Destroying disease with electricity…

[hazard5]

I trust that there are many of you on this board who are in school and majoring in the sciences…especially if you want to get into medicine, and I am sure there are some of you that already are doctors, biologists, and medical researchers…

 

Well I just wanted to get your opinion on something that I have been looking into for the past year and using myself. I am a 2nd year college student at the University of New Orleans and majoring in biology, and hopefully I will be getting into a premed program…but I am still undecided.

 

Anyway, around the time I was 16, I started looking online for anything that could help me get rid of or help me fight a really annoying virus. Yes, I have had herpes simplex 1, apparently my sister had it too…must have been a kiss from a aunt or something, maybe even my parents had it…around the time I was 17 I had a shingles outbreak, and it really freaked me out…So I looked and looked online, researched all the new vaccines that were being developed, which seemed to be far and far away from being finished, and anything “alternative” if you will…

 

I came across article about 2 research scientists at the Einstein university of New York

 

Here is a quote:

 

“In the Fall of 1990, two medical researchers, Drs.William Lyman and Steven Kaali, working at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City made an important discovery. They found that they could inactivate the HIV virus by applying a low voltage direct current electrical potential with an extremely small current flow to AIDS infected blood in a test tube. Initially, they discovered this in the lab by inserting two platinum electrodes into a glass tube filled with HIV-1 (type 1) infected blood. They applied a direct current to the electrodes and found that a current flow in the range of 50-100 microamperes (uA) produced the most effective results. Practically all of the HIV viral particles were adversely affected while normal blood cells remained unharmed. The viral particles were not directly destroyed by the electric current, but rather the outer protein coating of the virus was affected in such a way as to prevent the virus from producing reverse transcriptase, a necessary enzyme needed by the virus to invade human cells. Reverse transcriptase allows the virus to enter a human T cell line (called CEM-SS) and commandeer the DNA reproduction machinery. After using the host cell to reproduce itself into thousands of new virii, the swollen host cell (now called syncytia or giant cell) will burst and spew the contents into the bloodstream or lymph system. This is how the virus spreads, but lacking reverse transcriptase, the HIV virus can't invade the host cell and it becomes vulnerable to destruction by the body's immune system. (The details of this experiment can be read from Kaali's patent application.)”

 

http://educate-yourself.org/be/

 

Here is the patent itself:

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5139684

 

Now when I read that I was REALLY intrigued, and started doing more research. Eventually I was led to a article on a man by the name of Robert Becker, who took the idea that those 2 scientists had and developed into a more usable form in vevo…

 

Here are the first 2 videos I saw

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3383948315844437935

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2095786730805958061

 

After doing even more research, I came to the conclusion that this basically had the same effect to any virus…I eventually found out about a yahoo group that had a very crude version of the device, basically producing the same results with a 12volt battery, 6ft power cord, and some cloth or sponge…

 

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/microelectricitygermkiller/

 

I said “ahh what the hell”, and made the simple device, I had a couple of outbreaks on my lip, before I noticed that there was a herpes section and a precise way of fighting the outbreak…basically placing the (wet) wire that is rapped in cloth or a sponge on the area that the outbreak is occurring…a couple of weeks had passed since my last ob, and I felt another one coming on, the area got a little red, and tingly just like when it happens, and I got really. I placed the “electrodes” on the outbreak area and I could feel the current coming through, I switched with both the positive and the negative electrodes…every once in a while…after about 10min of “zapping” if you will, I took a alcohol pad and cleaned the outbreak area, I came back and checked it 10min later…and it looked and felt as if NOTHING was developing.

 

I even made a post on the group…

 

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/microelectricitygermkiller/message/14970

 

----- Original Message -----

From: To: Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 1:07 PM

Subject: [germkiller] herpes simplex outbreak gone in a couple hours

 

 

”Alright well last night was the first time in a while i actually had a

outbreak, i didn't realize it at the time but later in that day i did

notice something around the side of my mouth, just a little redness

and kind of itchy. I didn't make much out of it, i thought it was just

a rash or something. Well later that night at around 1:20am i think, i

felt that area and it was like 2 little blisters. I knew i had an

outbreak, i went to the mirror and saw that i had two blisters

developing, it looked small but i knew that it was probably gonna get

bigger. Well i went and got my Apprentice Godzilla, i wetted the

cotton on the wire, and went to work. I put the positive on on the

blister, and the negative one in my hand, i would leave the positive

on the blister for a minuet then move it around every once in a while.

