@Bob are you familiar with the Parmeds Home model that is sold on Dr. Pawluk’s website? I am curious if this unit meets your criteria for a lower intensity machine with your recommended waveform? The unit comes with two applicators and has 10 preset programs. The programs that are considered “higher intensity” supposedly generate 70 gauss on the full body mat and 200 gauss on the smaller pad. The lower intensity programs supposedly generate 10 gauss on the whole body mad and 27 gauss on the small pad. I completely understand your position on the essential meaninglessness of gauss measurements from PEMF devices. So, I am just stating this as a point of reference. The product description is found here:
1 Like
Well, to begin with, honestly I have not tested that product, so anything I would say would be strictly based on informed inference, not hard data. But I would say that they definitely do not use my recommended waveform for several reasons:
1- If they had any appreciation for the importance of waveform shape (the details, not baby stuff such as “square waveform”), then they would advertise this, because it is the key feature of biologically-active PEMF.
and
2- It is technically difficult to achieve the correct waveform, and there is about zero chance of them doing it by accident, and definitely zero chance of them doing it consistently in a manufactured product with the unavoidable batch-to-batch variations.
And so without the use of the correct waveform, a low-intensity PEMF product is unlikely to work well at all. It might, but it might not. Hard to say, because not even the manufacturer knows enough technical details to say.
Second: In my opinion, most modern commercial PEMF systems work, at least sort of, they don’t seem to hurt people, or at least no one advertises the harm if it does happen, and they are all more or less based on the same few internal circuitry architectures. Keep in mind: ALL of these systems have one of these origins:
1- They are based on an old crude Soviet bloc technology
or
2- They are based on a simple pulse generator with a mega-amplifier
or
3- They are a (poorly) pirated version of an existing PEMF system
or
4- They are just total nonsense, like a transformer coil that you plug into a wall (the “sinusoidal” systems).
This is because, so far as I can tell, all modern PEMF systems except ICES-PEMF were developed by marketers and businessmen, not scientists and engineers. They will not invest in real science, and they only invest in just enough engineering to make a product that actually turns “ON” when you flip the switch. Anything more is considered to be an unnecessary expense. I know this for a fact, having seen it as a consultant over the past few decades.
And as you correctly point out, Gauss levels are only indirectly related to actual PEMF performance.
It would be exactly like making the following conclusion:
“Gee, that car has a loud stereo, therefore it must also have a powerful engine.”
Well, maybe, sometimes. And sometimes you just put a loud cheap stereo system into a 1974 Pinto.
One final caveat: I am not the PEMF police, mainly because the last 20 years of doing so has proven to be very disappointing, to say the least.
OK, with all that firmly in mind, what can I say about this system?
Well, not much. Nobody can unless they have tried it. It is almost certainly not an efficient low-intensity system, but I could be wrong. What matters is: does it work?
In the past I would have referred you back to Dr. P’s web site and support staff, but lately I am not so sure.
About all you can do is:
1- Ask friends and colleagues: have they tried it, does it work for them?
or
2- try it yourself and return it within the return period if possible, if you don’t like it or it is not helping you
or
3- maybe someone on this forum has one and has tried one themselves and they can chime in (please do)
1 Like
THAT is exactly how i feel about Pawluk… when profit influences offerings on a pemf based health website that is fronted to help people, it becomes useless to the public looking for an authority on pemf devices for health.
i suppose even in science, despite the data, there can be disagreement… but when you decide on criteria and priorities of the values to assess, shouldn’t the opinion become more objective and just a matter of adding up the data per agreed criteria/protocol?
side question for @Bob: have you guys ever decided on/agreed to what standard of ranking of variable, factors, results, and metrics for pemf device and for patient baseline/outcome to make a more objective evaluation?
my impression of Pawluk’s site for some time is no different than those comparison review sites that focus only on Amazon products bc of their affiliate fees, while ignoring products outside of Amazon that may be superior.
do you guys differ in opinion bc of preferred variables to measure or the interpretation of the agreed variables and ranking of importance to measure?
i understand he is coming from a more subjective(?) interpretation of clinical outcomes without any control on what pemf device that is consistently being used… where you are coming from a control of pemf device and parameters and the feedback from users of your tech (with the variable of other therapies at play).
hope my rambling makes sense, but am i missing anything?
bottom line: the only value i see Pawluk bringing to the table is the “fact” that pemf has clinically proven to help a variety of issues that he’s worked with firsthand… that’s useful to know, but not so much in evaluating the devices out there on the market that people can use. his comparison site is no more useful than any affiliate marketer’s site.
