An Overview of Biofield Devices
David Muehsam, PhD; Gaétan Chevalier, PhD; Tiffany Barsotti, MTh; Blake T. Gurfein, PhD
Author Affiliations
Visual Institute of Developmental Arts and Sciences,
National Institute of Biostructures and Biosystems,
Bologna, Italy (Dr Muehsam); Consciousness and Healing
Initiative, San Diego, California (Dr Muehsam);
Developmental and Cell Biology Department, University
of California Irvine, Irvine (Dr Chevalier); California
Institute for Human Science, Encinitas, California (Ms
Barsotti); Osher Center for Integrative Medicine,
University of California, San Francisco, (Dr Gurfein).
Abstract
Advances in biophysics, biology, functional genomics,
neuroscience, psychology, psychoneuroimmunology,
and other fields suggest the existence of a subtle system
of “biofield” interactions that organize biological
processes from the subatomic, atomic, molecular, cellular,
and organismic to the interpersonal and cosmic levels.
Biofield interactions may bring about regulation of
biochemical, cellular, and neurological processes
through means related to electromagnetism, quantum
fields, and perhaps other means of modulating biological
activity and information flow.
The biofield paradigm,
in contrast to a reductionist, chemistry-centered viewpoint,
emphasizes the informational content of biological
processes; biofield interactions are thought to operate
in part via low-energy or “subtle” processes such as
weak, nonthermal electromagnetic fields (EMFs) or processes
potentially related to consciousness and nonlocality.
Biofield interactions may also operate through or be
reflected in more well-understood informational processes
found in electroencephalographic (EEG) and electrocardiographic
(ECG) data.
Recent advances have led
to the development of a wide variety of therapeutic and
diagnostic biofield devices, defined as physical instruments
best understood from the viewpoint of a biofield
paradigm. Here, we provide a broad overview of biofield
devices, with emphasis on those devices for which solid,
peer-reviewed evidence exists. A subset of these devices,
such as those based upon EEG- and ECG-based heart rate
variability, function via mechanisms that are well
understood and are widely employed in clinical settings.
Other device modalities, such a gas discharge visualization
and biophoton emission, appear to operate through
incompletely understood mechanisms and have unclear
clinical significance. Device modes of operation include
EMF-light, EMF-heat, EMF-nonthermal, electrical current,
vibration and sound, physical and mechanical,
intentionality and nonlocality, gas and plasma, and
other (mode of operation not well-understood).
Methodological issues in device development and interfaces
for future interdisciplinary research are discussed.
Devices play prominent cultural and scientific roles in
our society, and it is likely that device technologies will
be one of the most influential access points for the furthering
of biofield research and the dissemination of
biofield concepts. This developing field of study presents
new areas of research that have many important implications
for both basic science and clinical medicine.
Introduction
Developments in several fields of research, including
biophysics, biology, functional genomics,
neuroscience, psychology and psychoneuroimmunology
have advanced our understanding of the
interrelatedness of these disciplines from the level of
basic biological processes to a dynamic systems or “biofield”
level. These recent advances have also shown that
emotional states, intention, stress, and other psychosocial
factors can significantly affect biological function
and health outcomes.1-7 Molecular, cellular, and organismic
function and regulation are thus interwoven with
and can be influenced by emotion, cognition, and psychosocial
factors, suggesting the existence of a “subtle”—ie,
low-energy system of biofield—interactions
connecting these activities.
Here, we define the term biofield as “an organizing
principle for the dynamic information flow that regulates
biological function and homeostasis.” Biofield
interactions can organize spatiotemporal biological processes
across hierarchical subtle and gross levels: from
the subatomic, atomic, molecular, cellular, and organismic
to the interpersonal and cosmic levels. As such, biofield
interactions can influence and be influenced by a
variety of biological pathways, including biochemical,
cellular, and neurological processes related to electromagnetism,
correlated quantum information flow, and
perhaps other means for modulating activity and information
flow across multiple levels of biology.
Biofield devices comprise physical instruments that
may be most clearly understood from the viewpoint of a
biofield paradigm, and a large and diverse number of
devices have been developed to measure or manipulate
biofield interactions. These include both diagnostic
devices (to measure biofield properties) and therapeutic
devices (to manipulate biofield interactions). The study
of biofield devices is at a nascent stage of development,
and much further research is needed to determine clinical
efficacy and elucidate the underlying mechanisms of
action for many of the devices mentioned here. Thus the
purpose of this work is to provide an overview of those
devices that we judge to be promising enough to warrant
further investigation rather than to provide a critical
review. We believe a critical review is warranted but out
of the scope of this paper.
The biofield devices summarized here operate
through a variety of modalities rather than a single
mechanism. Some biofield devices function through
well-understood mechanisms and are already widely
used in clinical settings: for example, electroencephalography
(EEG)- and electrocardiography (ECG)-based heart
rate variability (HRV).
Other devices appear to operate
through mechanisms that are novel or incompletely
understood. However, all of these devices share a common
property: rather than functioning primarily in a
reductionist, chemistry-centered manner, biofield devices
function via the informational content of biological
processes and can interact via low-energy or “subtle”
processes, including those potentially related to consciousness
and nonlocality.8,9
Biofield Devices
Here we provide a brief overview of the broad categories
of biofield devices, with the goal being to stimulate
further discussion and research. It is out of the
scope of this overview to assess the efficacy of particular
devices. Rather, we describe those devices for which
we deemed that sufficient evidence exists to warrant
mention. In order to manage this task in a manuscript
of reasonable length, we chose to focus upon devices
for which peer-reviewed scientific reports suggesting
efficacy are available rather than conference proceedings
or manufacturers’ white papers.
However, in the
few cases that specific devices with sufficient promise
and relevance lacked a peer-reviewed basis, we have
presented whatever evidence was available. Here,
devices are organized according to mode of operation
and these modalities include electromagnetic field
(EMF)-light, EMF-heat, EMF-nonthermal, electrical
current, vibration and sound, physical and mechanical,
intentionality and nonlocality, gas and plasma, and
other (mode of operation not well understood).
Modalities Using Electromagnetic Fields: Light
One line of research that has yielded a large
amount of information on biofield activity is the study
of biophoton emission (BE), also called ultraweak photon
emission. BE is the spontaneous emission of light
which emanates from all living organisms, including
humans.10 Several studies have reported intercellular
BE signaling,11 and it has been suggested that such signaling
by coherent biophotons could explain many
regulatory functions,12 including cellular orientation
detection,13 biophoton-regulation of neurotransmitter
release,14 leukocyte respiratory activity,15 and
enhanced seed germination.16 A systematic review has
suggested that detection of BE may be useful as a medical
diagnostic approach and as a research tool.17
The body also exhibits sensitivity to exogenous
light exposure, and numerous phototherapies use visible
light to treat seasonal affective disorder,18 vitamin D
deficiency,19 and a variety of skin conditions.20-24
Infrared light has been used therapeutically for wound25
and bone26 repair. Laser therapy (LT) is another form of
phototherapy that is now employed for a wide variety of
clinical applications.27 Low-level laser therapy (LLLT),
which acts without ablating tissue, has been extensively
studied, producing a growing body of systematic reviews
supporting efficacy of LLLT for several pathologies 27
including skeletal muscle repair, 28 tendinopathy, 29
rheumatoid arthritis, 30 osteoarthritis, 31 neck pain, 32
chronic joint disorders, 33 and traumatic brain injury.