I also found something that i didn't realize before, that when i was

holding the negative and when i gave it allot of pressure like trying

to crush it with my hand, the current on the positive felt very

powerful, i did that from time to time.

 

Well i used the apprentice Godzilla for 5 min. Then i got out my wrist

blood electrifier, and used that for about 20min. i went to sleep

around 5:00 in the morning and woke up around 1:00am.

 

Well let me tell you its gone, alright it hasn't even developed, i

mean by now if i hadn't done it probably would have been another

couple of blisters there, a little bigger and redder, and well thats

basically it. But it is gone, completely, in a matter of hours after

the use of the Godzilla it is GONE. I mean this was the first time i

used the apprentice Godzilla, i never would have imagined it to work

this fast, thanks BG for your amazing idea.”

 

 

I kept using it for a couple of months, and it worked great, but after a while the copper from the wires, turned into copper sulphate, and it was useless…so I just switched to another new wire, and it worked perfectly…Eventually I found out about the company SOTA Instruments, who took bob becks idea and made it available, to people…I bought one of their silver pulsers and I cant tell you how many “obs” I have fought off

 

Anyway, since the use of ac current and dc current is used in both the battery device and the pulser…they both produce the same results. What if this was used in a larger and full body form…?

 

I once read that Nicola Tesla passed millions of volts through his body. What did this do to his body? Would a person that was infected with a virus such as aids, or malaria, my virus…would the viruses in his body be “destroyed!”?

 

I have read that cattle farmers who got electrocuted by the cattle fences by accident saw that their ailments were no more…

 

If a person suffering from a disease was shocked with a tazer what would happen to the disease? Would the tazer affect it in anyway?

 

I am just putting out ideas on how electricity can be used to fight off disease, maybe even the ones that are causing so much trouble in our world.

 

I would also like to point out this article for people that are interested in learning more… http://www.geocities.com/a57ngel/PetAlternatives/

 

We may have a new way of fighting cancer with this!

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Assuming this works as well as you've made it out, the question here is whether or not there is a good way of delivering the current to the right areas. You can't just pass electricity through the entire body at once -- it'll just take the paths of least resistance. Also, I suspect it's only certain pathogens that would be particularly sensitive to electricity -- and of course there may be various cells native to your body that may be as well, leading to side effects.

 

As a side note: we experience millions (or at least thousands) of volts of electricity every time we experience static shock. What matters is the current, and current applied to the wrong places can kill you. I'd be extremely careful with this idea if I were you.

[insane_alien]

if this is applied to blood, fine. i suspect it would have quite severe negative effects if applied somewhere electrically sensitive though. examples being the nerves, heart and especially the brain.

[hazard5]

we are talking about micro current, stuff you cant even feel...but i see what you are saying...yet there have been tons of people that have been attacked and tazed by other individuals..what does a tazer have on ones health, pathology wise?

[insane_alien]

tazers only have a temporary effect, unless of course you have a condition that could make you vulnerable such as a weak heart. but tazers are not applied directly to the heart or brain and if they are then they certainly be fatal.

 

There are some therapies which involve direct electrical stimulus of the brain, these are pretty risky as are all surgeries on the brain as you have to get it just right.

[blazarwolf]

Ill only comment on the HIV portion (Thats a bible dude!)

 

HIV main Defenses to any treatment are:

 

1)An extreme Ability to Replicate

2)An extremly poor ability to Replicate

 

That is Hiv is like a rabbit on viagra... When it gets into those T-cells... "Wow thats alot of HIV"

 

At the same time HIV sucks at making copies of itself, there riddled with errors, the code comes out slightly different every time...

 

Meaning: There were HIV that were risistant to the Electrical therapy... Blame darwin, and its qualitys, but it will survive and become every increasingly risistant to the treatment.

 

Though that ligand channel is the course of much study.....

[hazard5]

i dont think hiv can be resistant to the electricity, this isnt an like a anti viral cocktail that if you stop taking it it becomes resistant...One thing that i have found is that i have read that it is extremely easy to get the hiv out of the blood, and bob beck even showed tests results with people that had hiv down to a no viral load.

 

But still ther hiv in the gut, and other areas is hard to get at and they multiply there...

[xnebulalordx676]

I believe mild battery electric applications are fine and focus on zapping the protozoa that are harmful while leaving the rest of body alone. I have nothing against Doctor Hulda Clark methods.

 

I also believe HIV to be protozoa that becomes worm parasite rather than virus.

[DrP]

Assuming this works as well as you've made it out, the question here is whether or not there is a good way of delivering the current to the right areas. You can't just pass electricity through the entire body at once --

 

 

I had a course of physio once for the tendons in my shins (mild shin splints - not the fracturing, but the pulling away of tendon fron the bone - long story - anyway); The physio prescribed ultra sound and electrical pulse treatment. I must admit, although she was a lovely lady who would explain the science behind it all to you, I thought she was a bit of Quack! (Since going to her, I have spoken to other people who also have had to visit her and she ALWAYS without fail preascribes ultra sound for whatever complaint they have - a bit like the old 'leaches for everything' style of doctoring:D)

 

Anyway - the electric pulse treatment consisted of 2 electrodes placed either side of the painful area - she then handed me a dial and told me to slowly increase the current up as far as I could without going into too much of a spasm from it. Then I'd sit there with this current going through my leg for about 10 mins before she she unplugged me. Felt weired - and being fair - I might just as well have tried the leaches.

 

I also believe HIV to be protozoa that becomes worm parasite rather than virus.

 

I've not heard that one before.

[insane_alien]

you do know we have electron micrographs of the HIV virus don't you?

 

we know what it is, claiming it is something else is just denying the facts.

[blazarwolf]

you do know we have electron micrographs of the HIV virus don't you?

 

we know what it is, claiming it is something else is just denying the facts.

 

 

Saying that is pointless... in my short time here, ive noticed there is some psuedoscience, but much more disinformation/uneducation. I would hope more people wouldent chime in unless they know what there talking about or have something to add... this is not onto you, it just seems obvious to me.

[dragonfly]

hi all. As a long time user and promoter of electromedicine devices I can vouch for their safety and efficacy. The amount of electric current needed to disable virus and kill bacteria is only .00013 amps which is totally harmless to healthy cells. I can put that amount directly across my heart with no bad effects. I have also used a cranial electrostimulator which outputs even more electricity with nothing but good effects on my brain. Electricity cannot be countered by viruses since it isn´t a chemical. Using electricity is far superior to using drugs. People think we´ve come a long way technologically, and in some ways we have, but we are actually 100 years behind the times because doctors were using electricity from batteries to counter all kinds of diseases way back around 1900 when the FDA and AMA came into existence with the primary purpose of promoting and profiting from pharmaceuticals. That´s when they came up with the law that makes it illegal to sell anything for the treatment of disease that doesn´t have FDA approval. For a great read on this whole subject please read my free e-book at http://www.dragonfly75.com/book/

All the best to you!

[Mokele]

Blah blah blah.

 

Show me peer-reviewed double-blind study, and give me a plausible mechanism.

[jimmydasaint]

Mokele - surely one should not dismiss apparent alternative theories out of hand before further investigation has been performed. I have found one reference amongst many others which are peer-reviewed and seem to have some merit in terms of experimental science. IMHO, it is important for people who use these theories to provide testable hypothesis and then control their experiments, as you have mentioned. However, if it works then we have observed phenomena which are reproducible. Halfway to a theoretical explanation, in my view. Excellent thread which deserves more attention.

 

Objective: Low-intensity currents (LIC) have gained popularity during the last years, and nowadays the majority of electrotherapy units may produce LIC. On wounding, the body produces a current, the current of injury, which promotes healing. Still, this current may gradually decrease resulting occasionally to delayed or limited wound healing. Thus, by applying the same LIC externally, healing may be accelerated by sustaining the LIC throughout the healing phases. The first review of research studies on the effect of LIC on wound healing is attempted, which can be considered useful for the practicing clinician, to provide an overview of current evidence on the effectiveness of LIC and provide protocols of treatment. Methods: Comprehensive review of randomized-controlled trials investigating the effect of LIC on wound healing. Results: The review revealed that LIC promote wound healing and appear to be effective in the range of 200–800 μA. The direct current may be continuous or pulsed and polarity may or may not be reversed.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2396465

 

he directional migratory response was least on a laminin substrate, whereas cells on fibronectin demonstrated a response that was intermediate between those of collagen and laminin. These results suggest that physiologic ionic currents in concert with underlying matrix may influence the rate of reepithelialization of skin wounds.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8617998

 

The aim of this study was to investigate the antibacterial effect of positive and negative monophasic low-voltage pulsed current on typical Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens of chronic wounds. Using the Dermapulse®-System, three Gram-negative (Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae) and three Gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia faecium) organisms were tested against positive and negative polarity low voltage pulsed current. All tested organisms were significantly reduced by ES. The reduction differed significantly between positive polarity and control and negative polarity and control, with the highest log10 reduction factor (RF) achieved with positive polarity.

http://pt.wkhealth.com/pt/re/worp/abstract.00021763-200705000-00015.htm;jsessionid=KpVDhgPDPZJkJ2LGhPRr0WpQPsqGGhl93JjC1tMssrWzHVTV8Qgw!1032775582!181195628!8091!-1 (Abstract only) Edited July 24, 2009 by jimmydasaint

[insane_alien]

that article is talking about wounds, not diseases.

 

there is a difference between getting stabbed and catching ebola or something.

[dragonfly]

Yeah, I was a skeptic too till I used two devices to get rid of a 16 year long viral infection (Epstein-Barr virus) after having tried everything else within my budget. Those devices and others also got rid of the flu (many times in just 2 days), urinary tract infection, and a nasty 1 month long fungal lung infection in just 1 day. There´s nothing like personal experience to convince you. Go to the first group below to find out how you can make your own device that you can test on yourself;

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/microelectricitygermkiller/

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Beck-n-stuff/

[Mokele]

In vitro tests =/= in vivo, whole-organism tests, which should be trivially simple to do in a proper fashion. Lots of things kill bacteria in a petri dish but not in an organism.

 

The whole thing just seems too suspiciously "alternative medicine", with the claims that it can cure everything, is being suppressed, annecdata, lack of clinical trials, etc.

 

If this is so effective, why isn't be being used by AIDS patients? Or those with drug-resistant TB? Or swine flu? Or herpes? Or hepatitis? I'd think that those with long-term, chronic, or serious infections would jump all over this. So why haven't they, or why are they silent?

 

People have tried this as a remedy for snake bite, figuring it might denature the toxins (since they're just proteins, after all). Guess how well that worked. Here's a hint - the results involve a lot of missing limbs and dead people.

 

And how, exactly, is this system supposed to distinguish your cells from viri or bacteria? If it's denaturing protein or screwing up membrane ion balance, it should do it for ALL cells, not just a select group of cells. Why doesn't it destroy blood cells too? And if it doesn't destroy your cells, how can it work against intracellular parasites, viral or otherwise?

 

I don't want some hack noticing that bacteria can be hurt by electricity (no sh*t, I bet hammers hurt them too), I want IN VIVO tests, conducted via double-blind, published in a reputable journal, and I want a plausible mechanism. Lab rats are fine.

