microcurrent

[Guest guest]

, Catherine Hemenway <chemenway@b...> wrote:

> I've seen the Alphastim used with an ear clip (can't attach to needles)

and electrodes. I assume it's possible to attach an alligator clip?

 

the company says you can or at least that people do. however, pantheon

says the microcurrent in most machines is designed to be dispersed through

pads and is not reliable and accurate through needles. they say their

machine was the only one designed with needles in mind. I think they may

be right.

 

The issue of microcurrent, while apparently off-topic for CHA, has led me

to consider one of my favorite topics, which is dosage.

 

one of the microcurrent sites I browsed brought up the old arndt-shulz

(spelling??) law of stimulus and response. which is that weak stimuli

enhance and strong stimuli inhibit and depress. this was adopted by

homeopaths and eclectics, both of whom used weak stimuli in their

practices. now microcurrent advocates are saying the same thing about

microampere vs. milliampere. Micro is weak and good and milli is strong

and bad. It has been noted that acupuncture and moxa induce microcurrent

in the connective tissue, so arguably acupuncture was the original

microcurrent therapy. We should also remember what manaka noted, which is

that shallow needling affects the meridians, while deep needling affects

the nervous system. Evidence suggests that acupuncture was used for its

effects on both levels of physiology. Both stimulation and inhibition may

be desirable under different circumstances.

 

In that light, I'd like to redirect this back to chinese herbs. I am an

advocate of using fairly high dosage in my herbal prescribing. and I have

no doubt that part of the effects of my formulas are inhibitory. they

inhibit pain, inflammation, cough, spasms, etc. TCM accepts that symptom

inhibition is often a desirable part of treatment. Herbs that inhibit in

this way are not healing, per se. the herbs that " heal " are the superior

herbs, the ones that nourish and harmonize and rectify. while the

symptomatic herbs are definitely used for inhibition and thus constitute

strong stimuli, normal doses of most tonic herbs could perhaps be

generally considered weak stimuli. they don't cause dramatic changes in

the body, but stimulate long term changes. Many tonics were often taken

in wine and pills in lower doses for health maintenance, but they were

still usually taken in quite large dosages in treating illness. How do we

reconcile the use of large dosages of tonics at times with the concept of

a weak stimuli enhancing function. Well, when a person is ill, there is

greater signal to noise ratio to overcome. the noise is the disease and

the signal is the therapy. when there is lot of noise, you need a lot of

signal. but the actual amount of stimulus the body receives may be

relative to the difference between the signal and the noise, rather than

determined by the absolute value of the signal. thus, a much higher dose

of herbs may be necessary to achieve a small effect in a diseased patient

than would be required in one who is healthy. So, for example, a formula

to treat a full blown psychotic break would need to be much stronger than

one used to calm low grade anxiety. I have heard it said that the more

structural and organic a disease process is, the more one needs large

dosages. that psyche and spirit are best treated with minute doses. Well,

if we are talking about mental illness, I have not found that to be true

at all. Severity is always the key factor, not whether a disease is more

in the mind or body. And as you read the previous sentence, the fallacy

should be clear. those who make the claim about low doses affecting

psyche are creating a body mind separation that is alien to TCM. I think

this is an idea that generally comes from western sources who fail to cite

their own sources.

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

" Great spirits have always been violently opposed by mediocre minds " --

Albert Einstein

[Guest guest]

one of the microcurrent sites

>>>The science on microcurrent is very poor. Studies done not by manufactures show no effect on pain

Alon

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/11/2002 1:14:31 PM Central Standard Time, writes:

 

 

We should also remember what manaka noted, which is

that shallow needling affects the meridians, while deep needling affects

the nervous system.

 

Off topic as it is, could you explain how this distinction was made and what it means to stimulate a meridian vs. stimulating the CNS?

 

Thanks

 

Guy

 

DrGRPorter

[Guest guest]

Off topic as it is, could you explain how this distinction was made and what it means to stimulate a meridian vs. stimulating the CNS?>>>>Probably O ring

Alon

[Guest guest]

The Cranial Electrical Stimulation "Toy" does have allot of research behind it. Daniel L. Kirsch has a complete book put together that presents much scientific data on the CES *toy*. The name of the book is "The Science Behind Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation".

 

Teresa

 

-

ALON MARCUS

Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:05 PM

Re: microcurrent

 

one of the microcurrent sites

>>>The science on microcurrent is very poor. Studies done not by manufactures show no effect on pain

AlonChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Daniel L. Kirsch has a complete book put together that presents much scientific data on the CES *toy*.

>>>All done by the manufacturer. The AlphaStim is interesting i do not have much experience with it. All I know is that my friend Richard Gracer MD was using it and was trying to become a seller of them. He does not use them any longer. He is a result oriented physician. He sees many patients and I trust his experience

Alon

[Guest guest]

, " Alon Marcus " <

alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> Daniel L. Kirsch has a complete book put together that

presents much scientific data on the CES *toy*.

> >>>All done by the manufacturer.

 

and that is the point. People need to be skeptical and

disciminating about what is presented as " research " . If one

searches medline for peer reviewed studies, there is no

evidence that microcurrent relieves pain. however, there is

some evidence that it promotes regeneration of bone better than

TENS. I sent an email to the a one of the companies mentioned

on this list about their product and I have been bombarded with

high pressure phone calls from them every day since. very

disappointing.