Does anyone have any experience with joint cartilage treatment. I have heard of cartilage being repaired by the body when using SCENAR therapy. I have not heard anyone talk about it using these field devices.
ices can regrow bone:
I can’t find it right this second, but I remember seeing a study where something like 34% of people got cartilage back in the knee with PEMF. It took a long time. The study was 2 years or something. I have seen images where an elderly woman was bone on bone in her knee and her cartilage grew back. Pretty sure that was with the Curatron, but I don’t think the study was with that. That was a clinical example.
This wasn’t the example I was thinking about, but I found this one and it is close enough.
What I remember specifically was that it didn’t matter if the cartilage was totally gone, for instance after meniscus surgery. It could still grow back. It took a long time.
ices tech might work more efficiently than curatron?
in bone gap study using ices, bone was almost fully healed in 4 weeks.
I don’t know the answer to that, except that you can wear the ICES day and night and the Curatron is something you spend some time on. If I was wealthy, I would have both because theirs clearly works. I am not wealthy and the ICES also clearly works.
Is the rate at which bone heals the same at which cartilage heals? Can these be compared equally?
Cartilage will heal much more slowly than bone. This is well established and it is because of the fact cartilage has far fewer cells than bone and no vasculature. In many cases, cartilage does not seem to heal much at all, and so people generally assume that cartilage slowly and inexorably degrades over time.
But my opinion: I was able to use ICES-PEMF to reverse the cartilage problems in my right hip about 5 years ago, and the problem has never returned, so I assume there has been tissue regeneration. The process was very slow, and required daily use, but it was slowly getting better, not worse.
More recently, I have been working on my left hip. It has been much more of a problem, and has taken a lot longer, but it is definitely steadily getting better.
I am sufficiently encouraged by this that I am asking one of my clinical colleagues to help me launch a new study on cartilage regeneration. I am probably speaking too soon here, but this is something I really want to try.
If you would be interested in a cartilage regrowth study using Micro-Pulse ICES-PEMF, please reply to this post briefly so I can gauge the interest. If enough people are interested, I will try to set something up as soon as I can.
I would be interested in knowing whats involved.
What I have in mind right now is this:
Set up a study with clinical oversight to see whether or not ICES-PEMF can improve damaged cartilage. The scope of the study would depend on interest, but my preference would be to have people join who are willing to get before-and-after images and a clinical assessment from their health care provider.
I hope to run it as an individual survey-based study with general guidelines for use of the ICES-PEMF, but not a specific, controlled protocol. So, basically it would be a study of:
–Initial prognosis of cartilage damage
–Use of ICES-PEMF in whatever way people actually use the technology, with detailed descriptions of the conditions of use.
–Occasional re-evaluations and prognosis.
I would like it to be an open-ended study, accepting people as they want to join and following them as long as we can, to get accurate long-term outcomes. So, it would be a significant time commitment. Most studies like this would be impossible in an academic setting, which is why you will not be able to find any in the scientific literature.
I am not sure I will be able to do this as a study, but if there is sufficient interest I will definitely make the attempt.
I certainly have an interest in any studies done using this technology. I’m not sure if people have a conscious interest in general though. It seems that heat disease and cancer are the biggest interest areas such that other areas are generally misplaced. I ask people I know about their injuries and for energy levels and other superficial cares people generally respond positively to PEMF. But for more serious injuries they usually opt to see a doctor. Seeing a doctor is a great idea, but I mean that it displaces PEMF from their minds entirely. The positive news is that interest is growing and is especially strong in those that have seen traditional approaches fail again and again. I believe that over time, a study showing the benefits of PEMF in any or all areas will be sought after. It is frustrating to be told everything is fine, knowing it is not.
So this study would be that a person purchase the ICES and use it for this specific disorder while living their normal daily routine? This instead of coming to a specific place with provided ICES services?
Well, I don’t like to run studies where I ask people to buy things, so what I had in mind is a possible study where people who already own a system could be part of the study, but people could also buy one. Unlike a typical study, people who are already using ICES for joint regeneration could also join the study, and they could use it as they want to, and remain in the study as long as they want. So a study of this kind would be discounted by most scientists & clinicians, but ironically it would yield the most practical and useful information.
