Pulsed Magnetic Field System Frequently Asked Questions

"Here's Some Questions About Pulsed Magnetic Field Therapy That You Might Have On The Tip of Your Tongue."

Question 1

Where do electromagnetic fields occur in our natural environment?

Answer 1

Magnetic fields occur naturally, and living cells depend upon them to assist in the maintenance of cellular membrane resilience. The earth and sun create magnetic fields. Without magnetic fields from the earth and sunlight, life would not be possible. Human movement creates magnetic fields within the body that stimulate cells, hence the importance of exercise in health maintenance. Most important, human movement generates a magnetic field, which brings about cell regeneration. This maintains the membrane potential at the ideal 70 to 90 mV level.

Question 2

What is the difference between static magnets and pulsating electromagnetic fields?

Answer 2

Static field magnets are commonly used in the form of bracelets, back supports, shoe inserts, and sleeping mattresses to control pain. There has been an explosion in the use of these magnets in the US over the past 10 years. They are effective, but over time the body can become accustomed to the constant field, no longer receiving the initial health benefits. Static magnets must be worn or used for long periods of time. Most of these products use field strengths of 10s to 1000s of gauss. The stronger fields require closer health management. In contrast, the leading-edge QRS in-home health appliance imitates the low magnetic fields that occur naturally in our bodies. The QRS is one of the first consumer accessible devices to use a micro-Tesla or 0.05 to 0.5 gauss field device. The QRS pulsating electromagnetic field has frequencies that differ regularly from time to time so that they flow in a wavelike form, specifically, sawtooth-shaped waves. The QRS has safe, long-lasting beneficial results created in only 8 minutes, twice a day. After 20 years of widespread clinical testing, no negative side effects have been found. It's a safe and easy self-managed health care solution. The QRS is gentle enough to use with babies, the elderly…and pets too!

Question 3

What is the relationship between magnetism and human health?

Answer 3

Radios, computers, cellular phones, and other equipment create unnatural magnetic fields in our environment. This affects cell membranes, which in turn affect human health. Although positive magnetic fields are all around us and in us, interference with their balance is harmful. Human interference has disturbed the electrical potential of cell membranes, and disturbed cells do not function optimally. Human intervention, in the form of QRS, can restore the necessary balance.

Question 4

What is the number one cause of illness?

Answer 4

Cell malfunction is the basis for illness. Though we live in an industrial, affluent country, we suffer from loss of personal energy. Stress and environmental pollution, together with insufficient exercise and improper diet rob us of energy, or at least tip us out of energetic balance. Cells are no longer functioning correctly. This situation leads to poor circulation, declining performance, premature aging, and degenerative diseases.

Question 5

What are the physiological effects of QRS treatment?

Answer 5

First, blood circulation increases because friction and flow resistance in the blood vessels are reduced. At the same time, the diffusion rate for oxygen and carbon dioxide increases and oxygen content of the blood goes up. Second, cell membrane potential normalizes due to QRS energy, which restores the balance of positive and negative ions. Third, calcium is released from the protein layer of cell membranes, triggering many reactions including macrophage activation (the "eating" of foreign particles). Calcium influx enlarges blood vessels and sets off the production of new cells. Thus, the body receives support both in preventing and in fighting illness.

Question 6

What effect does QRS have on blood pressure?

Answer 6

QRS reduces the acidity and viscosity of the blood and therefore improves blood circulation. It also regulates the blood pressure. This means that high blood pressure will become lower and low blood pressure will become higher. This regulation of blood pressure takes place during the first two minutes of QRS application.

Question 7

Can QRS be combined with other treatments?

Answer 7

QRS is ideal applied as an adjunctive treatment. Examples include homeopathy, nutritional supplements, chemotherapy, drugs, acupuncture, and massage. The absence of side effects ensures that there is no conflict between treatments.

Question 8

What is the role of metabolism in cell function?

Answer 8

Metabolism in general refers to chemical reactions in body cells. As food is broken down or oxidized, energy is produced. Cell mitochondria give out heat and ATP (adenosine triphosphate), a vital form of chemical energy utilized in all cell activity. Activity releases carbon dioxide, water, and other waste products. When cell membranes do not receive the required amount of energy, this sequence of reactions is impaired. When reactions are impaired, cytolysis (cell disintegration) results.

Question 9

How does QRS affect cell metabolism?

Answer 9

QRS produces a pulsating magnetic field, which supplies body cells with the energy they lack. Then cells are enabled to function (metabolize) optimally. These low pulsating magnetic fields operate to bring about cell and body regeneration in a natural way without side effects. This activates the immune system and puts the body in a state where it can actually heal itself.

CLICK HERE TO ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Glossary of Terms You Might Find Helpful For Pulsed Magnetic Therapy:

Resonance
To manifest sympathetic vibration. Human cells each have a specific vibration. The QRS produces an electromagnetic field, which imitates and creates the same vibration as healthy human cells.

Electromagnetic field
A magnetic field is created by passing an electric current through a coil of wire. The QRS emits a patented electromagnetic field wave, shaped in a saw-tooth pattern.

Micro Tesla
Measurement term for magnetic field strength.

Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Properties
Every pulsing electromagnetic field is characterized by the three parameters of waveform, frequency and field strength.
Waveform: The patented QRS saw-tooth wave generates electromagnetic forces that create actions in the body. They are responsible for the optimal level for transport of ions, among other actions.
Frequency: Everything that exists has a vibration, including every atom, molecule and thus the human cell. The QRS uses the frequencies of the body itself, which are generated through movement. The concept on which the QRS was based was that humans carry a symphony of frequencies in the body. By treating the person through electromagnetic fields, it is necessary to offer the full package of personal frequencies that support the body to perform its own functions. The QRS contains a range of frequencies from 3-1000 Hertz.
Field Strengths: Because the system is using the body's own frequencies, only very gentle and small magnetic field strengths have to be used. The QRS works with average field strengths between 3 and 30 micro-Tesla. Even the magnetic field strength of the earth is greater (50 micro Tesla). This is why there are no side effects from using the QRS.