[dragonfly]

Please read my e-book first which will answer many of your questions. Why doesn´t every sick person "jump all over it"? Because most are doubters, like you. Us alternative people call them "sheeple" because they are like sheep who will only follow the crowd. You want everything handed to you on a silver platter first. But actually many people have jumped on it and have submitted their testimonies of healing. My book has many of them. Check it out at http://www.dragonfly75.com/book/

[Mokele]

Your e-book? Sorry, no. Any idiot with adobe can make a pdf and stick it on the web.

 

I want to see legitimate, peer-reviewed research, not ramblings. I want to see a double-blind study with controls and sham treatments and a sample size of over 500 inidividuals, with a nice clear ANOVA showing the results.

 

And "testimonials" are not evidence. The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

 

It's not even that hard. You and a friend could do it in 6 months for a few thousand dollars. Just buy 600 rats, keep them in isolation cages, inject 400 of them with a disease (200 controls), and then have your friend administer whatever therapy you want to the infected rats, with you hiding behind him and using a wireless device to connect and disconnect power to his treatment (giving you 200 treated rats and 200 that received "sham" treatments to control for the effects of handling etc.) Hell, I'll even do the stats for you myself (it'll take me ~10 minutes).

 

As for wanting stuff handed to me, yes, yes I do. The burden of proof is always on the claimant (you). If I claim there's life on Mars, it's up to me to support my claim, not up to you to disprove it. You have claimed that this technique works, therefore it's your responsibility to support that claim. That's how science works.

[jimmydasaint]

I am trying to stay relatively neutral here. However, I am trying to find some merit in this treatment for people who may have no other conventional option left. For example, there is a reference here to a Nanotechnology Symposium here and apoptosis of tumour cells:

Cell Shocked: USC Researchers Present New Electric Pulse Technology

ScienceDaily (Mar. 11, 2004) — A new technology that uses electric fields to alter the "guts" of a cell may lead to improved methods of treating diseases such as cancer and leukemia, according to researchers in the USC Viterbi School of Engineering.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/03/040311071327.htm

 

Also, a reference to the following:

Microfluidic Device for Dielectrophoresis Manipulation and Electrodisruption of Respiratory Pathogen Bordetella pertussis

 

de la Rosa, C.; Tilley, P.A.; Fox, J.D.; Kaler, K.V.I.

Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions on

Volume 55, Issue 10, Oct. 2008 Page(s):2426 - 2432

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TBME.2008.923148

Summary:A miniaturized microfluidic device was developed to facilitate electromanipulation of bacterial respiratory pathogens. The device comprises a microchip with circular aluminum electrodes patterned on glass, which is housed in a microfluidic system fabricated utilizing polydimethylsiloxane. The device provides sample preparation capability by exploiting positive dielectrophoresis (DEP) in conjunction with pulsed voltage for manipulation and disruption of Bordetella pertussis bacterial cells. Positive DEP capture of B. pertussis was successfully demonstrated utilizing 10 Vrms and 1 MHz ac fields. Application of dc pulses (300 V amplitude and 50 mu s pulsewidth applied 1 s apart) across the aluminum electrodes resulted in electrodisruption and lysis of B. pertussis bacterial cells. Real-time polymerase chain reaction, a 23 factorial experimental design and transmission electron microscopy were used to evaluate bacterial cell manipulation and factors affecting bacterial cell disruption. The main factors affecting bacterial cell disruption were electric field strength, the electrical conductivity of the cell suspension sample, and the combined effect of number of pulses and sample conductivity. The bacterial deoxyribonucleic acid target remained undamaged as a result of DEP and cell lysis experimentation. Our findings suggest that a simple miniaturized microfluidic device can achieve important steps in sample preparation on-chip involving respiratory bacterial pathogens.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/10/4359967/04487107.pdf%3Farnumber%3D4487107&authDecision=-203 but if it ain't Nature or Cell then I guess it does not cut the mustard eh?

 

Oh, hang on mate, will this count as an in vivo study? It is not controlled though which is an error par excellence but the reviewers seemed to accept the findings:

 

Fitting the patients with electrodes that applied 200 kHz electric fields to the scalp at regular intervals for up to 18 hours per day, the researchers observed that the brain tumors progressed to advanced stages much slower than usual (taking a median time of 26 weeks), and sometimes even regressed. The patients also lived considerably longer, with a median survival time of 62 weeks.