34 Nonthermal LLLT appears to involve cytochrome c oxidase
as the photoacceptor,35 further elucidating one
instance in which the informational content of subtle
low-energy light-signaling may be more important than
the physical energy of the input signal.
Modalities Using Electromagnetic Fields: Heat
Devices using infrared thermography (IRT), also
called infrared thermal imaging, can detect small changes
in temperature due to muscular and metabolic activity,
subcutaneous blood flow, and patterns of perspiration
in specific parts of the body.36 Because of its high
sensitivity, IRT can be used for a broad range of applications,37
including assessment of fever, complex regional
pain syndrome, Raynaud’s phenomenon, and cardiovascular
disease. Although there is controversy regarding
efficacy and clinical use, IRT has also been studied for
the detection of temperature changes due to inflammatory
diseases and a variety of other syndromes,38 including
breast cancer39,40 and vascular dysfunction.41 IRT
can provide real-time clinical data on functional metabolism
without the use of radioactive dyes to identify
lymphatic congestion and lymph involvement in angiogenesis
related to malignancies.42 Other applications of
IRT have been useful in relation to angiology, allergology,
rheumatology, plastic surgery,43 dermatology, orthopedics,
diagnosis of circulatory abnormalities,44 and
veterinary medicine.37 With respect to biofield and
mind-body studies, IRT can be used as a tool to assess
psychophysiological activity,45 affective states in social
situations,36,45 and diagnostic techniques related to traditional
Chinese medicine (TCM).46 IRT may be viewed
as both a subtle and gross measuring device.
Modalities Using Electromagnetic Fields: Nonthermal
EMF interactions and electric currents, primarily
created by ions within the body, are essential for a variety
of critical biological functions, including regulation
of ion transport, maintenance of membrane electrical
potential, nervous system activity, cytoskeletal
transport, coordination of cell migration, embryonic
development, and wound healing.47,48 Recent studies
have also shown that processes regulating the dynamics
of mitosis, meiosis, and a variety of other processes
are governed by electric fields generated within the
intracellular network of microtubules, centrosomes,
chromosomes,48-50 and nuclear chromatin.51 Also, EMF
signaling in neuronal microtubules has been suggested
as a substrate for cognition50 and as a source of observed
EEG correlates of consciousness,52 suggesting the existence
of a system of subtle signaling that relies on
rhythm, resonance, and synchronization.53,54
In addition to these endogenous EMF interactions,
biological systems appear to exhibit sensitivity to exogenous
EMF exposures for most of the frequencies, field
strengths, and amplitudes occurring in natural and manmade
environments.46,47 These observations have led to
the development of a large number of therapeutic applications
and clearance from the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and regulatory bodies worldwide
for EMF treatment of pathologies such as bone repair,
pain, and edema.55
Of particular relevance to biofield science, a large
and rapidly growing body of data has demonstrated the
existence of nonthermal EMF bioeffects, for which the
molecular interaction energies are less than the average
thermal energy of the target.56 The existence of these
extremely weak EMF effects suggests the possibility of
bioinformation flow at extremely low energies and
could foreshadow a paradigm shift away from the biochemical
paradigm and towards an information-oriented
model, wherein weak signaling (via EMF, light, or
vibration) plays an essential role in biological regulation.
Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) devices are the
most common types of EMF therapy devices.57 PEMF
devices employ pulsed—ie, time-varying—waveforms
that are generally transmitted to the body via antennae
near the target tissue. Because of the extremely large
body of literature on PEMF therapies, here we shall consider
only those pathologies for which sufficient numbers
of clinical studies have permitted literature reviews.
Treatment of nonunion bone fractures is one of the
most widely adopted PEMF therapies cleared by the
FDA.58 Other PEMF devices have been cleared by the
FDA for pain and inflammation.59 PEMF treatment for
osteoarthritis has been extensively studied, producing
statistically significant results, but recent reviews have
suggested that further research is needed to assess the
clinical relevance of these findings. 60-65 PEMF “resonance”
or “bioresonance” devices are designed to function
via resonances at frequencies characteristic of EEG,
ECG, or other endogenous EMF processes. Although the
conceptual basis for bioresonance is unclear and efficacy
has not been definitively demonstrated, bioeffects have
been reported for some PEMF resonance devices.66-68
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a form
of pulsed magnetic field therapy that uses a rapidly
changing magnetic field to induce electric fields strong
enough to stimulate cortical neurons and alter neuronal
activity.69 While TMS was initially used as an investigative
tool in cognitive neuroscience,70 further inquiry has
led to its clinical use as an FDA-cleared treatment for
treatment-resistant depression.
71-74 Now widely accepted
as a noninvasive, low-cost method for brain stimulation,
TMS has been reported to produce benefits for a
wide variety of psychiatric conditions such as depression,
acute mania, bipolar disorders, panic, hallucinations,
obsessions/compulsions, schizophrenia, catatonia,
posttraumatic stress disorder, and drug craving.75
TMS has also been studied as a treatment for neurological
conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, dystonia,
tics, stuttering, tinnitus, spasticity, epilepsy,
stroke-related aphasia, and motor dysfunction and
pain syndromes such as neuropathic pain, visceral
pain, or migraine.75 Several clinical studies are underway
to evaluate the clinical utility of TMS for these
indications,69,75-77 and a recent review has set forth
evidence-based guidelines for TMS therapy and listed
specific conditions for which current evidence is sufficient
or insufficient to recommend treatment.78
Static Magnetic Field Therapies
A wide variety of health claims have been made
for static magnetic field (SMF) therapies, and a large
number of manufacturers currently sell magnets
intended for therapeutic purposes.79,80 Most SMF therapies
use ceramic or neodymium permanent magnets
placed on the skin surface or very near to the body.
Although the quality of published research varies
greatly, blinded in vivo studies have reported a variety
of clinical benefits for SMF exposures, including
improvements related to postsuction lipectomy edema
and pain81; fibromyalgia pain and sleep disorders82,83;
chronic pelvic pain84; pain, numbness, and tingling
due to diabetic peripheral neuropathy85; postpolio
pain86; and musculoskeletal pain.87 Other trials reported
both positive short-term and negative long-term
results on osteoarthritis knee pain88 and no effect on
foot89,90 and chronic back pain91 (although the latter 2
trials employed magnets in bipolar configuration,
resulting in lower amplitude inside the target as compared
to unipolar configuration). Reviews have produced
ambivalent conclusions for analgesia92 and
microcirculation93 and have reported that more
research is needed to determine clinical efficacy for
bone, tendon, and skin healing.94
Modalities Using Electric Currents, Voltages, or
Potentials
All living organisms produce electric currents and
potentials. This endogenous bioelectricity is a crucial
component of biology, as it serves as a substrate for
membrane potential, all nervous system activity, and
many other vital biological processes.47,48 Pivotal
advances in medicine have resulted from the ability to
measure and manipulate bioelectricity,95 and here we
provide examples of devices that measure or manipulate
bioelectricity and have been employed for research
in biofield science. Even though their underlying
mechanisms are understood well, EEG and ECG are
included as biofield devices. These approaches are sensitive
measures of distributed information flow
required for cellular regulation and function, which
although well understood in terms of biophysical substrates,
also represent important examples of biofield
interactions according to the above definition.
EEG is a noninvasive technique that uses electrodes
on the scalp to produce quantitative information
about the functional state of the brain.
The frequencies
present in EEG data are indicative of particular
brain states and brain function on a cellular level.