Hertz
Measurement term for quantifying electro/pulsed magnetic frequencies.

Cellular Metabolism
The entire sum of all physical and chemical processes is constantly taking place in human cells. Healthy cells need food, oxygen, water and nutrients, which produces energy for functioning of the human body. At the same time, waste and toxins are released.

What constitutes a cell?
Each cell consists of a membrane, nucleus and mitochondria, the electricity plant of the cell. The cell produces its own energy (ATP).

ADP
ADP is Adenosine Di Phosphate. This is the chemical that is converted by the body into ATP so the body can use it for energy. In addition, a further 90 chemicals are required. Apart from ATP, carbon dioxide, water and waste products are produced.

ATP
ATP is Adenosine Tri Phosphate. This is the energy the body's cells use to function on a daily basis.

Transmembrane Potential
The electric voltage of the outer layer of human cells. In a healthy cellular environment the transmembrane potential is between 70-110 mV (millivolts). In a state of disease the cells of the human body drop their voltage under 70 mV, thus causing a sluggish metabolism. The QRS assists in raising and maintaining the cell transmembrane potential to 70-110 mV.

CLICK HERE TO ORDER RIGHT NOW!

You are probably wondering...
"Can I see some scientific data on this?"

Well this is where things get a bit technical but if that's your style then dig into this:

By Dr. W. Gaube, Dr. W. Kobinger, Dr. G. Fischer, Germany and Austria July 1999, Empirical report

Summary
32 patients of a general practice, predominantly with disorders of the locomotor system or other specific diseases were treated with weak pulsed magnetic fields (field strength: max. 4µT) at different time intervals and partly in conjunction with conservative therapy. Two devices were used ("Salut 1" or "Bonvita") with coil-mats built into a mattress.

Upon conclusion of the magnetic field therapy we found a highly significant improvement in mobility among patients and (p < 0.01) a reduction in the fingertip to floor distance when bending forward. Furthermore, patients who received drug treatment needed a significantly lower dosage of drugs after completion of the magnetic field treatment.

Keywords: Magnetic field therapy, adjuvant treatment of elderly patients, reduction of drugs, improved mobility

Introduction
In this day and age, when nearly half of the population above 45 years of age is complaining of back pains and also of the peripheral joints (1) - which results in high treatment and rehabilitation costs for this segment of the population - the desire to find complementary treatment methods or alternatives to classical, mostly drug-oriented school medicine has been on the increase.

Hence, an ever growing number of consumers who are becoming more critical and in extreme cases, rejecting school medicine altogether, are gathering information in this by the mass media influenced society about fast-acting therapy methods which are "free from side-effects". This trend extends across nearly the entire broad spectrum of diseases, which a general physician sees for treatment. Since using pulsed magnetic fields in human medicine as adjuvant therapy method starting in the early 70s, treatment of diseases of the locomotor and sustentacular apparatus were of primary concern, using the following two field characteristics:

1. The classical type of magnetic field therapy was using pulsed low-frequency magnetic fields (up to approx. 1000 Hz [pulse repetition] frequency, field strengths in the milli Tesla range, mainly for the treatment of poorly healing bone fractures (7,11,16). Even the German health insurance industry recognized low-frequency magnetic fields temporarily as an "ultima ratio" therapy method (11).

2. The application of presently (still) under-appreciated very weak pulsed low-frequency magnetic fields (with field strengths not exceeding one tenths of the previously mentioned value) as an adjuvant to conventional therapy methods for diseases of the rheumatic type or for attritional symptoms of the locomotor and sustentacular apparatus (9,14), this type of treatment continuous to be subject to debate in circles of physicians who have a negative attitude towards it, despite strict supervision by physicians who are familiar with this biomedical subject matter (11,12,15). Although some critical arguments may be justified, our own research in this area, starting with the empirical report on the double blind trial, indicates that these fields with extremely low current strengths (13) induced within the tissues seem to be effective (4,5,8,10,19). This skeptical attitude, even total refusal, towards this type of therapy is directed predominantly towards diseases outside the rheumatic-degenerative range of diseases, fueled by the general lack of literature on this topic (2).

Material and Methods
The present study originates from an empirical report from a practice of general medicine in a mixed agrarian-industrial region. The population density of the commuter belt around the central town of Knittelfeld where that practice is located, or the urbanized surrounding area is approximately 50,000 inhabitants.

The treating physician who is using the magnetic field therapy has no objections towards it and has several years of experience in this field (8). The two devices used in two examination series are the "Salut I" and the "Bonvita" devices, the latter of which being structurally very similar to the first.

Both plug-in type devices with built-in timer function for a (fixed) application of 8-minute duration consist of a computer-controlled generator section, which is connected to an application mattress (1 x b approx. 180 x 80 cm) via a coaxial cable. The mattress contains 3 integrated flat coil pairs with tapered wire cross-sections, generating magnetic field strengths of varying degree in the primary target regions of shoulder, hip, and knees. For unproven reasons, based on the current state of international scientific research, the weakest applied inductive field is supposed to be near the head and the strongest field in the area of the lower extremities.

The device for which a patent has been applied generates complex, layered impulse packets with a maximum adjustable effective field strength (Level 5) of 4 µT, according to the manufacturer. The field strengths of the other adjustment levels are not documented. Both devices used in this series were so-called "Verum" devices, no comparative group was used, hence this series cannot be considered a statistically controlled study. The time period of this report ranges from January 1996 to mid-May 1997, during which the treating physician subjected certain patients to magnetic field therapy based on his many years of experience. The entire group consisted of 32 individuals (average age: 65.3 ± 10, 5a, 20 females and 12 males) with ages ranging from 38 to 84 years.