While no control group existed, the results compared favorably to historical data for recurrent GBM, in which the time for tumor progression is approximately 10 weeks and the typical survival time is 30 weeks. In addition, 3 of the 10 patients were still alive two years after the electrode therapy started. These results were announced in a recent issue of The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Kirson et al., PNAS 104, 10152-10157, June 12, 2007).

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070802100748.htm As for the mechanism by which the disease is arrested, the following is stated in the Discussion:

 

he tumor inhibitory effect of TTFields has been attributed previously to two separate mechanisms (9): interference with the formation of the mitotic spindle microtubules and physical destruction of cells during cleavage, both of which are strongly dependant on the orientation of mitosis axis versus the field vectors. Because the relative orientation of the mitosis axis during cytokinesis is random, it would be expected that only a fraction of dividing cells would be affected by TTFields of any specific direction. To overcome this problem, we applied sequentially several field directions and have shown that increasing the number of directions from 1 to 3, resulted in a significant increase in the anti-proliferative efficacy of TTFields in vitro and in vivo.

 

I think the 'alternative' therapies of today may become mainstream and conventional tomorrow.

Edited July 24, 2009 by jimmydasaint

[GDG]

Please read my e-book first which will answer many of your questions. Why doesn´t every sick person "jump all over it"? Because most are doubters, like you. Us alternative people call them "sheeple" because they are like sheep who will only follow the crowd. You want everything handed to you on a silver platter first. But actually many people have jumped on it and have submitted their testimonies of healing. My book has many of them. Check it out at http://www.dragonfly75.com/book/

 

Excuse us if we don't take your word for it: this is a science forum, after all. There is a vast difference between being open minded, and accepting credulously anything proposed. "Most are doubters" for the excellent reason that there are many charlatans.

 

Further, we understand statistics and the need for control groups, particularly where medical treatment is involved. If you take five people with flu, pulse them with electricity, and find that they recover from their infection in 4 days, you have proven exactly nothing. If you take ten people, treat five with electricity, and the other five with a simulated (but dead) electrode, there is an excellent chance that the control group will recover just as quickly as the treated group. However, even if the control group takes two days longer, you still have not proven anything, as ten people is too small a group for meaningful statistics. If you take a thousand people, divided into a control group and perhaps a couple of treatment groups at different voltages or currents, and find a statistically significant difference, then we would be paying more attention.

 

For me, the statment at p. 34 of the e-book

"Homeopathy, a highly respected school of medicine around the world, ..."

completely destroyed all credibility.

[Mokele]

A new technology that uses electric fields to alter the "guts" of a cell may lead to improved methods of treating diseases such as cancer and leukemia, according to researchers in the USC Viterbi School of Engineering.

 

Again, it's in vitro, with no real discussion (nor plausible mechanism) to prevent damage to healthy cells. They may have just invented the Death Ray, but unless they can isolate the effects in vivo, it's medically useless.

 

Microfluidic Device for Dielectrophoresis Manipulation and Electrodisruption of Respiratory Pathogen Bordetella pertussis

 

Not actually applicable. Note the last sentence of the abstract: "Our findings suggest that a simple miniaturized microfluidic device can achieve important steps in sample preparation on-chip involving respiratory bacterial pathogens. " It's meant for preparation of samples, not curing disease.

 

Oh, hang on mate, will this count as an in vivo study? It is not controlled though which is an error par excellence but the reviewers seemed to accept the findings:

 

No control = bullshit. And PNAS papers can be published without review by members of the Academy (which explains some of the truly awful papers I've seen in there).

 

As for the mechanism by which the disease is arrested, the following is stated in the Discussion:

 

See, that's the sort of thing I'm after, and I can consider that plausible (however, it also brings up the question of whether this method is any better than plain old colchicine therapy, which also disrupts tubulin and therefore mitosis).

