Like the answer to many health questions, the answer is…It depends –> on the type of magnetic therapy and the ailment. In terms of Neuromagnetics, which is magnetic therapy that correctly applies a static inhomogeneous field directly over the pain or the nerves that innervate that area, the answer would be often.
For serious ailments such as cancer, I suspect the answer would be never. But Q Magnets may provide comfort or localized temporary relief of minor aches and pain. However it is unlikely to be effective for mechanical pain, such as a growth causing pressure on a nerve which we list as a limitation for Q Magnet therapy.
For recent injuries such as bruises, sprains and strains, Q Magnet therapy may help to reduce pain and inflammation so people can get back to their sport or favourite physical activities sooner. This is precisely why elite athletes and the medical teams of major sporting teams use Q Magnets. The affects are plain to see.
Sports therapists working with professional teams almost live with their patients and know exactly how typical injuries respond to treatment. By using Q Magnets as an adjunct therapy, recovery times are typically reduced.
There are many critics of magnetic therapy such as this one, and their arguments are valid if they are referring to fridge magnets. But they are throwing out the baby with the bath water; the science has moved on. Newer rare earth magnets such as Neodymium are 50 times more powerful than flexible rubber magnets. Anyone with a gauss meter can test that Q Magnet models such as the QF28-6 can penetrate up 50mm, not a few mm as the critics state.
In addition new research shows that static magnetic fields do affect living tissue as shown in these 10 animal and cell studies. In fact one study showed how common bipolar magnets had no effect on the firing of action potentials, whereas quadrapolar magnets were able to almost completely block action potential firing.
This fits in with the theory that there exists a “window of effectiveness” for the therapeutic application of static magnetic fields. This is where more research needs to be conducted and is underway to better understand where this window exists. This is no different for pharmaceuticals, where the drug needs to be tested for efficacy within the dose range and then tested for safety. However, the research on pharmaceuticals probably outspends the research on static magnets by about 100,000:1. No wonder such a chasm exists in the science.
A recent review by Turk in the Lancet showed that despite millions being spent, the last 10-20 years has made very little progress in the treatment of non-cancer chronic pain. In fact many large pharmaceutical companies are vacating the area, so this is a very complex and difficult area even for the best researchers. New complementary methods of treating pain should be commended, not derided. As Turk noted, there is a crucial need for a combination of therapies to tackle this pervasive problem.
Leave a Comment
Only registerd members can post a comment , Login / Register