EEG is used to identify epileptic seizure activity and
has been employed as a research tool to measure
changes in brain state related to biofield therapies.96
ECG, using skin surface electrodes in a manner
similar in principle to EEG, is a diagnostic tool for
detecting the electrical activity of the heart. ECG is
sometimes used for the diagnosis of heart-related conditions,
including myocardial infarction, syncope, and
pulmonary embolism.97 ECG data can also be used to
measure changes in HRV98-102 that have been linked to
a variety of biofield practices, though further studies
are needed.103-105
Electrodermal activity measured by skin conductance
and galvanic skin response (GSR) reflects autonomic
sympathetic arousal associated with emotional
and cognitive states.106 GSR measurements are also
employed by several devices claiming diagnostic abilities,
but the veracity of these claims has not been clearly
demonstrated. Also, the use of GSR for diagnosis is controversial:
while the FDA classifies GSR measurement as
a Class II medical device to be used only for the measurement
of skin conductance and permitted for use in biofeedback,107
a number of manufacturers of devices
intended for a broader range of diagnoses via GSR have
obtained FDA labeling under this more narrow designation.
Another device employing electrodermal measurement
is the apparatus for meridian identification (AMI),
which measures electrical characteristics of the skin at
acupuncture points located at the base of fingers and
toes called Jing-Well points.
108 Based on the theory that
the “energy” or “strength” of the acupuncture meridians
(or energy channels) is reflected by electrodermal characteristics,
conductance, capacitance, and polarization,
measurements from Jing-Well points are analyzed in
order to diagnose a variety of pathologies, as well as to
assess overall wellbeing.109 In a controlled study of
claustrophobia therapy, increase in AMI-measured prepolarization
current at Jing-Well points correlated with
a significant reduction in anxiety.110 Similarly, statistically
significant differences between electric potential
measurements obtained on and off acupoints and
between external focus and healing states have been
reported in “energy healing” practitioners.111
In addition to these diagnostic uses of bioelectricity,
electrical stimulation is rapidly emerging as an
important new domain in medicine. Stimulation technologies,
such as vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep
brain stimulation (DBS), and transcranial direct current
stimulation (tDCS), are currently practiced clinically
and are under investigation for several new indications,
in particular for diseases and conditions that
are unresponsive to pharmacological therapy.
VNS, which entails the use of implanted electrodes
to stimulate the vagus nerve, is currently
approved in the United States for treatment of epilepsy
and depression and is being actively studied as treatment
for osteoarthritis, tinnitus, anxiety, Alzheimer’s
disease, migraine, fibromyalgia, obesity, autism, sepsis,
and inflammatory pathologies.
112,113 DBS involves the
use of implanted electrodes to stimulate targeted
regions of the brain.114 DBS has been studied as a treatment
for chronic pain, major depression, and Tourette
syndrome115 and is currently FDA-cleared for the treatment
of tremor, Parkinson’s disease, dystonia, and
obsessive-compulsive disorder. It is also under consideration
as a diagnostic/research tool.115 During tDCS,
electrodes are placed upon the scalp to noninvasively
transmit electrical current across the brain. Research
on tDCS is emerging and preliminary results suggest it
may enhance cognitive performance.116
Earthing, also known as grounding, is a practice
whereby individuals connect themselves electrostatically
to the earth by walking barefoot outdoors or by
using grounded conductive mats, bedsheets, or body
bands when indoors. Based upon the notion that the
earth’s negative surface charge is a virtually limitless
reservoir of free electrons constantly replenished by the
global atmospheric electric circuit,117,118 when earthed,
the body uses these electrons as antioxidants for neutralizing
excessive oxidative stress in the body.119,120
Research published over the last decade reports a broad
array of health-related results, including improved sleep,
decreased pain, normalizing effect on cortisol, reduction
and/or normalization of stress, diminished damage to
muscles caused by delayed onset muscle soreness, reduction
of primary indicators of osteoporosis, improved
glucose regulation, and enhanced immune function.121
While this simple technique holds promise as a therapy
and method for enhancing overall wellbeing, more
research is needed to determine the mechanisms and
clinical significance of earthing.
Taken as a whole, these electric current technologies,
which alleviate symptoms by delivering electrical
current into a system that is experiencing dysfunction,
produce systems-level effects and could be viewed as
cutting-edge examples of biofield diagnostic and therapeutic
devices. While still in the nascent stages of
refinement and elucidation of mechanisms of action,
the potential positive clinical impact of this class of
devices is significant and likely to shed light upon several
interrelated areas of biofield science.
Modalities Using Vibration/Sound
A number of devices use sound, both within and
outside of the audible range for humans. Infrasound is
low-frequency sound with frequencies below 20 Hz,
which is the limit of “normal” human hearing.
Infrasound has been reported to be effective for increasing
vitality, accelerating healing, and strengthening
immune function.122
Transcranial ultrasound (TUS) is a noninvasive
neuromodulatory technique that may be useful for the
treatment of mental health and neurological disorders.123,124
While further work is needed to demonstrate
the range of clinical applications,125,126 recent
clinical studies have reported improvement in mood in
chronic pain patients, suggesting promise for TUS as a
noninvasive treatment for pain management and perhaps
depression.127
Several therapies using audible sound have been
developed that could be considered biofield devices.
Music therapy, the clinical and evidence-based use of
musical sounds to meet therapeutic goals, has been
shown to promote wellness, manage stress, alleviate
pain, enhance emotional expression and memory,
improve communication, and promote physical rehabilitation.128
Neuroacoustic therapies use sound to modulate
brain activity and are reported to affect sympathetic-parasympathetic
balance and synchronize the activity
of the right and left brain hemispheres.129 Binaural beat
neuroacoustic therapies employ combined tones of
slightly differing frequencies and left–right channels,
which are reported to induce altered states of consciousness,130
modulate EEG activity and hypnotic susceptibility,131
and affect vigilance and mood.132
Modalities Based Upon Mechanical/Physical
Interactions
TCM uses acupuncture as a technique for balancing
the flow of a vital energy called qi, believed to move
through the body’s meridians.133 TCM posits that disruption
of energy flow is a root cause of many types of
disease134 and that one means to harmonize the flow of
qi is to insert thin metal needles into particular acupuncture
points on the skin, often followed by stimulation
of the needles mechanically or electrically.135
Acupuncture is commonly used to treat many symptoms
and diseases, including chronic pain, osteoarthritis,
side effects of chemotherapy, and fibromyalgia.136-139
Although the anatomical nature of these
meridians is unclear, it has been suggested that threadlike,
nonlymphatic subcellular structures sometimes
called Bonghan ducts or primo vascular structures may
play a role140,141; several theories for mechanisms of
action have been put forth, including local inflammatory
responses, cytoskeletal remodeling, release of adenosine
(antinociceptive effects), neuromodulation,
endogenous opioid production, and alteration of autonomic
nervous system tone.142-145
Modalities Based Upon Human Intention
A large and growing research literature has considered
the role of human consciousness and intention in
biology, psychology, and the physical sciences.8,9 These
human intentionality effects have been reported in a
variety of living systems—for example EEG146 and
galvanic skin response147—suggesting that human
intention may play a key role in biofield interactions.