Therapy series I (see Table 1) for which the "Salut I" device was used, was conducted on a daily basis at approximately the same time every day with the patient lying down (1 hour, based on patient survey), hence no therapy-free days were noted. In series II (see Table 2) the "Bonvita" device was used for treatment at the office, which means that patients received 5 consecutive applications with a 2-day break during weekends. In this case, the treatments lasted 3 weeks, starting on Monday of the 1st week, concluded with a final examination on the Monday of the 5th week. Holidays and missed days of therapy in series II were made up at a later time.

During the treatment period, control examinations were conducted in order to adjust individual therapy measures, if necessary. Collectively, there were 18 patients receiving medication (antirheumatics, soporifics, analgesics) based on their complaints. A possible reduction in medication during the treatment period or after the magnetic field treatment was also taken into consideration. Patients who were released "without medication" received no medication for the listed diagnosis. The measure of mobility improvement among patients who suffered from mobility-limiting diseases of the spine was the fingertip-floor distance in cm when bending forward, determined before and after the therapy series (D FBA, Table 1a + 2a).

In evaluating the success of the therapy among the patients, a comparison was made between the intake of medication and the change of fingertip - floor distance before and after the magnetic field therapy, assuming an equal distribution (50% / 50%) of the values in the Chi2 Test.

Results
With respect to a reduction in medication, a significant success was achieved in reducing the dosage among 16 cases in comparison to 2 cases who maintained their dosages (Chi2 = 10.89, df = 1, p < 0.001). All 9 patients who were tested for mobility after the therapy, showing a significant improvement in reducing the fingertip-floor distance (Chi2 = 0.9, df = 1, p < 0.01), indicating an improvement in their mobility. When considering those patients whose successful therapy can only be evaluated qualitatively based on their verbal response, one can deduce a collectively positive effect as a result of the magnetic field therapy. No failures were noted, patients reacted differently, but during the course of treatment, an improvement of varying degree was noted in every case.

Discussion
In a comparison with partially positive results of magnetic field therapy using relatively strong fields (3,6,17,18,20) for diseases of the locomotor and sustentacular system (2), it may be more interesting for scientific, practice-relevant considerations to continue and extend future systematic research efforts on the effects of very weak, magnetically fluctuating impulse fields on other kinds of diseases. This effort should be conducted without the objections stemming from certain interest groups in school medicine in order to avoid a suppression of positive results released to the general public. On the other hand, in order to avoid the promotion of diverse magnetic field therapy devices for the purpose of self-healing among patients gravitating in that direction, emphasis should be placed on the use of these devices adjuvantly by physicians familiar with these devices. Manufacturers often recommend in their brochures and advertisements certain treatment methods by suggesting parameter adjustments (diagrams, field strengths, frequencies, application intervals, field sources) which may not be substantiated by research. Many of these claimed successes which are sometimes based on just one patient, are justifiably criticized by knowledgeable specialists.

In contrast to these claims, this empirical report shall serve as an orientation (no blind trials, no control groups, no rigid marginal conditions of an exact clinical study), which can be repeated by other researchers interested in this method or for further development.

With the exception of individual cases, other groups of diseases besides the diseases of the locomotor and sustentacular system are being treated successfully and the documented therapeutic treatments are repeatable.

Another reason why some researchers exhibit reservations regarding the use of weak magnetic fluctuating fields in human medicine is justifiably based on the uncertainty which of the well-researched or theoretical interactive mechanisms are actually responsible for the observed effects.

No specific receptors are known which operate solely on a physical basis of magnetic field effects, while they have been shown, even structurally, to react with pharmacological agents. Many drug-induced physical-chemical reactions are far from being fully understood with respect to their action and their action can often only be described in a round-about way to specific organic structures or defined control circuits.

Low-frequency, fluctuating magnetic fields, even those with field strengths of nearly 1 Tesla, tend to penetrate the body unhindered, showing no adverse thermal effects. Exceptions are metallic implants which heat up as a result of being irradiated by these fields.

Nevertheless, we have observed on numerous occasions positive effects (4,5,8,10,19), and given the fact that these magnetic fields do not seem to cause any side-effects, based on the present state of science, they do tend to aid in medicated treatment therapies to some degree and, in this sense, should be desirable within a broader treatment spectrum for suffering patients.

CLICK HERE TO ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Scientific Studies From All Over The World Confirm The Benefit of Pulsed Magnetic Field Therapy:

1. Aaron, R.K., D. Lennox, G.E. Bunce and T. Ebert, 1989. The conservative treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. A comparison of core decompression and pulsing electromagnetic fields. Clin. Orthop. 249:209-216.

2. Adair R.K., 1999. Effects of very weak magnetic fields on radical pair formation. Bioelectromagnetics, 20: 255-263.

3. Adair, R.K., 1991. Constraints on biological effects of weak extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields. Phys Rev A, 43: 1038-1049.

4. Ahrens J: Selective Cyclo-oxygenase Inhibition, Therapiewoche (Switzerland) 10/7: 373-376, 1994

5. Ammer K: Magnetic Field Therapy - A Critical Literature Overview. Ost Z Phys Med 3/2:61-69, 1993

6. Anonymous: Magnetic Fields Stimulate Bone Healing. Öst Ärzte Zeitung H.11:55, 1999

7. Ayrapetyan S.N., Grigorian K.V., Avanesian A.S., Stamboltsian K.V., 1994. Magnetic fields alter electrical properties of solutions and their physiological effects. Bioelectromagnetics, 15:133-42.

8. Barovic J, G. Fischer, Z. Turk, W. Kobinger: Enhanced Mobility and Pain Reduction with Magnetic Fields for Diseases of the Locomotor and Sustentacular System. Öst Z Phys Med 5/4: 162-163, 1995

9. Barovic J, Z. Turk, M. Kokoschinegg, W. Kobinger, G. Fischer: Adjuvant Magnetic Field Therapy in the Rehabilitation of Elderly Patients with Fractures Near the Hip Joint. Der praktische Arzt 48/708: 512-516, 1994

10. Bassett CA. Bioelectromagnetics in the service of medicine. In: Blank M, ed. Electromagnetic fields: biological interactions and mechanisms. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1995.