We do not have clinics or anything like that which provide ICES services, so that would not be a possibility. The use of clinics to apply PEMF of any sort is more driven as a cost and revenue model, not based on how people actually should use PEMF for best outcomes (every day for a few hours).
This is why I have put so much effort into developing personal PEMF that gives the best outcomes if used every day, as opposed to occasional application in a clinic.
But while this may give better outcomes, it is very difficult to study and nearly impossible to get clinics to adopt it.
Let me tell you a secret: when someone from a clinic calls me they always ask: “How do I make money off of it?”
They only rarely ask: “Does it work?”
When I tell them it is not really designed to generate clinical revenue, it is designed to be affordable for daily use, most clinicians immediately lose interest.
This is a major perverse incentive we are facing in mainstream AND alternative medical care.
People generally consider PEMF as a last resort, usually only after they discover how little the medical system has to offer them. That is a shame, because by then many people have compounded their problems by having failed implants and surgeries and other forms of real tissue damage. Nonetheless, there is a lot of evidence (including approximately 1000 published, peer-reviewed scientific papers) that indicate that PEMF can be very helpful with a wide range of problems.
I would be very interested in participating. I had a knee re construction (including medial meniscus) done about 30 years ago after a serious injury. At the time I was told to expect it to “last” about 10 years. About two months ago I had MRIs and XRays and evalutations done. I have the A9b and only need a protocol with coil placement to get started.
It would be a few months before we could organize anything formal. And this would be a study of what people actually do, not a controlled study with a specific protocol.
So it would be great if you just start collecting:
Details of what you have done and what you are doing now with the A9.
such as coil placement(s), and intensity, duration of each session, frequency of use (daily?), dates for start, stop, change, assessment
Clinical assessments and prognoses
Other things you did, such as supplements, other clinical treatments, etc.
Any images or data you can collect
If I can get something formal started, it would take that form: try to record as much as possible about what people actually did, and clinically, how well it actually worked.
Believe it or not, this type of information is far more valuable than typical controlled studies. You can see what people actually do, and what actually works, over realistic periods of time. And many interesting observations tend to emerge that would be excluded from typical, tightly-controlled studies.
It would be great if you wanted to start collecting this type of information. If I can get a survey-based study started this summer, it would give us a massive head start. Anyone reading this post who is interested could start ahead of time this way.
We can keep the study open, and people can start whenever they want to and go as long as they want to, and that would give a lot more useful information than any time-restricted study.
Thank You. I look forward to whatever comes from this process.
I now realize an error I think I’ve made in how I’ve been using my A9b. A few years ago I was on crutches from too much twisting doing weed whacking. Getting Prolotherapy shots a couple of times got me off the crutches and then getting the A9b kept me off the crutches. It seems to me that Prolo Therapy, PRP, Stem Cell injections and ICES all stimulate stem cell growth. ICES also seems to help with inflammation. I think that aspect of it is what we experience with pain relief. The mistake I may have made was in using it only for pain relief. When the pain was gone quit using it until the next time. If I kept using it all the time I may have had more progress with cartilage, bone and who knows what else. I still suspect that the most valuable time to use it is when there is pain or when that body part is under stress, but going forward I will be using it much more. I’m also wondering if the M1 would likely give better results.
I think the longer you use it especially after the pain has subsided, to promote full tissue recovery, the less likely the pain is to return in the future. That has definitely been my experience, and many people tell me they have the same results.
I think the A9 is as good as an M1, unless you need to experiment with different pulse patterns. Some people like one more than the other though, and opinions vary. I prefer the M1 mainly because it is 25% lighter and smaller than the A9, so I almost forget when I am wearing it.
That is the reason I purchased an M1. Only because it is smaller. I think it is very small, which is of course, good for being portable. That is great that you already have an ICES.
I’ve used it three times in my son. Once he had his hand run over by a bike. Another time he fell and hit his head on a chair (tonight actually). Another time he closed his hand in a door. He is kinda accident prone. Anyways, all three times were looking very bad with lots if swelling and redness. After a few minutes using the M1, the redness went away and the swelling was nearly gone. Treatment ended each time because he felt fine and didn’t want to sit any longer.
I would be would be interested in a cartilage regrowth study, Bob.