Two large-scale projects are currently collecting
data on human interactions with global events: (1) the
Global Consciousness Project is collecting data on correlations
between statistics of continuously operating
random event generators around the world and brief
episodes of widespread mental and emotional reaction
to major world events,148 and (2) the Global Coherence
Initiative is seeking to examine interactions of humans
with EMFs of terrestrial, solar, and cosmic origin by
installing a global network of 12 to 14 ultrasensitive
magnetic field detectors around the planet and correlating
EMF data with variables such as HRV.149 While
these global projects involve large numbers of participants
around the world, the intention host device
(IHD) is another type of device methodology based
upon human intention focused more individually.150
The IHD has been reported to broadcast imprinted
human intention to condition a laboratory environment
and to produce alterations in time-series measurements
of temperature, pH, drosophila fitness and
energy metabolism, in vitro enzyme activity, and
molecular concentration variability.150,151
Modalities Using Gas or Plasma
Gas discharge visualization (GDV) is an important
example of the use of plasma in biofield science. Based
on the Kirlian effect, a high-frequency, high-voltage field
is used to stimulate weak photon emission, followed by
the application of modern optics, electronics, and computer
processing to form images of the weak photon
emission. Dating back to the 1930s, this technique has
been called electrography, electrophotography,
corona discharge photography, bioelectrography,
GDV, electrophotonic imaging (EPI), and
Kirlianography.
GDV/EPI techniques are currently
used diagnostically based upon the characteristics of
images of the fingertips158 and often with proprietary
means of correlating these data with acupuncture systems
or other means of assessing the biological state.159
Nearly 1000 papers have been published (mostly in
Russian) on GDV research and a few hundred more in
the West. A recent review of GDV research applied to
medicine and psychology can be found in the book
(more books on IUMAB Library)
Electrophotonic Applications in Medicine: GDV
Bioelectrography. One study reported significant differences
in cancer patient GDV scans when compared with
healthy particpants, and after 6 weeks of treatment
including surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, a
change trending toward healthy subject GDV profiles.
These intriguing data suggest that informatics based
upon biofield measurement devices such as the GDV
may be useful for gaining deeper understanding of disease
states and guiding practitioners and their patients
towards states of greater wellness.
Other Device Modalities
In light of observations of nonlocal effects,8,9
which suggest that biofield interactions may involve
means of information transfer that cannot be easily
described via well-understood substrates (eg, EMFs),
here we describe devices that do not fit easily into the
categories listed above. Although a vast number of
other devices fall into this category, here we list 3 of the
more well-known modalities: torsion fields, orgone
energy, and scalar waves. These 3 modalities were chosen
because of their prominent positions amongst
devices purported to act upon the biofield. However, it
should be noted that the biophysical substrates are
either poorly understood or not generally accepted by
the scientific community. Claims of effects and efficacy
for these modalities have not been verified, and further
research is needed to establish not only the veracity of
the claims but also to fully confirm the existence of the
specific effects reported.
Torsion Fields
The notion of a torsion field is generally credited
to the Russian professor N.P. Myshkin162 and is based
upon the theory that particles with spin are coupled
via torsion fields.162 A collection of relevant experiments
is reviewed in a volume by Swanson.163 Torsion
fields are of interest to biofield science in that they
could provide a theoretical framework for explaining
non-EMF interactions and how these might interact
with biological systems.
Orgone Energy
Orgone energy is a purported universal life force
originally described in the 1930s by the Austrian psychoanalyst
Wilhelm Reich.164-166 Reich believed
orgone energy to be a massless, omnipresent substance,
closely associated with living energy but also present
in inert matter. Orgone energy was thought to create
organization on all scales using orgone particles called
“bions,” from the microscopic to macroscopic levels
within organisms, clouds, or even galaxies.165 Reich
designed and built special “orgone energy accumulators”
to collect and store orgone energy from the environment
and claimed these devices could be used for
improvement of general health.164
Scalar Waves
Scalar waves are said to be produced when 2 electromagnetic
waves of the same frequency are exactly
out of phase and cancel with each other.167 Rather
than the waves completely disappearing in the
destructive interference, it is hypothesized that a
transformation of energy into a scalar wave occurs,
with the resulting scalar field “reverting back” to a
vacuum state of potentiality.167 Scalar waves are purported
to explain homeopathy and lymphatic detoxification;
treat diabetes, nearsightedness, kidney stones,
Parkinson’s disease, strokes, arthritis, and cancer; and
reverse the aging process.168
Discussion
Although the biofield devices described here operate
through a great diversity of mechanisms, these
devices all share the common quality of being most
clearly understood within a biofield framework, wherein
information flow or the capacity to create organization
acts across hierarchical levels to coordinate biological
activity. Elements of this framework are already well
accepted by the biomedical community and have been
applied through several device modalities, including
ECG, EEG, other electrophysiological techniques, some
EMF therapies, ultrasound, thermal imaging, and techniques
using light like LT. Extraordinary medical and
scientific progress has occurred as a result of these
modalities and the elucidation of their underlying principles.
Further progress is likely to be informed by the
recent demonstration of endogenous EMF regulation of
a variety of biological processes and indications of quantum
information processing in the cytoskeleton.48-52,54,169
These recent results suggest a biophysical
basis for biofield coordination of activities across the
molecular, cellular, and organismic levels53 and may
provide testable hypotheses regarding biofield regulation
of homeodynamics and mind-body interactions.
In contrast to this growing knowledge of biofield
mechanisms, several biofield modalities appear to
operate according to principles that are not currently
well understood or accepted by mainstream medical
science.
Further study of those modalities for which
there is strong experimental evidence—eg, BE, consciousness
and nonlocal interactions, GDV, TCM—
may substantially advance our understanding of biofield
interactions and their biological and health implications.57
The growing basic science data and existence
of devices operating via consciousness or intention,8,9
which may act through nonlocal quantum correlations,
must be taken seriously. Despite long-lasting
taboos proscribing study of these phenomena, researchers
must have the courage and self-awareness necessary
to assess the veracity, specific properties, and general
significance of the large and important body of
research in this area.
The large diversity of biofield device modalities
presents several significant methodological issues not
limited to the fact that biofield interactions appear to
involve exceedingly complex systems. Attempts to
reduce biofield interactions to reductionist substrates
may be inadequate, underscoring the need for a more
holistic “systems biology” approach.170 Significantly,
several of the modalities described here, such as BEs
and extremely weak EMFs, operate at extremely low
interaction energies, often below the apparent thermal
threshold of Brownian motion.56 Such low energies
suggest the existence of weak-field information transfer
or subtle signaling, for which the biological mechanisms
are only now becoming elucidated.
While the existence of extremely weak EMF effects is now beyond
dispute,56 understanding of the clinical relevance of
specific nonthermal waveforms is still in its infancy,
and a more comprehensive model of the resonant
response of the body to particular weak EMF signaling
is still needed. Furthermore, the significance of these
EMF effects is unclear when juxtaposed with the variety
of EMFs that many individuals are exposed to in the
course of everyday life.
In order to determine which biological processes
exhibit functional sensitivities to these subtle factors,
researchers will have to carefully control for the influence
of very weak EMFs and other low-energy subtle influences.
Therein, specialized equipment and laboratories will be
required, including the use of Faraday cages, µ-metal enclosures,
completely dark rooms, noise-proofing, and the
development of instruments sensitive enough to measure
biofield interactions or subtle low-energy nonthermal
influences. Nearly all cell culture incubators produce a
nonuniform EMF of bioactive strength, which must be
taken into consideration.56 Controlling for picotesla-nanotesla
range sensitivities57 presents further challenges, as
shielding at these extremely low field strengths may be
difficult or impossible in some situations. In the absence of
a means to control for all potential subtle effectors, it may,
in some instances, be necessary to adopt a new paradigm of
research wherein naturally occurring EMF fluctuations
due to solar/geomagnetic and other sources are an integral
part of the experimental environment and are therein
measured and accounted for in analyses. Similarly, circadian
and other naturally occurring biological rhythms
may influence very sensitive systems. These factors may
be precursors of a shift towards an information-based
model of low-energy interactions, wherein the informational
content of a process may be much more relevant
than the apparent energy of interaction.