11. Bassett, C.A.L., A.A. Pilla and R.J. Pawluk, 1977. A non-surgical salvage of surgically-resistant pseudoarthroses and non-unions by pulsing electromagnetic fields. Clin. Orthop 124:117-128.

12. Bawin S.M. and Adey W.R., 1976. Sensitivity of calcium binding in cerebral tissue to weak environmental electric fields ocillating at low frequencies. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 73: 1999.

13. Bawin, S. M., Kaczmarek, K. L., and Adey, W. R., 1975. Effects of modulated VHF fields on the central nervous system, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 247:74.

14. Bier RR, Estersohn HS. A new treatment for Charcot joint in the diabetic foot. J Am Pod Med Assoc 1987;77:63-69.

15. Binder A, G. Parr, B. Hazleman, S. Fitton-Jacksin. Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy of Persistent Rotator Cuff Tendinitis. Lancet I: 695-698, 1984

16. Binder, A., G. Parr, B. Hazleman and S. Fitton-Jackson, 1984. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy of persistent rotator cuff tendinitis. Lancet 8379:695-698.

17. Blackman, C.F. Benane, S.G. Rabinowitz, J.R. House, D.E. and Joines, W.T., 1985. A role for the magnetic field in the radiation-induced efflux of calcium ions from brain tissue in vitro. Bioelectromagnetics 6: 327.

18. Blumenthal N.C., Ricci J., Breger L., Zychlinsky A., Solomon H., Chen G-G., Kuznetsov, D., Dorfman, R., 1997. Effects of low intensity AC and/or DC electromagnetic fields on cell attachment and induction of apoptosis. Bioelectromagnetics, 18: 264-272.

19. Brighton, C.T., 1981. The treatment of non-unions with electricity. J. Bone Joint Surg. 63A:847-851.

20. Busch, K.W. et. al., 1986. Studies of a water treatment device that uses magnetic fields. Corrosion - NACE, 42: 211.

21. Cavapol A.V., Wamil A.W., Holcomb R.R., McLean M.J., 1995. Measurement and analysis of static magnetic fields that block action potentials in cultured neurons. Bioelectromagnetics, 16:197-206.

22. Chiabrera A. and Bianco, B., 1987. The role of the magnetic field in the EM Interaction with Ligand Binding, in M. Blank and E. Findl (eds.), Mechanistic Approaches to Interaction of Electric and Electromagnetic Fields with Living Systems, Plenum Press, NY, p. 79.

23. Chiabrera, A., Bianco, B., Kaufman, J.J. and Pilla A.A., 1992. Bioelectromagnetic resonance interactions: endogenous field and noise, in B. Norden and C. Ramel (eds.), Interaction Mechanisms of Low-level Electromagnetic Fields, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 164.

24. Chiabrera, A., Grattarola M. and Viviani, R., 1984. Interaction between electromagnetic fields and cells: Microelectrophoretic effect on ligands and surface receptors. Bioelectromagnetics 5: 173.

25. Colbert A.P., Markov M.S., Banerij M., Pilla A.A., 1999. Magnetic mattress mad use in patients with fibromyalgia: A randomized double-blind pilot study. J Back Musculoskeletal Rehab, 13: 19-31.

26. Collacott E.A., Zimmerman J.T., White D.W., Rindone J.P., 2000. Bipolar permanent magnets for the treatment of low back pain: A pilot study. JAMA, 283: 1322-1325.

27. Cox, J.A., 1988. Interactive properties of calmodulin. Biochemical Journal, 249: 621.

28. Eichwald C., Wallaczek J., 1996. Model for magnetic field effects on radical pair recombination in enzyme kinetics. Biophys J, 71: 623-631.

29. Foley-Nolan, D., C. Barry, R.J. Coughlan, P. O'Connor and D. Roden, 1990. Pulsed high frequency (27MHz) electromagnetic therapy for persistent neck pain: a double blind placebo-controlled study of 20 patients. Orthopedics 13:445-451.

30. Foley-Nolan, D., K. Moore, M. Codd et al., 1992. Low energy high frequency pulsed electromagnetic therapy for acute whiplash injuries: a double blind randomized controlled study. Scan. J. Rehab. Med. 24:51-59.

31. Fontanesi G, Gc. Traina, F. Giacecci et al.: La lenta Evoluzione del' Processo riparativo di una Frattura può essere prevenuta? Giorn Ital Ortop Traumatol 13/9: 389-404, 1986

32. Frankel RB, Liburdy RP. Biological effects of static magnetic fields. In: Polk C, Postow E, eds. Handbook of biological effects of electromagnetic fields. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1996:153-188:153.

33. Garg, T.K. et. al., 1995. Effect of magnetically restructured water on the Liver of a Catfish. Electro- and Magnetobiology, 14: 107.

34. Gossling, H.R., R.A. Bernstein and J. Abbott, 1992. Treatment of ununited tibial fractures: A comparison of surgery and pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF). Orthopaedics, 15:711-719.

35. Gränz A, G. Fischer, C. Anderwald, W. Gaube, H. Lischnig: Using a Pocket-sized Magnetic Field Device for the Supportive Treatment for Somnipathy or Complaints of Weather Sensitivity, Erfahrungsheilkunde 36/10: 650-653, 1987

36. Greenbaum B., Sutton C., Vadula M.S., Battocletti J.H., Swiontek T., DeKeyser J., Sisken B.F., 1996. Effects of pulsed magnetic fieldson neurite outgrowth from chick embryos. Bioelectromagnetics, 17: 293-302.

37. Haimovici N: Theoretical Considerations Regarding the Use of Low-Frequency Pulsed Magnetic Fields in Orthopedic Therapy. Therapiewoche 30: 4599-4606, 1990

38. Higashitani, K. et. al., 1992. Effects of magnetic fields effects on stability of nonmagnetic ultrafine colloidal particles, J Colloid Interface Sci, 152: 125.