 

However, it should be noted that the above mechanism would only work for cancer (and possibly infections from eukaryotic pathogens) - there are no mitotic spindles involved in bacterial or viral replication, so those diseases should be utterly unaffected by electrical treatment, contrary to the claims of other posters.

 

I think the 'alternative' therapies of today may become mainstream and conventional tomorrow.

 

A few, perhaps, but certainly not all, and their acceptance (by myself and the medical community) hinges on proving their efficacy. That's all I really ask for - evidence-based medicine.

[jimmydasaint]

Again, it's in vitro, with no real discussion (nor plausible mechanism) to prevent damage to healthy cells. They may have just invented the Death Ray, but unless they can isolate the effects in vivo, it's medically useless.

 

I agree that in vivo studies with controls are a must, but experimenters have to start somewhere. I spent a lot of time extracting antigens in vitro because access to in vivo methods would have required further purification steps by HPLC or column chromatography. It was too messy to perform in vivo. I was testing in vitro as a precursor to in vivo work.

 

No control = bullshit. And PNAS papers can be published without review by members of the Academy (which explains some of the truly awful papers I've seen in there).

 

I had no idea that some papers were published without review - that seems slack.

 

See, that's the sort of thing I'm after, and I can consider that plausible (however, it also brings up the question of whether this method is any better than plain old colchicine therapy, which also disrupts tubulin and therefore mitosis).

IMHO it is easier to use electrotherapy which can be made portable and allow patients some form of motion rather than IV drips of colchicine. I don't know the reason though.

 

However, it should be noted that the above mechanism would only work for cancer (and possibly infections from eukaryotic pathogens) - there are no mitotic spindles involved in bacterial or viral replication, so those diseases should be utterly unaffected by electrical treatment, contrary to the claims of other posters.

 

This is where it gets a bit more controversial. For viral diseases, the evidence seems to be entirely anecdotal and uncontrolled. However, I don't know...I was reading about Jung at the weekend, and he was prepared to use methods which would be considered highly unscientific but he seems to have considered them acceptable as long as the patient was cured.

 

I think of my dear old Mum who has diabetes type II and if electrotherapy claimed to work for her, I would seriously consider it. However, the claims made for viral treatment are on shaky foundations and it is difficult to find any controlled studies, let alone any double blind studies.

 

I suppose the jury is still out for electrotherapy of viral diseases.

[dragonfly]

OK here´s some meat for you to chew on:

from my site: http://www.geocities.com/a57ngel/bioelectric/eng/articles.html

"From China came the first results of a larger case study which uses the Electro-Carcinoma treatment with over 10,000 patients in the period of 1987 to 2000. One of the central results: in just over 30% of the cases, it brought about the dissolution of the tumors, and in somewhat more than 40%, to the reduction of the tumor. "

 

"It is found that subjecting body parts containing cancerous tissue to a plurality of magnetic field pulses, with characteristic frequencies above about 5 kHz and intensities above about 1 Tesla, will either arrest the growth of tumors or progressively reduce the number of cancerous cells, resulting in remission of tumors"..."Twelve rats having primary DMBA-induced mammary carcinomas were treated daily with a conventional Magneform machine. A primary mammary gland carcinoma induced by a carcinogen, such as DMBA or NMU, is highly virulent, as outlined in substantial detail in P. M. Guillino, et al., Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 54, no. 2, February 1974. It is common for such a tumor in a rat to increase in size by about 10 to 30 fold in about 30 days, and if left untreated almost invariably will ulcerate within about 45 days. Ten of the rats are treated daily with 20 pulses at 5 Tesla and 8 KHz."..."It can be seen from the above table that after thirty days the tumors were either diminished in size, stabilized, or at least controlled relative to untreated tumors"

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

No control = bullshit. And PNAS papers can be published without review by members of the Academy (which explains some of the truly awful papers I've seen in there).

According to the PNAS web site, Academy members must secure at least two independent reviewers for their papers.

 

http://www.pnas.org/site/misc/iforc.shtml#submission