting a number on these things is essentially impossible. So, people have to use PEMF thoughtfully and intelligently, or they will not get as much out of it, nor will they appreciate what they do get out of it.

So, if you are using a PEMF system, then for your individual injury or need you need to find a way to track your progress and determine whether or not you are getting a benefit. This takes a fair amount of work and attention. Fortunately, PEMF is so beneficial for so many conditions that it is sufficient to get PEMF in a clinic two or three times per week, for 15 to 30 minutes, even if it is a crude waveform.

But if you are willing to develop the skill of using PEMF and assessing and tracking your progress, then you can get even better outcomes using much lower power, highly efficient systems on a daily basis.

1 Like
#68

Apologies for being unable to finish my response, things got busy…

So, as a practical matter, how do you know if PEMF is working? This is a very reasonable question, and everyone who uses PEMF would want to know this. But all of the stuff I said in the first half of my response is true, which means it’s very hard to give a general answer.

So, the best answer I can give is to give advice for specific cases and injuries, taking as many key individual factors as possible into account, such as age, duration of injury, and other conditions. This basically means that the use of PEMF is highly individualized. I think that is true for many types of injury, but we also have pretty effective advice for other types of injury. Having tried to solve this for years to give the best possible information, I think the best way to address this type of complexity is this Forum.

It seems to be most effective when a person asks a specific question about a specific condition, then many people can chime in and offer their experience and insight, and I can give specific information related to the specific question. There is no answer to broad non-specific questions such as “How does one know if it is working?” But in most cases we can collectively say a lot more about questions with a lot more detail for a specific condition or injury. Examples would be things like:

Back pain: Usually shows significant reduction in hours or a few days.

Migraine: Over time, a reduction in frequency, intensity, or both, or a change in how sensitive a person is to triggering events.

BPH: reduction confirmed by clinical examination

Sleep: Personal observations of sleep quality, unless you subject yourself to a sleep clinic or study.

Peripheral Neuropathy: return of function, sensation, reduction of pain, change in the type or quality of pain.

Diabetic Ulcer: Diameter of ulcer over time before versus during PEMF use: is the ulcer continuing to grow, slowing, staying the same size, reducing in size?

It basically goes on and on like this. And its the same for the general question “How do you use PEMF?” As a broad general question, it is essentially unanswerable. It becomes more tractable when your question becomes more specific and your observations become more detailed.

#69

Makes sense. Specific questions:

-IOPTx system for electroceutical treatment used three 15 min sessions but parameters included a 50 Hz frequency (80-85 Gauss), rectangular shape, pulse width 100, and amplitutdes 90-150. Each patient may have an optimal dose response curve. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02713683.2021.1904999
Q: What settings/protocols on M1 might be most comparable or worth exploring to the settings they used in this study? It appears M1 does not have the 50 Hz but as you mentioned before, it’s not so much the Hz but the waveform shape. Curious if it has to be 50 for optimal results or other protocols would work just as well.

-Pawluk also mentions on his site the use of 50 Hz in multiple studies, for whatever reason they chose this frequency for the eye studies. Most studies short term but showed repair and support of retina. He says weak PEMFs may have some benefit but have not been studied and most magnetic fields range in the 80-330 Gauss (8-33 milliTesla) but admits it doesn’t matter what frequencies are used as there was variation in the studies.
Q: Do you concur with his clinical opinion?
Q: How does the Gauss levels he cites compare to the strength levels on M1 power settings and does this also refer to specific frequencies or any frequencies in general?

Sabel sees results using frequency ranges 8-25 Hz as well as having identified 5 spectral brands Delta, Theta, Alpha, Beta frequencies alternating current stimulation for brain based on placing electrodes on eye sockets. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4927182/

Another report shows neurostimulation frequency pulses 5-34 range using the Eyetronic device in Germany with goggles to improve visual field. * https://bioelecmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42234-022-00089-9

Q: Which protocols on M1 would be worth exploring based on the study results?
Q: Based on existing evidence, any other protocols on M1 besides Omni8 to explore on eyes to improve retina, tissue regeneration, fluid balance, microcirculation, etc.?

