Flux Health Forum

Protocols - Described

talks about frequency, slew, pulse, etc…

1 Like

Interesting, thanks. I am happy to be having at least a modest impact on the PEMF discussion.

Hi Dr. @Bob Dennis:

Would your ICES devices be sufficient to cover the same type of PEMF effectiveness as using a high powered PEMF unit? For example, i think MagnaWave puts out high powered PEMF. Or would you say your ICES devices are more comparable in therapy/efficacy as low powered PEMF devices?

Just wondered if your devices covered BOTH categories or just low powered units for covering results.

Well, that is very hard to say actually. Some of the “high powered” devices are claimed by the manufacturer to be 10x to 100x higher power than they actually are… after all, who is going to check… when was the last time you actually measured a “Gauss”?

Then again, even if they deliver a huge amount of total power; is the waveform correct? Is it efficient or just over-powered? In many experiments, I was able to show enhanced biological effects while reducing power. This got quite extreme, to the point where I am getting better and more reliable effects when only using 0.2% of the power originally used at NASA. So, that’s a 99.8% reduction of power with a noticeable improvement in biological effects.

So… is more power a good thing? not necessarily.

I have done my best to make the system as efficient and optimal as possible. but comparison with other commercial systems is really pretty much impossible, sorry. Their systems do work, apparently, most of the time. But ICES-PEMF is in some ways unlike these larger systems.

Interestingly, clinicians who use both tell me that most of the time (~67% of the time) they see positive synergistic effects when they use both: large PEMF at their clinic a few times per week + ICES-PEMF daily at home.

My opinion: I don’t think one replaces the other. I would try them in synergy and separately, see what works best for you as an individual, and go with that.

3 Likes