39. Ieran M, Zaffuto S, Bagnancani M, Annovi M, Moratti A, Cadossi R. Effect of low frequency pulsing electromagnetic fields on skin ulcers of venous origin in humans: a double blind study. J Orthoped Res 1990;8:276-282.

40. Jerabek J, Pawluk W. Magnetic therapy in Eastern Europe: a review of 30 years of research. Chicago: William Pawluk,MD,MSc, publ., 1998.

41. Jones D.B., Ryaby, J.T., 1987. Low energy time varying electromagnetic field interactions with cellular control mechanisms. In: Blank M, Findl E, eds. Mechanistic approaches to interactions of electric and electromagnetic fields with living systems. Plenum Press, NY, pp. 389-97.

42. Kaczmarek, L. K., and Adey, W. R., 1974. Weak electric gradients change ionic and transmitter fluxes in cortex, Brain. Res., 66:537.

43. Kloth L.C. and M.C. Zisken, 1996. Diathermy and pulsed radio frequency radiation, in Michlovitz S., ed, Thermal agents in rehabilitation. F.A. Davis, Philadelphia, pp. 213-254.

44. Kloth LC, Berman JE, Sutton CH, Jeutter DC, Pilla AA, Epner ME: 1999. Effect of Pulsed Radio Frequency Stimulation on Wound Healing: A Double-Blind Pilot Clinical Study, in "Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine", Bersani F, ed, Plenum, New York, pp. 875-878.

45. Kokoschinegg P, G. Fischer: Effects of Pulsed Magnetic Fields of Low-Intensity on Biological Systems and Basic Research on this Phenomenon. Magnets in Your Future 6/4: 4-13, 1992

46. Kröling P, W. Schnizer: Zur Problematik of Magnetic Field Therapy. Z Phys Med Baln Med Klim 14: 177-198, 1985

47. Kröling P: Magnetic Field Therapy, in: Schmidt KL, Drexel H and Jochheim KA (Publ.): Text Book on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, G. Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, Chapters 4-9, pp. 192-197, 1985

48. Lin I.J. and Yotvat, J., 1990. Exposure of irrigation and drinking water to a magnetic field with controlled power and direction. J Magnetism Magnetic Mat, 83: 525.

49. Lundager Madsen, H.E., 1995. Influence of magnetic field on the precipitation of some inorganic salts, J. Crystal Growth, 152: 94.

50. MacGinitie L. Streaming and piezoelectric potentials in connective tissues. In: Blank M, ed. Electromagnetic fields: biological interactions and mechanisms. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1995:497.

51. Malmivuo J, Plonsey R. Biolelectromagnetism: principles and applications of bioelectric and biomagnetic fields. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995:482.

52. Man, D., Man B., Plosker H., 1999. The influence of permanent magnetic field therapy on wound healing in suction lipectomy patients: A double-blind study. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 104: 2261-2296.

53. Markov M.M., Muehsam D.L., Pilla A.A., 1998. Permanent magnetic fields: Dosimetry and bioeffects. Bioelectromagnetics Society, 20th Ann Meeting, St. Pete, FL, June 7-11.

54. Markov M.S. and A.A. Pilla, 1997. Weak static magnetic field modulation of myosin phosphorylation in a cell-free preparation: Calcium dependence, Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, 43: 233-238.

55. McDonald F., 1993. Effect of static magnetic fields on osteoblasts and fibroblasts in-vitro. Bioelectomagnetics, 14:187-96.

56. McLean MJ, Holcomb RR, Wamil AW, Pickett JD, Cavopol AV. Blockade of sensory neuron action potentials by a static magnetic field in the 10mT range. Bioelectromagnetics 1995; 16:20-32.

57. Mooney V. A randomized double-blind prospective study of the efficacy of pulsed electromagnetic fields for interbody lumbar fusions. Spine 1990;15:708-712.

58. Mooney, V., 1990. A randomized double-blind prospective study of the efficacy of pulsed electromagnetic fields for interbody lumbar fusions. Spine 15:708-711.

59. Muehsam D.J. and Pilla, A.A., 1994. Weak magnetic field modulation of ion dynamics in a potential well: mechanistic and thermal noise considerations. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics 35: 71.

60. Muehsam D.J. and Pilla, A.A., 1996. Lorentz approach to static magnetic field effects on bound ion dynamics and binding kinetics: Thermal Noise Considerations. Bioelectromagnetics 17: 89.

61. Muehsam D.S., Pilla A.A., 1999. The sensitivity of cells and tissues to exogenous fields: Effects of target system initial state, Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, 48: 35-42.

62. Natarajan E., Grissom C.B., 1996. The origin of magnetic field dependent recombination in alkylcobalamin radical pairs. Photochem Photobiol, 64: 286-295.

63. Pages Ih, H. Hermann, E. Conradi: Magnetic Field Therapy for Chronic Degenerative Diseases of the Locomotor System, Z Physiother 37: 21-24, 1985

64. Pandey, S. et. al., 1996. Effect of magnetically treated induced water structure on the oestrus cycles of albino female mice Mus Musculus. Electro- and Magnetobiology, 15: 133.

65. Pennington GM, Danley DL, Sumko MH, et al., 1993. Pulsed, non-thermal, high frequency electromagnetic energy (Diapulse) in the treatment of grade I and grade II ankle sprains. Military Med. 158:101-104.

66. Pilla A.A., Figueiredo M., Nasser P.R., Kaufman J.J., Siffert R.S., 1992. A clinically effective pulsed EMF signal accelerates fresh fracture repair in a rabbit model. Trans ORS, 17: 529.

67. Pilla A.A., Muehsam D.J., Markov M.S. 1997. A dynamical systems/Larmor precession model for weak magnetic field bioeffects: Ion-binding and orientation of bound water molecules. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics 43:239-249.

68. Pilla A.A., Nasser P.R., Kaufman J.J., 1992. The sensitivity of cells and tissues to weak electromagnetic fields, in, "Charge and Field Effects in Biosystems-3", Allen M.J., Cleary S.F., Sowers A.E., Shillady D.D., eds, Birkhauser, Boston, pp. 231-241.

69. Pilla, A.A. D.J. Muehsam, M.S. Markov and B.F. Sisken,1999. EMF signals and ion/ligand binding kinetics: Prediction of bioeffective waveform parameters, 48: 27-34.

70. Pilla, A.A., 1993. State of the art in electromagnetic therapeutics. In: Blank M (ed), Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine, San Francisco: San Francisco Press Inc. 17-22.

71. Pilla, A.A., D.E. Martin A.M. Schuett et al., 1996. Effect of pulsed radiofrequency therapy on edema from grades I and II ankle sprains: a placebo controlled, randomized, multi-site, double-blind clinical study. J. Athl. Train. S31:53.

72. Pilla, A.A., P.R. Nasser, J.J. Kaufman, 1993. On the sensitivity of cells and tissues to therapeutic and environmental electromagnetic fields, Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, 30: 161-166.

73. Pscheider G: Magnetic Field Therapy, Thesis at the Institute for Electro and Biomedicine Technology at the TU Graz, 1987

74. Rinaldi E, V. Negri, P. Marenghi et al.: Treatment of Infected Pseudarthrosis of the Inferior Limb with Low-Frequency Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields: Report of 16 Cases. J Bioelectricity 4/1: 251-264, 1985

75. Ryaby, J.T., 1998, Clinical effects of electromagnetic and electric fields on fracture healing. Clin Orthop, S205.

76. Salzberg, C.A., S.A. Cooper, P. Perez, M.G. Viehbeck and D.W. Byrne, 1995. The effects of non-thermal pulsed electromagnetic energy on wound healing of pressure ulcers in spinal cord-injured patients: a randomized, double-blind study. Ostomy Wound Management 41:42-51.

77. Sharrard, W.J.W., 1990. A double-blind trial of pulsed electromagnetic fields for delayed union of tibial fractures. J. Bone Joint Surg.,72B:347-352.

78. Sisken B.F., Kanje M., Lundborg G., Kurtz W., 1990. Pulsed electromagnetic fields stimulate nerve regeneration in vivo and in vitro. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 1: 303-309.

79. Sisken BF, Kanje M, Lundborg G, Herbst E, Kurtz W. Stimulation of rat sciatic nerve regeneration with pulsed electromagnetic fields. Brain Research 1989; 485:309-316.

80. Sisken, B.F., Midkiff, P., Markov, M.S., 1999. Static magnetic fields and nerve regeneration. Bioelectromagnetics Society, 21st Ann Meeting, Long Beach, June 20-24.

81. Steiner, U.E, and Ulrich, T., 1989. Magnetic effects in chemical kinetics, and related phenomena. Chem Rev., 51:89.

82. Stiller MJ, Pak GH, Shupack JL, Thaler S, Kenny C, Jondreau L. A portable pulsed electromagnetic field (pemf) device to enhance healing of recalcitrant venous ulcers: a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Br. J. Dermatol 1989;127:147-154.

83. Todorov N: Treatment of Periarthritis of the Shoulder Joint Using Controlled Pulsed Magnetic Fields. Z Physiother 31:93-97, 1979

84. Trock Dh, Aj. Bollett, Rh. Dyer Jr, Lp. Fielding, Wk. Miner, R. Markol: A Double Blind Trial of the Clinical Effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields in Osteoarthritis, J Rheumatol 20: 456-468, 1993

85. Vallbona C, Haywood CF, Jurida G. Response of pain to static magnetic fields in post-polio patients: a double blind pilot study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehab. 1997; 78:1200-3.

86. Wagner W, W. Kobinger, G. Fischer: Pain Reduction through Miniaturized Magnetic Field Devices for Diseases of the Locomotor and Sustentacular System, Arzt und Praxis 49/728: 443-446, 1995

87. Walleczek J. Magnetokinetic effects on radical pairs: a paradigm for magnetic field interactions with biologic systems at lower than thermal energy. In: Blank M, ed. Electromagnetic fields: biological interactions and mechanisms. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1995:395-420.

88. Warnke U. Infrared radiation and oxygen partial pressure in human surfacial tissue as indicators of the therapeutic effects of pulsating magnetic fields of extremely low frequency (Report from the 2nd International Congress on Magnetomedicine). Biophysics and Medicine Report 1981;2/81:1-8

89. Weber M, ed. Therapy with pulsating magnetic fields used in combination with other treatment methods. Uttwil, Switzerland: Biophysics and Medicine Report, 1992:64.

90. Weintraub MI. Chronic submaximal magnetic stimulation in peripheral neuropathy: is there a beneficial therapeutic relationship? Am. J. Pain Management 1997; Vol 8.

91. Yamauchi T., Yoshimura Y., Nomura T., Fujii M., Sugiura H., 1998. Neurite outgrowth of neuroblastoma cells overexpressing alpha and beta isoforms of Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II - effects of protein kinase inhibitors. Brain Res Brain Res Protoc 2: 250-258.

92. Zhadin, M.N. and Fesenko, E.E. Ion cyclotron resonance in biomolecules, 1990. Biomedical Sciences 1: 245.

93. Zucco F, B. Orlandi: Very Low Frequency and Low Intensity Magnetic Fields in a Different Treatment of Disease. Chronic Low Back Pain in Senile Degenerative Arthritis: A Double Blind Study, Bio-electrochemistry and Bioenergetics 14: 187-195, 1985

Some Scientific Studies Using PMF...

Clinical use and testing of the QRS began with elderly patients who were not having success with standard medical treatment. Review Elderly Diseases to see the broad range of positive outcomes with QRS for mature populations.

All producers of magnetic field therapies claim their products regenerate by activating cell metabolism. Metabolism always requires transport of ions. Therefore all such claims should be evaluated carefully. Only QRS has a worldwide patent, obtained after years of research, for the transport of ions into body cells. See our Ion Transport blood study demonstrating the transport of sodium, calcium, and potassium.