Interfaces for Future Research
Biofield studies are now evolving toward being an
accepted discipline within mainstream science, and
the existence of a community or several related groups
focused on biofield research will greatly enhance the
visibility and credibility of the field as a whole. To further
the development of knowledge in the next decade,
we propose the creation of an organization or community
of researchers dedicated to furthering biofield
studies and device development. Regular opportunities
for interaction and critical assessment of progress and
results will enhance the growth of knowledge related
to this emerging field. A collaborative community will
also enable the independent replication of key findings.
This will be critical for achieving acceptance by
the scientific community at large.
Another important goal will be to acquire funding
for independent replications or concurrent experimental
protocols in separate laboratories. Private sources of
funding are necessary to perform research today, and
this often results in conflicts of interest. For example,
device manufacturers provide a substantial portion of
the funding for research in EMF therapeutics. Research
in this emerging and sometimes controversial field,
which is moving toward advances in science, illustrates
how such conflicts of interest could significantly
hinder acceptance by the mainstream scientific community.
Efforts could be made to form collaborations
amongst device manufacturers to replicate findings
and make distinctions between similar devices.
Although this may appear to run contrary to the shortterm
goals of individual companies, the long-term
benefits may be substantial.
In order to further the progress of biofield research
and device development, research must be coordinated
across several levels. Further developments of diagnostic
and therapeutic biofield device technologies will require
interdisciplinary research joining clinical and preclinical
studies with basic science efforts in physiology, biophysics,
and the development of a theory of mind and
nonlocal consciousness in the following areas.
Basic Science Foundations:
Physiology, Biophysics, and Theory of Mind/Consciousness
Interfaces among these 3 fields are crucial for the
development and refinement of biofield device technologies.
A better understanding of the physiology of
biofield interactions (ie, biofield reception, generation,
and function) will require interfaces with biophysics
and new models for subtle biological influences such
as extremely weak EMF effects or biophotonics. A more
comprehensive theory of mind is required to understand
nonlocal interactions and to further understand
the biophysical bases for these effects. At this stage,
models based upon quantum correlations appear
promising,54,169 but testable hypotheses are needed in
order to develop a more detailed functional framework.
Development of the interfaces between physiology,
biophysics, and a testable nonlocal theory of the role of
the mind will elucidate the specific ways in which
devices can be developed for detection and manipulation
of biofield interactions.
Preclinical Research
Cell culture and animal models provide an essential
interface for testing and implementation phases of
device development. A large body of previous data has
already been valuable for steering the device research
described here.
Clinical Research
Many of the devices reviewed here hold significant
promise as low-cost, personalized diagnostic and
therapeutic approaches. As such, rigorously designed
clinical studies are a high priority for moving biofield
device research and development forward. This will
require interfaces among clinical, preclinical, and basic
science researchers in order to assess the unique translational
and methodological questions discussed above.
Cross-platform Validation
An immediate goal will be to support the creation
of laboratories that can design and carry out studies to
test across multiple devices using gold-standard diagnostic
and therapeutic medical approaches as comparators.
The outcomes of these crossplatform validation
studies could lead to the further development and
implementation of noninvasive diagnostic medical
assessments and therapeutic devices that are related to
biofield science.
The current existence of biofield devices is a demonstration
of the clear, specific, and tangible knowledge
that has been gained thus far in biofield science. Devices
play prominent cultural and scientific roles in our society,
and it is likely that device technologies will be one of
the most influential access points for the furthering of
biofield research and the dissemination of biofield concepts.
Comprehensive study of biofield devices will
require a concerted research effort, interdisciplinary collaborations,
and sufficient funding. Systematic studies
are needed to deepen our understanding of the nature of
biofield interactions and to move biofield device development
and experimentation forward. This developing
field of study presents new areas of research that have
many important implications for basic science, clinical
medicine, and potentially, the forward progress and evolution
of our species. The ever-growing understanding of
biofield science holds promise to foster a more humane
and personalized form of medicine and an expansion of
our scientific viewpoint to include the importance of
each individual’s interconnectedness with communities,
the immediate environment, the earth, and the cosmos.
References
1. Rossi EL. Psychosocial genomics: gene expression, neurogenesis, and humanexperience in mind-body medicine. Adv Mind Body Med. 2002;18(2):22-30.
2. McCraty R, Atkinson M, Tomasino D, Bradley RT. The coherent heart: heart–brain interactions, psychophysiological coherence, and the emergence of system-wideorder. Integr Rev. 2009;5(2):10-114.
3. Jonas WB, Eisenberg D, Hufford D, Crawford C. The evolution of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the USA over the last 20 years. Forsch Komplementmed. 2013;20(1):65-72.
4. Morgan N, Irwin MR, Chung M, Wang C. The effects of mind-body therapies on the immune system: meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e100903.
5. Simkin DR, Black NB. Meditation and mindfulness in clinical practice. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2014;23(3):487-534.
6. Innes KE, Selfe TK. Meditation as a therapeutic intervention for adults at risk for Alzheimer’s disease—potential benefits and underlying mechanisms. Front Psychiatry. 2014 Apr 23;5:40.
7. Lee C, Crawford C, Teo L, et al. An analysis of the various chronic pain conditions captured in a systematic review of active self-care complementary and integrative medicine therapies for the management of chronic pain symptoms. Pain Med. 2014;15 Suppl 1:S96-103.
8. Hankey A. The influence of psychic phenomena: a new light on health. J Altern Complement Med. 2007;13(8):787-8.
9. Radin D, Nelson R. Meta-analysis of mind-matter interaction experiments:
1959-2000. IaEM healing. London: Harcourt Health Sciences; 2003:39-48.
10. Popp FA, Nagl W, Li KH, Scholz W, Weingärtner O, Wolf R. Biophoton emission. New evidence for coherence and DNA as source. Cell Biophys.
1984;6(1):33-52.
11. Vanwijk R. Bio-photons and bio-communication. J Sci Explor. 2001;15(2):183-97.
12. Popp FA, Chang JJ. The physical background and the informational character of biophoton emission, In: Chang JJ, Fisch J, Popp FA, Editors. Biophotons. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer; 1998:238-50.
13. Albrecht-Buehler G. Rudimentary form of cellular “vision”. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992;89(17):8288-92.
14. Galantsev VP, Kovalenko SG, Moltchanov AA, Prutskov VI. Lipid peroxidation, low-level chemiluminescence and regulation of secretion in the mammary gland. Experientia. 1993;49(10):870-5.
15. Shen X, Bei L, Hu TH, Aryal B. The possible role played by biophotons in the long-range interaction between neutrophil leukocytes. In: Beloussov LV,
Voeikov VL, VanWijk R, Editors. Biophotonics and coherent systems in biology. Moscow: Moscow University Press; 2000:336-46.
16. Kuzin AM, Surkenova GM. Secondary biogenic irradiation of plant structures
after gamma-irradiation at low dose. In: Beloussov LV, Editor. Biophotonics.
Moscow: Bioinform Services; 1995:257-65.
17. Ives JA, van Wijk EP, Bat N, et al. Ultraweak photon emission as a non-invasive health assessment: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e87401.
