Info Source: The Straits Times dated 6 Nov 2010.
By: Andy Ho, Senior Writer
SEVERAL non-physicians are offering 'bioresonance' as a cure-all for ills ranging from allergies and addictions to autism and cancers.
All for $150 to $300 for one to 1-1/2 hours at a device that looks like any oscilloscope you might find in a physics lab.
Recently, a Bedok general practitioner called Dr Erwin Kay was censured by the Singapore Medical Council for 'treating' patients with the device. He was fined $5,000 for professional misconduct.
But while bioresonance is not accepted as a method of medical treatment that trained physicians may use, it is perfectly legal for non-physicians to offer it.
In the United States, by contrast, the extravagant claims that these operators make for bioresonance may see them hauled off to court.
For instance, in October 2002, a bogus cancer cure guru, David L. Walker, had to settle with the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC, which works to prevent consumers from being defrauded, had taken him to court for claiming that he could cure cancer with his bioresonance machine.
What practitioners like Mr Walker claim their 'remedy' can do is based on the unproven premise that cells in the human body have a natural vibration or resonance. Hence, bio-resonance. That is, they vibrate or resonate at 'healthy frequencies' whereas unhealthy cells supposedly do so at different frequencies.
It follows, therefore, that healthy frequencies should be applied to ill bodies to bring them into balance once again. Such rebalancing apparently would free unhealthy cells of unspecified toxins accumulated in the course of ill health.
What is needed, then, is a device that can detect these differences in frequencies, determine which organs are ill and then deliver opposite waves to 'cancel out' the unhealthy frequencies. This is where the bioresonance device comes in.
In use, the electrodes linked to the device are applied to the patient's skin to supposedly diagnose one's conditions. The electrodes send out electrical signals that perform their 'wave interference' work adroitly, thus leading to a rebalancing of frequencies.
The stated frequency range at which rebalancing occurs is said to vary greatly from 10 Hz to 150,000 Hz. Computerised data recording goes on even as the electrodes emit their healing frequencies.
Computer power is also used to analyse the data and interpret the results to give an indication of the patient's health.
Signal intensity is then varied according to these analyses, which may also direct the practitioner to focus the electrodes on a specific part of the anatomy where treatment is particularly needed. Of course, several sessions are needed to achieve re-balancing and healing.
There is absolutely no credible scientific evidence to support this gobbledegook. The evidence that does exist utterly refutes its theory and practice.
In a randomised, double-blind trial involving children in Davos, Switzerland, who had an allergic skin condition called atopic dermatitis, bioresonance was found to have no curative effect at all.
In a separate trial, bioresonance electrodes were tested for accuracy in the diagnosis of allergies to house dust mites or cat dander. Their accuracy was compared to that of the standard skin-prick test used by dermatologists. There was absolutely no correlation between the two sets of results.
A similar trial published in the British Medical Journal in January 2001 also showed that the bioresonance machine failed to diagnose skin allergies.
Since these are not life-threatening conditions, perhaps the practice of bioresonance is quite harmless. Not so, however, when it is also claimed to cure cancer.
Though there have been no clinical trials to test this claim, it is based on completely erroneous science. Advocates argue that the bioresonance device can kill cancer cells by releasing tumour suppressor genes that have become 'suppressed'. Alternatively, or in addition, it is said to attenuate hyperactive oncogenes or genes that cause cancer.
Actually, cancer arises when mutations develop in these genes, not because they are suppressed or become hyperactive, respectively. Once mutations have developed in them, genes cannot be restored to their previously normal state.
The p53 gene helps to regulate when a particular type of cell will divide in two. It also leads defective cells to 'commit suicide'. But when p53 mutates, it can no longer do these things, so cancer develops.
But bioresonance advocates claim that p53 is 'suppressed', not mutated, in cancer cells. For this reason, it is argued, bioresonance can be used to reinvigorate p53, thus curing the cancer.
But genomics studies show p53 is mutated, not suppressed, in cancers.
In sum, bioresonance is junk science. Advocates may trot out testimonials from satisfied customers, but testimonials are not data. Its efficacy can be proven only with trustworthy data obtained from rigorous trials with blinded controls.
But since anyone may make and sell these devices - that is, the technology can no longer be patented since it is widely available - no one has any incentive to invest in such studies.
Be that as it may, unless and until such studies are done, one should stay away from this 'therapy'.
x------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOW IT WORKS
The bioresonance device called the BICOM, can supposedly detect differences in frequencies, determine which organs are ill and then deliver opposite waves to 'cancel out' the unhealthy frequencies. Electrodes linked to the device send out electrical signals that perform their 'wave interference' work adroitly, thus leading to a re-balancing of frequencies, say advocates. Computerised data recording goes on, and computer power is used to analyse the data and interpret the results to give an indication of the patient's health.
Signal intensity is then varied according to these analyses, which may also direct the practitioner to focus the electrodes on a specific part of the anatomy where treatment is particularly needed. Several sessions are needed to achieve 're-balancing and healing'.
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment