Flux Health Forum

SIngle-pulsed SPEMF

Single-pulsed PEMF- SPEMF appears to work with only three minutes per day for seven days as well as PEMF for 10 hours a day for a month.

Do any of the settings on the C5 or the M1 or even the B5 allow for the single-pulsed?



Bringing @Bob on to this thread.

OK, thanks. My opinion:

(1) “SPEMF appears to work…” Seriously, that is a very important finding, and would be wonderful if it worked. The key thing to keep in mind is that the platinum standard for science is replicability. Important findings need to be independently replicated or the finding remains suspect. NOTE: as much as 90% of academic science can not be replicated, not even by the same scientists in the same laboratory doing the same experiments with the same equipment. This is a huge problem with academic science, called the “replicability crisis” or “repeatability crisis”.

The take away message: if it is an exciting finding, remain skeptical until the result is replicated independently.

So, how about this paper… it was published 8 years ago, great finding… where are all the independent verifications? If the findings are so solid, why do the authors not build upon this very important finding?

As a scientist, my “sniff-test”: this is probably a random positive result. Statistically, you should expect random positive results about 5% of the time in medical/biological research. My advice: Do not get excited about it until it is replicated independently.

(2) “Do any of the settings on the C5 or the M1 or even the B5 allow for the single-pulsed?”
ANSWER >>> No, ICES-PEMF does not work this way.

Technical comments: SPEMF is a high intensity (0.6T = 6000 Gauss) sinusoidal pulse. Looking through the entire PEMF literature, sinusoidal pulses tend to have very little or no biological effects, so very large amplitude pulses are required to get any biological response at all. This is a clear indication of extreme inefficiency.

I am not saying that it does not work. I am saying that in my opinion it is more likely to be a statistical blip and not a real effect, but I could be wrong. It would be really great if it did work this way.


Reminds me of a lecturer I had in an Electronic Instrumentation college course, “I’d rather have an instrument that gave repeatable readings than one that gave accurate ones”. The point being accuracy and repeatability are not always one and the same.

I agree with your instructor.