1 Like
Sadly, I must say that I agree. We do not have many objective measures for direct comparisons between PEMF systems, so a lot of these opinions are subjective. And it extends far beyond just the technical details of any given PEMF product; for example, how trustworthy, honest, and helpful are the people in the company, is the technology over-priced for the real value, and many other hard to quantify things like that.
All people want to know is “what should I buy?”
This is understandable, but there are no simple answers unfortunately.
I bought a Parmed Homes system 6 months ago through Dr. P’s website. Before that I only tried a Bemer and Omi mat. Initially, in first few weeks I liked the Bemer mat. I was not impressed by the Omi mat though and returned it.
The Good:
Once I tried the Parmed Home system I noticed a huge difference compared to the Bemer! Parmed felt so much more powerful! The Bemer feels like a little engine that is driven really hard to get some effect. The Parmed feels much smoother. The first few times trying the sleep/relax program #1 I felt like floating on a cloud, even throughout the night. All my cells were tingling gently but in a good way! The circulation/oxygenation program #7 was/is also great. I felt a big performance boost in the first few weeks when I run it before a work out. Because this initial experience was so positive, I decided to keep the Parmed!
After ~2 months or so, unfortunately, those amazing, initial sensations started to diminish by some and Pemf effects seemed less noticeable. My understanding is the body gets used to Pemf, heals by some and then this becomes the new normal. I did not have serious health issues but my constant lower back pain (2-3 out of 10) went away after using Parmed regularly for 3-4 months. Program #7 in the morning seems to give me more energy. When I’m tired after work I take a quick 20min power nap with sleep/relax program #1 and feel much better. I use it as a wellness tool and wouldn’t want to miss it.
Parmed talks about ‘high slew rate’ which their system supposedly has. (I would call it ‘fast rise time’ of the current (I) and magnetic (B) pulse.) That is a high dB/dt every time a new pulse starts. Should lead to higher local electrical field at the cell level and lead to more response from the cells.
I would think that is similar to what @Bob is doing with ICES and ‘micro pulse’? Making system more efficient and use less power sounds like a pulse with shorter width and faster rise/fall time. Some other PEMF supplier also stress that point of ‘high slew rate’.
The Bad:
I wish Parmed would reveal what frequency each program uses. They give each program a name like ‘circulation’, ‘relax/sleep’, ‘wellness’, ‘restore’, ‘pain A’, ‘pain B’, ‘osteoporosis’, ‘fracture healing’.
But what if your condition doesn’t fall into any of those categories? A frequency key would be helpful then!
And being able to change basic parameters of the programs, or, have more selection would be nice. Run time and power levels are both fixed to 15min/30min and mid/high power level. (The next model up would provide that option though at higher price point.)
However, those restrictions make the system very easy to power up and run. One doesn’t have to navigate much through menus at all which is helpful for certain (less tech savvy) patients.
The Ugly:
That would be packaging of the system: It looks like a used item off of ebay! The mat is rolled up in a generic black garbage bag and not fully closed! The small pillow wasn’t protected by any bag but just put on top of everything inside shipping box. No manual inside, no professional bubble wrap or custom styrofoam (just a small generic piece of styrofoam on top of everyting). Both mats looked like they could use a good wipe down with disinfectant wipe! I wondered if the mats were used item.
At least the electrical box was inside a custom fitted cardboard box and looked like a new item.
When I called Dr. P. and complained about packaging I was told that is the way Parmed ships their systems! Then I called the US distributor directly, a nice guy, but he said I’m the first customer to complain about the packaging. Really? Hard to believe. For spending $5k (w/ tax and shipping) one would expect a bit more TLC on product presentation and it makes you wonder if that is a real professional company or just a mom and pap store.