18. Terman JS, Terman M, Lo ES, Cooper TB. Circadian time of morning light
administration and therapeutic response in winter depression. Arch Gen
Psychiatry. 2001;58(1):69-75.
19. Wacker M, Holick MF. Vitamin D—effects on skeletal and extraskeletal health and the need for supplementation. Nutrients. 2013;5(1):111-48.
20. Diffey BL. Ultraviolet radiation physics and the skin. Phys Med Biol.
1980;25(3):405-26.
21. Hamilton FL, Car J, Lyons C, Car M, Layton A, Majeed A. Laser and other light therapies for the treatment of acne vulgaris: systematic review. Br J Dermatol. 2009;160(6):1273-85.
22. American Cancer Society. Light therapy. 2011; http://www.cancer.org/
D. Accessed September 9, 2015.
23. Adauwiyah J, Suraiya HH. A retrospective study of narrowband-UVB phototherapy for treatment of vitiligo in Malaysian patients. Med J Malaysia. 2010;65(4):297-9.
24. Titus S, Hodge J. Diagnosis and treatment of acne. Am Fam Physician.
2012;86(8):734-40.
25. Toyokawa H, Matsui Y, Uhara J, et al. Promotive effects of far-infrared ray on full-thickness skin wound healing in rats. Exp Biol Med (Maywood).
2003;228(6):724-9.
26. Azril MA, Shaifuzain AR, Halim AY, Iskandar MA, Shukrimi A, Imran Y. Effect of far infrared radiation on bone healing—study in rabbits. Malaysian J Med Sci. 2006;13(Suppl):87.
27. Chung H, Dai T, Sharma SK, Huang YY, Carroll JD, Hamblin MR. The nuts and bolts of low-level laser (light) therapy. Ann Biomed Eng. 2012;40(2):516-33.
28. Alves AN, Fernandes KP, Deana AM, Bussadori SK, Mesquita-Ferrari RA. Effects of low-level Laser therapy on skeletal muscle repair: a systematic review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;93(12):1073-85.
29. Tumilty S, Munn J, McDonough S, Hurley DA, Basford JR, Baxter GD. Low level laser treatment of tendinopathy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Photomed Laser Surg. 2010;28(1):3-16.
30. Brosseau L, Robinson V, Wells G, et al. Low level laser therapy (Classes I, II and III) for treating rheumatoid arthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
2005(4):Cd002049.
31. Jamtvedt G, Dahm KT, Christie A, et al. Physical therapy interventions for
patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: an overview of systematic reviews.
Phys Ther. 2008;88(1):123-36.
32. Chow RT, Johnson MI, Lopes-Martins RA, Bjordal JM. Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in the management of neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo or active-treatment controlled trials. Lancet. 2009;374(9705):1897-908.
33. Bjordal JM, Couppé C, Chow RT, Tunér J, Ljunggren EA. A systematic review of low level laser therapy with location-specific doses for pain from chronic joint disorders. Aust J Physiother. 2003;49(2):107-16.
34. Naeser MA, Zafonte R, Krengel MH, et al. Significant improvements in cognitive performance post-transcranial, red/near-infrared light-emitting diode treatments in chronic, mild traumatic brain injury: open-protocol study. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31(11):1008-17.
35. Prindeze NJ, Moffatt LT, Shupp JW. Mechanisms of action for light therapy: a review of molecular interactions. Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2012;237(11):1241-8.
36. Ioannou S, Gallese V, Merla A. Thermal infrared imaging in psychophysiology: Potentialities and limits. Psychophysiology. 2014;51(10):951-63.
37. Redaelli V, Tanzi B, Luzi F, et al. Use of thermographic imaging in clinical diagnosis of small animal: preliminary notes. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 2014;50(2):140-6.
38. Ring EF, Ammer K. Infrared thermal imaging in medicine. Physiol Meas.
2012;33(3):R33-46.
39. Kennedy DA, Lee T, Seely D. A comparative review of thermography as a breast cancer screening technique. Integr Cancer Ther. 2009;8(1):9-16.
40. Ng EY. A review of thermography as promising non-invasive detection modality for breast tumor Int J Therm Sci. 2009;48(5):849-59.
41. Thiruvengadam J, Anburajan M, Menaka M, Venkatraman B3 Potential of thermal imaging as a tool for prediction of cardiovascular disease. J Med Phys. 2014;39(2):98-105.
42. Zore Z, Boras I, Stanec M, Oresić T, Zore IF. Influence of hormonal status on thermography findings in breast cancer. Acta Clin Croat. 2013;52(1):35-42.
43. Mikulska D. Contemporary applications of infrared imaging in medical diagnostics. Ann Acad Med Stetin. 2006;52(1):35-9; discussion 39-40. Polish.
44. Jiang LJ, Ng EY, Yeo AC, et al. A perspective on medical infrared imaging. J Med Eng Technol. 2005;29(6):257-67.
45. Merla A. Thermal expression of intersubjectivity offers new possibilities to human-machine and technologically mediated interactions. Front Psychol.
2014 Jul 23;5:802.
46. Ni JX, Gao SH, Li YH, et al. Clinical trial on the characteristics of zheng classification
of pulmonary diseases based on infrared thermal imaging technology.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:218909.
47. Funk RH, Monsees TK. Effects of electromagnetic fields on cells: physiological
and therapeutical approaches and molecular mechanisms of interaction. A
review. Cells Tissues Organs. 2006;182(2):59-78.
48. Funk RH, Monsees TK, Ozkucur N. Electromagnetic effects—From cell biology to medicine. Prog Histochem Cytochem. 2009;43(4):177-264.
49. Zhao Y, Zhan Q. Electric fields generated by synchronized oscillations of micro-tubules, centrosomes and chromosomes regulate the dynamics of mitosis and meiosis. Theor Biol Med Model. 2012 Jul 2;9:26.
50. Plankar M, Brežan S, Jerman I. The principle of coherence in multi-level brain information processing. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2013;111(1):8-29.
51. Zhao Y, Zhan Q. Electric oscillation and coupling of chromatin regulate chromosome
packaging and transcription in eukaryotic cells. Theor Biol Med
Model. 2012 Jul 3;9:27.
52. Hameroff S, Penrose R. Consciousness in the universe: A review of the “Orch OR” theory. Phys Life Rev. 2014;11(1):39-78.
53. Glass L. Synchronization and rhythmic processes in physiology. Nature.
2001;410(6825):277-84.
54. Hameroff S, Nip A, Porter M, Tuszynski J. Conduction pathways in microtubules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness. Biosystems. 2002;64(1-3):149-68.
55. Pilla AA. Mechanisms and therapeutic applications of time varying and static magnetic fields. In: Biological and Medical Aspects of Electromagnetic Fields. Barnes FS, Greenebaum B, Editors. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2007:351- 411.
56. Binhi VN, Rubin AB. Magnetobiology: the kT paradox and possible solutions. Electromagn Biol Med. 2007;26(1):45-62.
57. Shupak NM. Therapeutic uses of pulsed magnetic-field exposure: a review. Radio Sci Bull. 2003 Dec;3072(9-32).
58. Aaron RK, Ciombor DM, Simon BJ. Treatment of nonunions with electric and electromagnetic fields. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Feb;(419):21-9.
59. Markov MS. Expanding use of pulsed electromagnetic field therapies.
Electromagn Biol Med. 2007;26(3):257-74.
60. Hulme J, Robinson V, DeBie R, Wells G, Judd M, Tugwell P. Electromagnetic fields for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
2002(1):Cd003523.