Pain Reduction has been another positive effect of the low frequency pulsating fields of the QRS system.

See Pain Reduction 1 for results presented at the 26th Conference of the Austrian Society for Internal Medicine in Europe.
See Pain Reduction 2 for results presented at the Annual Conference of the Austrian Society for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
Review the results of a randomized double blind study with the QRS involving Osteoarthritis of the Knee.
View positive x-ray results from using the QRS Small Pillow in the case of Calcifying Tendinitis of the Shoulder.
Check a report on the application of the QRS in treating Wound Healing at the Geriatric Hospital in Graz, Austria.
Review the small study on Rehabilitation of Discopathy patients and QRS treatment.
A preliminary study examined how the blood vessels in the retina are dilated when using the QRS. This Retina Study shows positive potential use of QRS in the field of ophthalmology.

William Pawluk, MD, guides QRS use. Through the guidance of William Pawluk, MD, MSc, Assistant Professor at Johns Hopkins Medical School, initial work has begun to educate both physicians and individuals about pulsating electromagnetic fields as a treatment option. Dr. Pawluk is considered a leading national authority on the clinical application of both static and pulsed electromagnetic fields in the United States.

Under his direction, Body Fields is also working to establish an evidence-based standard for use in education about pulsating electromagnetic fields in complementary treatment. As the importer of the QRS, Body Fields USA's purpose is to introduce this new healing concept into the United States. The beneficial applications of pulsating electromagnetic fields as a promising health solution is based on over 30 years of research out of Europe.

The National Foundation of Alternative Medicine (NFAM) was created to scientifically study, validate and publicize information about alternative and complementary treatments for cancer and to make the findings available to the public free of charge. Dr. Pawluk has been appointed the electromagnetic consultant of the Scientific Advisory Board of the NFAM.

William Pawluk, MD was invited to the Bioelectromagnetic Society (BEMS) www.bioelectromagnetics.org meeting in Quebec, Canada, June 25-27, 2002 to speak on the positive results of the QRS with Osteoarthritis of the Knee in relieving joint stiffness and pain while increasing range of motion. The QRS, Quantron Resonance System, was internationally presented as an emerging treatment for osteoarthritis to the foremost research scientists in the field of pulsed electromagnetic fields. To read Dr. Pawluk's abstract contact us.(Treatment of Osteoarthritis with a new Broadband Signal).

Dr. Pawluk presented the QRS at the 2000 North American Academy of Magnetic Therapy (NAAMT) annual convention. NAAMT is the first national US nonprofit organization to represent the interests of clinicians from various disciplines in the emerging new field of magnetics used in clinical application, including both static magnets and frequency or time-varied magnetic fields. Please ask us about his Scientific Lecture to read his presentation.

With Jiri Jerabek, MD, PhD, Dr. Pawluk has co-authored Magnetic Therapy in Eastern Europe: A Review of 30 Years of Research. This book contains extensive medical information and details on the scientific basis of magnetic field therapy. It is appropriate for healthcare professionals and those with serious interest in the subject of magnetic therapy. There is no current source with as much practical research-based medical evidence.

As a consultant to Body Fields, Dr. Pawluk, with his extensive knowledge with the QRS, offers his expertise to you. To support the growth of awareness of pulsating electromagnetic fields and their use for healthcare, a national teleconference call is available for any interested parties. Please Contact Us if you would like to participate.

Presented at the 26th Conference of the Austrian Society for Internal Medicine.

"Using Magnetic Fields to Increase Flexibility and Reduce Pain with Respect to Ailments of the Ambulatory Apparatus."

By Dr. W. Kobinger, Dr. G. Fischer, Dr. T. Barovic, Dr. Z. Turk, Dr. N. Skat, Dr. D. Zivac., Slovakia and Austria, July 1995
Study conducted at Marburg Teaching Hospital, Drau (Slovakia) and the Institute of Hygiene, Graz University (Austria)

Between 01/02/95 and l2/05/95, 14 male and 14 female patients with ambulatory and sustenticular apparatus ailments, were treated solely using a magnetic field treatment device (QRS) . The patients had no prior surgical treatment related to their ailments. The QRS was previously unavailable on the Austrian market.

The patients (Ave. age 46.1 + 10.8 a) were suffering from intervertebral disc prolapse (diagnosed via myclography), spinal stenosis (on basis of CT), and osteoporosis (densiometry). They were treated in 20 sessions (8 minutes, twice daily - once in the morning and once in the afternoon) over a two-week period (Mon-Fri) on a mattress-like application mat using the maximum field-level setting on the QRS device (Bmax = 4 mt).

Success of the therapy was evaluated using a 10-point Dole scale, comparing a measured distance between the fingertips and the floor while the patients were bending forward both prior to, and following, treatment. Evaluation of tile subjective pain experienced by the subjects was carried out using non- parametric maximum, sequential-range, and semi-qualitative Chi2 tests. Flexibility was evaluated using the two-tailed t-Test for unequal variances (parametric test).

Using the sequential-range and maximum tests (111.2), there was a significant reduction in pain (p<0.05). Further level of significance could not be determined in either case due to methodological reasons.

Proceeding on the null hypothesis of an equal distribution for the categories, "improved" and "worsened", the results of the Chi2 test (p<0.001) were highly significant in favor of the effect of the magnetic field treatment. Increased flexibility in bending was also highly significant (p<0.001) (see 111.2).

The results presented in both categories reflect those indicated in international literature. Further cases are currently being studied.

Evaluation of "Pain Reduction"

a. Sequential Range Test. The limits for significance (p0.05) were far exceeded which indicates that improvement was achieved on this level.

b. Maximum Test. The negative (and positive) differences in the Dole scale values were compared (end of therapy minus beginning of therapy). This resulted in highly significant differences (p<0.001) indicating a reduction in pain through magnetic field application.

c. One-dimensional Chi2 test with one degree of freedom (including correction of continuity): There were 28 improvements and 0 deteriorations. Assuming equal distribution (equal amount of improvements and deteriorations), the result was as follows: Chi2 -26.04 (N=28).