Final words on the Parmed Home system: Overall, I’m still happy enough with this PEMF system. However, after some further digging on other available systems and especially after talking to the guys from Electromeds it seems that at the $5k price point the Sedona Pro system might be a better choice. It only gets up to 100 Gauss though on the small pad but has more flexibility on adjusting power/time and more program choices. Also, a frequency key is provided for each program.
About Dr. Pawluk: I read his book/webpage and appreciate his efforts on providing/summarizing medical data and scientific research! Customer service and support from him is not stellar but you can send email questions and will receive feedback once you figured out what is the right email to use! He was supposed to follow up with me a few weeks after I received my system. But that never happened. He sends a lot of promotional emails, all health related. Some topics are (very) interesting but it’s, as mentioned before, always of promotional nature.
@Stefan Thank you for that very detailed reply on your experience. I was actually able to get my hands on a list of the specific frequencies used for each of the parmeds home presets in my communications with a customer service associate at DrPawluk.com. I’ve attached it here. I also have an instruction manual and what looks like it was a slide presentation on the unit from Dr. Pawluk. Let me know if you would also like me to upload those.
Do you have any experience with any of the ICES devices?
Parmeds Frequencies.pdf (333.7 KB)
@Stefan I also took a couple of screenshots from the slideshow that I mentioned, which may also be of interest with you. Dr. Pawluk mentions that he doesn’t really agree with the manufacturer’s recommendations about which preset is best for which outcome. He has ranked the low and high presets according to the level of relaxation or energization they produce.
One more point about this. This is not an an either/or choice for me. I actually have an ICES M1 arriving on Thursday. I’m interested in both full body and local options. Although the smaller pad that comes with the parmeds home is more local than the full body mat, I am also interested in getting a bit more precision.
Hi Anomaloid,
thanks so much for sharing the screen shots and the pdf, very helpful! Even though P2 is labelled as ‘energizing’ by MFG whereas your info seems to suggest that is ‘most relaxing’. For me most relaxing was/is P1 which is called ‘sleep/relaxation’.
And about your other question: No, I have not tried any ICES device yet.
My hunch is that Dr. Pawluk determined which presets are more relaxing or stimulating based on correlation with brainwave states. So, the most relaxing programs tend toward the Alpha, Theta, and Delta range, while the more stimulating programs have frequencies associated with beta and gamma. It’s not clear to me if that’s a valid correlation unless you’re laying your head directly on the higher intensity mini pad. And even then, I don’t know if there’s any research to support that.
@Bob I happened to stumble across this technical specification for the Parmeds Home unit (and most of their other units as well). They describe their waveform as “Square-gated Sinusoidal.” I’ve seen you mention in another thread that it has been demonstrated over and over again that Sinusoidal waves have no beneficial biological effect, but the “noise” could potentially be detrimental. Is the term Square-gated Sinusoidal something distinct from a regular Sinusoidal wave or just more marketing type? If it is distinct, do you recall if any of the research you have seen showed beneficial effects from such a waveform? TIA.
BTW, I am loving the M1. Amazing effect on headaches of all kinds. I’m not normally prone to headaches, but I’m almost glad I’ve had some recently related to eyestrain from my floaters so that I was able to see the significant impact of the M1.
The floaters have also improved significantly. However, whether or not the PEMF has been a major factor is a bit hard to assess, as I do not have a serious problem like a retinal tear. So, the floaters would be expected to improve over time on their own (according to my eye doc, Dr. Google, and ChatGPT).
1 Like
@Bob my apologies. I think you may have already answered this question in your initial post in this thread. Interestingly, when I searched Google for the term square gated sinusoidal wave, literally the first hit I got was what appeared to be a marketing piece for a parmeds PEMF unit. They also referred to the high “slew” rate that Stefan mentioned in his reply.
https://pemfschool.com/pemf-school-got-square-wave-gated-sine-wave-we-do/
I don’t think there is a real technical meaning for the term “square-gated sinusoidal”. If that is a real term, it would refer to the electronic switching of the sinusoid into the ON or OFF state through some specific “gate” (usually a transistor), not the shape of the magnetic waveform itself. My guess though is that it is just a made-up pseudo-technical term from some marketer.
And I am very glad to hear that you are getting such good effects on headaches and (maybe) floaters.
1 Like