61. McCarthy CJ, Callaghan MJ, Oldham JA. Pulsed electromagnetic energy treatment offers no clinical benefit in reducing the pain of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Jun 15;7:51.
62. Cao LY, Jiang MJ, Yang SP, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2012;25(5):384-8. Chinese.
63. Ryang We S, Koog YH, Jeong KI, Wi H. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field on knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Rheumatology (Oxford).
2013;52(5):815-24.
64. Li S, Yu B, Zhou D, et al. Electromagnetic fields for treating osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 14;12:Cd003523.
65. Negm A, Lorbergs A, Macintyre NJ. Efficacy of low frequency pulsed subsensory threshold electrical stimulation vs placebo on pain and physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis: systematic review with meta-analysis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21(9):1281-9.
66. Fedorowski A, Steciwko A, Rabczynski J. Low-frequency electromagnetic stimulation may lead to regression of Morris hepatoma in buffalo rats. J Altern Complement Med. 2004;10(2):251-60.
67. Heredia-Rojas JA, Torres-Flores AC, Rodriguez-De la Fuente AO, et al.
Entamoeba histolytica and Trichomonas vaginalis: trophozoite growth inhibition
by metronidazole electro-transferred water. Exp Parasitol. 2011;127(1):80-3.
68. Islamov BI, Balabanova RM, Funtikov VA, Gotovskii YV, Meizerov EE. Effect of
bioresonance therapy on antioxidant system in lymphocytes in patients with
rheumatoid arthritis. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2002;134(3):248-50.
69. Hallett M. Transcranial magnetic stimulation: a primer. Neuron.
2007;55(2):187-99.
70. Walsh V, Cowey A. Transcranial magnetic stimulation and cognitive neuroscience.
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2000;1(1):73-9.
71. Grisaru N, Yaroslavsky U, Abarbanel J, Lamberg T, Belmaker RH. Transcranial magnetic stimulation in depression and schizophrenia. Eur
Neuropsychopharm. 1994;4(3):287-8.
72. Kolbinger HM, Höflich G, Hufnagel A, Müller HJ, Kasper S. Transcranial magnetic
stimulation (TMS) in the treatment of major depression: a pilot study.
Hum Psychopharmacol. 1995;10(4):305-10.
73. George MS, Wassermann EM, Williams WA, et al. Daily repetitive transcranial
magnetic stimulation (rTMS) improves mood in depression. Neuroreport.
1995;6(14):1853-6.
74. Pascual-Leone A, Rubio B, Pallardó F, Catalá MD. Rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stimulation of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in drug-resistant depression.
Lancet. 1996;348(9022):233-7.
75. Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A; Safety of TMS Consensus
Group. Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin
Neurophysiol. 2009;120(12):2008-39.
76. Fitzgerald PB, Brown TL, Marston NA, Daskalakis ZJ, De Castella A, Kulkarni J.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of depression: a doubleblind, placebo-controlled trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60(10):1002-8.
77. Lefaucheur JP, Antal A, Ahdab R, et al. The use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to relieve pain. Brain Stimul. 2008;1(4):337-44.
78. Lefaucheur JP, Andre-Obadia N, Antal A, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin
Neurophysiol. 2014;125(11):2150-206.
79. Markov MS. Magnetic field therapy: a review. Electromagn Biol Med.
2007;26(1):1-23.
80. Colbert AP, Wahbeh H, Harling N, et al. Static magnetic field therapy: a critical review of treatment parameters. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med.
2009;6(2):133-9.
81. Man D, Man B, Plosker H. The influence of permanent magnetic field therapy on wound healing in suction lipectomy patients: a double-blind study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999;104(7):2261-6; discussion 2267-8.
82. Colbert AP, Markov MS, Souder JS. Static magnetic field therapy: dosimetry considerations. J Altern Complement Med. 2008;14(5):577-82.
83. Alfano AP, Taylor AG, Foresman PA, et al. Static magnetic fields for treatment of fibromyalgia:
a randomized controlled trial. J Altern Complement Med. 2001;7(1):53-64.
84. Brown CS, Ling FW, Wan JY, Pilla AA. Efficacy of static magnetic field therapy in chronic pelvic pain: a double-blind pilot study. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
2002;187(6):1581-7.
85. Weintraub MI, Wolfe GI, Barohn RA, et al. Static magnetic field therapy for symptomatic diabetic neuropathy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84:736-46.
86. Vallbona C, Hazlewood CF, Jurida G. Response of pain to static magnetic fields in postpolio patients: a double-blind pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78(11):1200-3.
87. Pujol J, Pascual-Leone A, Dolz C, Delgado E, Dolz JL, Aldomà J. The effect of repetitive magnetic stimulation on localized musculoskeletal pain.
Neuroreport. 1998;9(8):1745-8.
88. Wolsko PM, Eisenberg DM, Simon LS, et al. Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of static magnets for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: results of a pilot study. Altern Ther Health Med. 2004;10(2):36-43.
89. Caselli MA, Clark N, Lazarus S, Velez Z, Venegas L. Evaluation of magnetic foil and PPT Insoles in the treatment of heel pain. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1997;87(1):11-6.
90. Winemiller MH, Billow RG, Laskowski ER, Harmsen WS. Effect of magnetic vs sham-magnetic insoles on plantar heel pain: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;290(11):1474-8.
91. Collacott EA, Zimmerman JT, White DW, Rindone JP. Bipolar permanent magnets for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a pilot study. JAMA.
2000;283(10):1322-5.
92. Eccles NK. A critical review of randomized controlled trials of static magnets for pain relief. J Altern Complement Med. 2005;11(3):495-509.
93. McKay JC, Prato FS, Thomas AW. A literature review: the effects of magnetic field exposure on blood flow and blood vessels in the microvasculature. Bioelectromagnetics. 2007;28(2):81-98.
94. Henry SL, Concannon MJ, Yee GJ. The effect of magnetic fields on wound healing: experimental study and review of the literature. Eplasty. 2008 Jul 25;8:e40.
95. Grimnes S, Martinson OG. Bioimpedance and bioelectricity basics. 3rd ed. 2011: London: Academic Press; 2011.
96. Baldwin AL, Hammerschlag R. Biofield-based therapies: a systematic review of physiological effects on practitioners during healing. Explore (NY).
2014;10(3):150-61.
97. Todd K, Simpson CS, Redfearn DP, Abdollah H, Baranchuk A. ECG for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism when conventional imaging cannot be utilized: a case report and review of the literature. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J.
2009;9(5):268-75.
98. Billman GE. Heart rate variability—a historical perspective. Front Physiol. 2011 Nov 29;2:86.
99. Xhyheri B, Manfrini O, Mazzolini M, Pizzi C, Bugiardini R. Heart rate variability today. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2012;55(3):321-31.
100. Gaebler M, Daniels JK, Lamke JP, Fydrich T, Walter H. Heart rate variability and its neural correlates during emotional face processing in social anxiety disorder.
Biol Psychol. 2013;94(2):319-30.
101. Kemp AH, Quintana DS. The relationship between mental and physical health: insights from the study of heart rate variability. Int J Psychophysiol.
2013;89(3):288-96.
102. Moon E, Lee SH, Kim DH, Hwang B. Comparative study of heart rate variability in patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, or major depressive disorder. Clin Psychopharmacol Neurosci. 2013;11(3):137-43.
103. Baldwin AL, Schwartz GE. Physiological changes in energy healers during selfpractice.
Complement Ther Med. 2012;20(5):299-305.