#70

OK, I’ll do my best to give direct answers, although the caveat is that technically, the protocols and especially the waveforms cited by almost all PEMF marketing material is way off from reality. I explain why I know this at many other locations on this forum and across the Internet, so we’ll just take it as a given. So, while technically this will be like comparing oranges to make-believe leprechauns, I’ll answer as directly as possible.

-IOPTx system: Their waveform is not “rectangular”. If it were even close, people would find 50Hz to be very irritating. This means their waveform is probably very inefficient in terms of eliciting biological effects.
The closest ICES-PEMF setting to this would be gamma wave, but I would definitely avoid that if it irritates you, and start with short sessions of low intensity if you decide to try it. You would have to limit the sessions by yourself, since there is no timer to limit it for you.
You are correct that it almost certainly does not need to be 50Hz to be optimal. I would suggest you try the following protocols instead:
Omni-8
Schumann 5
Alpha Wave
Beta Wave 1, 2, or 3

Two things to keep in mind:
1- When they claim “optimal”, that is not likely. I have never seen any such optimization data. This is just marketing fraud.
2- When PEMF companies select frequencies, they are trying to establish themselves somehow as unique or special in the market. The primary attribute for many of these “special frequencies” is that no one else is using them (YET), so they can seem somewhat progressive and unique in a highly competitive market. I have worked with so many of these people over the years. I would bet anything that this “optimal” frequency is just a wild guess, and it works, sort of, as most PEMF does, over a wide frequency range, so they just hit a golf ball into a swimming pool. Nothing special.

-Pawluk: He has probably seen clinical benefit using this, but once again, he’s hitting golf balls into a swimming pool. He and I have discussed this specific use (eyes) at great length. He has told me that he would prefer to use ICES-PEMF systems for this specific application, but we keep our prices low, and they are too low to make much profit as a reseller for this clinically-intensive application. Maybe too much truth packed into that paragraph… :thinking:

-Pawluk: I generally defer to his clinical opinion, largely because I am not a clinician. I tend to defer to people who have more expertise and experience than I do, which I suppose makes me some kind of strange species from a different planet. And I can tell you: it’s nice on that planet. Some people actually know things. And when people do not know things they actually realize that they don’t know something. Bizarre I know, but the universe is weird.

-Gauss comparisons: oranges to leprechauns again, which I explain in great technical detain in hundreds of locations.

-Sabel, Germany, both questions…
I suggest trying Alpha Wave, Beta Wave 1, 2, and 3

2 Likes
#71

That makes complete sense and good analogy of the ease of hitting golf ball into a pool. The goal of course is a hole in one but that takes experimentation. Was thinking Schumann 5 and will start slow on waves. Will consider gamma.

What signs/symptoms might reflect irritation to either lower power or stop, from an awareness standpoint? Keep in mind what irritates one person may or may not irritate another person.

#72

That is exactly correct.
If it irritates you, then take note, and make an adjustment.

#73

I had a vitreous detachment also. I find that using the C5 on a power of 4 for maybe 30 minutes a day, with coils over the eyes, seems helpful. I can’t really know if it’s helpful.

You have to have a feedback mechanism to know if some modality is helping or not.

I had my eyes dilated and photos taken of the interior as well as can be done. There is a bit of scar tissue from the vitreous detachment. I am recalled in 6 months for a follow up. So I’ll be able to see if this is helping or not, although 6 months is a long time.

PEMF makes the floaters move faster. It also has created a bit of the “meteorites” flashing onto the retina. Is this good or bad? I can’t really know.

Have you heard of success stories in this area?

#74

How long does it take to go through one cycle of Schumann 5 pps before it repeats?

#75

About 2 minutes for the lower frequencies, about 1 minute for each of the higher frequencies, so about 7 or 8 minutes per cycle.

#76

Are the details of each of the preset programs documented somewhere?

#77

I post the exact frequencies on the documentation that comes with each device, for example, the various pulse protocols for the M1 have the following sequence of frequencies in each protocol"

see page two of the quick start guide.

I do not publish exact time duration for each frequency period for several reasons:
1- It is not physiologically significant
2- Needs to allow for variability to minimize habituation
3- I am constantly asked for this detail by technology pirates so the competing companies can pirate it, so I maintain the precise timing values and variability as confidential.