Flux Health Forum

Sleeping with a device

PEMF Basics
#42

Prometheus

I do understand that a lot of studies have a financial motive, but still I do think there are scientists who are trying to understand science and when they find something like too little gamma in Alzheimer’s brains or the microglia working overtime harming the synapses, I still start at science.

Do I believe they are lying about the blood brain barrier becoming more permeable or about the effects on the tight junctions or about acetone working the same pathway as blood sugar, no, I suspect they are seeing genuine mechanisms and are trying to understand those mechanisms.

I haven’t thrown every single scientist out with the bathwater.

In fact, I got to Bob’s product by following science and it was his science images, rather than any studies that got me to try his product.

#43

scientists almost always work for some company or institution. The institution decides what is allowed to be done and even the results of the study. So it doesn’t matter whether the scientist has integrity or not. And the company/institution is purposed only for money and status nowadays. I know many people don’t want this to be true so they live in denial about it. Bob deals with the belly of the beast on a daily basis and has resigned himself to that reality but still tries to tell the truth about it as much as possible. I thank him for that. In my view, the only way to read a study or listen to anyone purporting to tell some truth, is to take everything with a grain of salt realizing that much or all it may be bogus to some extent. The integrity of the writer/speaker is the most important and we may not have anything but our intuition to go with in that regard. But if some part of their work resonates with me, then I consider that the highest level and worthy of taking seriously. With all due respect , I have to say that the way Dr Greiger posts studies without any savvy critical judgment is doing more disservice than service to his readers. Telling the whole truth is fast becoming a crime, and proving the truth is often not even a viable defense.

2 Likes
#44

I agree with this entirely. The power and value of individual trial and verification has been marginalized by modern academic science. But that attitude will turn out to be one of the biggest mistakes in the history of science.

1 Like
#45

Prometheus,

I guess for me, I got rid of so many disease symptoms using the studies - most of them without any devices at all - so I do know how well it has worked for me.

Most of the advances I have gotten were purely from diet during seasons I wasn’t using any technology at all.

I have been blown away by how quickly you can get rid of things like Diabetes or hallucinations or all sorts of things.

Anyway, those studies have been so effective that I love them.

I love the ICES, too, and I love infrared, but diet did so much in days to 2 weeks.

3 Likes
#46

Hi Lily:

Sorry for the confusion – no, it doesn’t look like the M1 will support the 2x2 array. I like the 2x2 because I don’t have to think too hard about where to put it on heads. :wink:

Using the single coils, I’d maybe try doubling them up as Bob describes, then do the same amount of time on your left forehead, right forehead, in the back where your skull curves in, and then on the left neck where you can feel the pulse.

Personally, I don’t feel anything on other body parts. After about 20-30 minutes on my head I can kind of feel “something”. Feeling an effect right away isn’t necessary to benefiting, as far as I can.

I tested a whack of different frequencies, mostly basing results on my arthritic knees and hands - some made me feel worse. If it didn’t increase the pain/swelling, then I stayed with it for a long time – weeks. I have found I’m good with a range from alpha to beta1, but for limited times usually. If I don’t use it for some reason (traveling and can’t plug in my C5), I can feel the lack of it. I kept a log of what I tried (frequencies x intensity x time) to find patterns at the beginning.

My preference for my clients is to start with OMNI-8 and stay with that if it helps, since, again, then one doesn’t have to guess whether the frequency is “good” for you.

1 Like
#47

Yes – “we” see a symptom that is perhaps the body trying to do self-repair and think it’s the problem.

Gamma is associated with the brain “putting things together”: new learning, aha moments, etc. So it makes sense that a brain struggling with dementia wouldn’t be expending its resources on new learning.

And there is some thinking that the amyloid-beta is actually trying to do the repair work, so when Alzheimer’s is “treated” by drugs to decrease it, the process can even be sped up. Similarly, if there is something that is disrupting the synapses and forced-gamma is creating more synapses (i.e., via the forced connecting), then there would be more messed-up synapses to clean up, perhaps.

Anyway, that’s why wherever possible I prefer not to push the brain around by forcing certain activity patterns. I like Omni-8 for the variation - more of a work-out than a forced-pattern. My perceived value of PEMF/ICES is in the magnetic field and its effects and very little in the choice of fequencies - since I think the body~brain is smarter than the literature’s database of “findings”, which we may or may not be interpreting correctly.

1 Like
#48

I agree with this: too much of medicine is trying to force something when we see a correlation, but we don’t know if what we are seeing is a cause, an effect, or unrelated entirely. Brainwaves are one area where I think this is true, gene expression is another, inflammatory cytokines another. When we try to force something up or down, we might simply be interfering with a repair process.

2 Likes
#49

Ah … that little detail about being 500x more efficient than most PEMF devices is important - especially for those of us who have some experience with other devices. Thank you!

Last night I tried the 2x2 array set on Delta, Power level 9, and I don’t think it did anything positive for me. I’m thinking of using only the set of 2 coils on Power level 6 instead.

PS I don’t think you can ever be accused of exaggerating! :rofl:

#50

different people respond differently, but pretty quickly you can find what works best for you if you experiment a little bit.

The efficiency numbers are startling. A short, sharp waveform of the correct shape is only 0.2% of the energy of a full sine wave, so it is literally 500 times more efficient if they each have the same biological effect.

The other efficiency number that stood out to me when I measured and calculated it was the difference between direct application of electrical current versus inductive coupling (the basis for ICES-PEMF). This is mainly because directly applied electrical current loses almost all of its energy trying to overcome the resistance of skin and similar tissues, and then the path it takes once it does get past the skin. Inductive coupling of energy passes right through areas like dry skin without any loss of energy.

When you calculate both of these (inductive coupling and energy path/distribution), inductive coupling to deep tissues is somewhere between 1000 to 10,000 times more efficient than directly-applied (conductively coupled) electrical current, such as TENS, or any system that uses conductive electrodes.

There is one more inductive effect that I know of that I am trying to measure and optimize, and that should improve the efficiency by an additional factor of about 2x to 10x, I think.

2 Likes