This indicates a highly significant decrease in pain (p<0.001).
Evaluation of "Mobility"
The t-test (two-tailed, unequal variances), on the average distance from the floor when bending forward, before and after the MFT series, had the following result:
(Temp = 3.56; FG = 51.07).
This indicates a highly significant increase in mobility (p<0.001)

Presented at the Annual Conference of the Austrian Society for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

"Using Magnetic Fields to Increase Flexibility and Reduce Pain with Respect to Ailments of the Ambulatory Apparatus."

Author: Dr. Joze Barovic
Co-Authors: Dr. G. Fischer, Dr. Z. Turk, Dr. W. Kobinger
Study conducted at Marburg Teaching Hospital, Drau (Slovakia) and the Institute of Hygiene, Graz University (Austria), 1995

Between 01/02/95 and 01/09/95, 23 female and 23 male patients suffering from ailments of their ambulatory and sustentacular apparatus, were treated with a new magnetic field device, QRS, in two research phases. The patients had not been surgically treated for their ailments.

The patients (Ave age: 51.0 +/- 1 15.la) were suffering from intervertebral disc prolapse (n=25, diagnosed via myclography), spinal stenosis (n=18, diagnosed on basis of CT), and osteoporosis (n=-2, diagnosis using densiometry). There was also one patient with spinal stenosis and osteoporosis (See 3. Paragraph 1).

The subjects were treated in 20 sessions (8 minutes twice daily - once in the morning and once in the afternoon) over a two-week period (Mon-Fri) on a mattress-like application mat (3 pairs of reels for neck, trunk and legs) using the maximum field-level setting on the device (Bmax = 4 mt).

Success of the therapy was evaluated using a 10-point Dole scale and (only in the first phase of the experimental tests n = 28) comparing a measurement of the distance between the finger tips and the floor while the patients were bending forward - both prior to, and following, treatment. Evaluation of the subjective pain experienced by the subjects was carried out using the preliminary non-parametric maximum, sequential range, and semi-qualitative Chi2 tests. Due to organizational reasons, flexibility was only measured in the first experimental phase and was evaluated by using the two-tailed V-Test for unequal variances (parametric test).

The results of the individual pain assessments accrued, using the 3 (non) parametric tests, showed the following results with respect to the overall group (3 paragraph 2):

Using the sequential range test there was already a significant result after 8 of the 46 Improvements (p<0.05). The exact level of error could not be determined due to methodological reasons. The maximum test showed a highly significant reduction in pain (p<0.00l) after computing only the 11 largest Dole scale differences.

As before, it was not possible to determine the exact probability of error. Proceeding on the null hypothesis of an equal distribution of improvement / worsening of the perception of pain following.

The application of the magnetic field treatment the results of the Chi2 test (p<0.001) were highly significant in favor of the positive effect of the magnetic field treatment.

Although only measured in 28 patients, due to organizational reasons, the increased flexibility in bending forward was also highly significant (p<0.0001) (see 3 paragraph 2).

The results presented in both categories reflect those indicated in international literature.

Further cases are currently being statistically substantiated.

Publication Article

Medizinisch-Orthopadische Technik (Medical- Orthopedic Techniques)
"Conservative Treatment of 240 Patients with Magnetic Field Therapy"
March/April 1976, Issue 2, page 78
By M. Schroter

Summary:

Magnetic field therapy (MFT) is a clear therapeutic gain in conservatively oriented therapeutics. By no means does it constitute an alternative solution to other forms of therapy, but it has become an established component in the entire treatment spectrum of orthopedics. The indications and results are presented briefly.

The following data relate to a group of 240 patients treated with magnetic field therapy in a conservative orthopedic practice. Any secondary treatment by medication was dropped in 90% of the cases treated with MFT in order not to obscure the therapeutic success, if any. However, in two of Morbus Bechterew's cases, aged 24 and 27, Indometacin was applied. After about 50 sessions of MFT, we discontinued the medication, following gradual reduction, over time, of the daily dose.

CLICK HERE TO ORDER RIGHT NOW!

QRS Helps Elderly People Also:

Austrian Journal for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, August issue 1999

"(Adjuvant) Whole Body Magnetic Field Therapy for Selected Diseases of Elderly Persons in a General Practice"

By Dr. W. Gaube, Dr. W. Kobinger, Dr. G. Fischer, Germany and Austria July 1999, Empirical report

Keywords: Magnetic field therapy, adjuvant treatment of elderly patients, reduction of drugs, improved mobility

1. The classical type of magnetic field therapy was using pulsed low-frequency magnetic fields (up to approx. 1000 Hz [pulse repetition] frequency, field strengths in the milli Tesla range, mainly for the treatment of poorly healing bone fractures (7,11,16). Even the German health insurance industry recognized low-frequency magnetic fields temporarily as an "ultima ratio" therapy method (11).

2. The application of presently (still) under-appreciated very weak pulsed low-frequency magnetic fields (with field strengths not exceeding one tenths of the previously mentioned value) as an adjuvant to conventional therapy methods for diseases of the rheumatic type or for attritional symptoms of the locomotor and sustentacular apparatus (9,14), this type of treatment continuous to be subject to debate in circles of physicians who have a negative attitude towards it, despite strict supervision by physicians who are familiar with this biomedical subject matter (11,12,15). Although some critical arguments may be justified, our own research in this area, starting with the empirical report on the double blind trial, indicates that these fields with extremely low current strengths (13) induced within the tissues seem to be effective (4,5,8,10,19). This skeptical attitude, even total refusal, towards this type of therapy is directed predominantly towards diseases outside the rheumatic-degenerative range of diseases, fueled by the general lack of literature on this topic (2).

Back to Top

CLICK HERE TO ORDER RIGHT NOW!