104. Burleson KO, Schwartz GE. Energy healing training and heart rate variability. J
Altern Complement Med. 2005;11(3):391-3.
105. Chien CH, Tsuei JJ, Lee SC, Huang YC, Wei YH. Effect of emitted bioenergy on biochemical functions of cells. Am J Chin Med. 1991;19(3-4):285-92.
106. Critchley HD. Electrodermal responses: what happens in the brain.
Neuroscientist. 2002;8(2):132-42.
107. US Food and Drug Administration. Code of federal regulaions: title 21–food and drugs. CFR 882.1540 Galvanic skin response measurement device. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2003-title21-vol8/xml/CFR-2003-title21-vol8-
sec882-1540.xml. Accessed August 20, 2015.
108. Tsuchita K, Motoyama H. Study of body’s energy changes in non-touch energy healing 1. Pranic healing protocol applied for a breast cancer subject. Subtle Original Article Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach 51 An overview of biofield devices
Ener Ener Med. 2009;20(2):15-30.
109. Deadman P. The five shu-points. J Chinese Med. 1993;42:31-38. https://www.jcm.co.uk/the-five-shupoints.html. Accessed August 20, 2015.
110. Lambrou P, Pratt G, Chevalier G. Physiological and psychological effects of a mind/body therapy on claustrophobia. Subtle Ener Ener Med. 2003;14(3):767-74.
111. Syldona M, Rein G. The use of DC electrodermal potential measurements and
healer’s felt sense to assess the energetic nature of qi. J Altern Complement
Med 1999;5(4):329-47.
112. Groves DA, Brown VJ. Vagal nerve stimulation: a review of its applications and potential mechanisms that mediate its clinical effects. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005;29(3):493-500.
113. Tracey KJ. Reflex control of immunity. Nat Rev Immunol. 2009;9(6):418-28.
114. Kringelbach ML, Jenkinson N, Owen SL, Aziz TZ. Translational principles of deep brain stimulation. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007;8(8):623-35.
115. Karas PJ, Mikell CB, Christian E, Liker MA, Sheth SA. Deep brain stimulation: a mechanistic and clinical update. Neurosurg Focus. 2013;35(5):E1.
116. Martin DM, Liu R, Alonzo A, et al. Can transcranial direct current stimulation
enhance outcomes from cognitive training? A randomized controlled trial in
healthy participants. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2013;16(9):1927-36.
117. Williams ER, Heckman SJ. The local diurnal variation of cloud electrification
and the global diurnal variation of negative charge on the Earth. J Geophys Res. 1993;98(D3):5221-34.
118. Anisimov SV, Mareev EA, Bakastov SS. On the generation and evolution of aeroelectric structures in the surface layer. J Geophys Res.
1999;104(D12):14359-67.
119. Oschman JL. Can electrons act as antioxidants? A review and commentary. J Altern Complement Med. 2007;13(9):955-67.
120. Oschman JL. Charge transfer in the living matrix. J Bodyw Mov Ther.
2009;13(3):215-28.
121. Chevalier G, Sinatra ST, Oschman JL, Sokal K, Sokal P. Earthing: health implications of reconnecting the human body to the Earth’s surface electrons. J Environ Public Health. 2012;2012:291541.
122. CHI Institute. Products>infratonics>>how it works. http://www.chi.us/infratronichowitworks.htm. August 20, 2015.
123. Fry FJ, Ades HW, Fry WJ. Production of reversible changes in the central nervous system by ultrasound. Science. 1958;127(3289):83-4.
124. Gavrilov LR, Gersuni GV, Ilyinsky OB, et al. The effect of focused ultrasound on the skin and deep nerve structures of man and animal. Prog Brain Res. 1976;43:279-92.
125. Tufail Y, Yoshihiro A, Pati S, Li MM, Tyler WJ. Ultrasonic neuromodulation by brain stimulation with transcranial ultrasound. Nat Protoc. 2011;6(9):1453-70.
126. Arendash GW. Transcranial electromagnetic treatment against Alzheimer’s disease: why it has the potential to trump Alzheimer’s disease drug development. J Alzheimers Dis. 2012;32(2):243-66.
127. Hameroff S, Trakas M, Duffield C, et al. Transcranial ultrasound (TUS) effects on mental states: a pilot study. Brain Stimul. 2013;6(3):409-15.
128. Gregory D. Four decades of music therapy behavioral research designs: a content
analysis of Journal of Music Therapy articles. J Music Ther. 2002;39(1):56-71.
129. Thompson JD. Clinical use of sound. Center for Neuroacoustic Research. http://www.neuroacoustic.com/. Accessed August 20, 2015.
130. Atwater FH. Accessing anomalous states of consciousness with a binaural beat technology. J Sci Explor. 1997;11(3):263-74.
131. Brady B, Stevens L. Binaural-beat induced theta EEG activity and hypnotic susceptibility. Am J Clin Hypn. 2000;43(1):53-69.
134. Lane JD, Kasian SJ, Owens JE, Marsh GR. Binaural auditory beats affect vigilance performance and mood. Physiol Behav. 1998;63(2):249-52.
135. Stux G, Berman B, Pomeranz B. Basics of acupuncture. 5th rev ed. 2003, Berlin: Springer; 2003.
134. Wilkinson J, Faleiro R. Acupuncture in pain management. Cont Ed
Anaesthesia Crit Care Pain. 2007;7(4):135-8.
135. Aung SK, Chen WP. Clinical introduction to medical acupuncture. New York: Thieme; 2007.
136. Cao L, Zhang XL, Gao YS, Jiang Y. Needle acupuncture for osteoarthritis of the knee. A systematic review and updated meta-analysis. Saudi Med J.
2012;33(5):526-32.
137. Choi TY, Lee MS, Kim TH, Zaslawski C, Ernst E. Acupuncture for the treatment of cancer pain: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(6):1147-58.
138. Deare JC, Zheng Z, Xue CC, et al. Acupuncture for treating fibromyalgia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 May 31;5:CD007070.
139. Hopton A, MacPherson H. Acupuncture for chronic pain: is acupuncture more than an effective placebo? A systematic review of pooled data from meta-analyses. Pain Pract. 2010;10(2):94-102.
140. Shin HS, Johng HM, Lee BC, et al. Feulgen reaction study of novel threadlike structures (Bonghan ducts) on the surfaces of mammalian organs. Anat Rec B New Anat. 2005;284(1):35-40.
141. Lee C, Seol SK, Lee BC, Hong YK, Je JH, Soh KS. Alcian blue staining method to visualize bonghan threads inside large caliber lymphatic vessels and x-ray microtomography to reveal their microchannels. Lymphat Res Biol. 2006;4(4):181-90.
142. Carlsson C. Acupuncture mechanisms for clinically relevant long-term effects-reconsideration and a hypothesis. Acupunct Med. 2002;20(2-3):82-99.
143. Goldman N, Chen M, Fujita T, et al. Adenosine A1 receptors mediate local antinociceptive effects of acupuncture. Nat Neurosci. 2010;13(7):883-8.
144. Langevin HM, Bouffard NA, Badger GJ, Churchill DL, Howe AK. Subcutaneous tissue fibroblast cytoskeletal remodeling induced by acupuncture: evidence for a mechanotransduction-based mechanism. J Cell Physiol. 2006;207(3):767-74.
145. Takahashi T. Mechanism of acupuncture on neuromodulation in the gut–a review. Neuromodulation. 2011;14(1):8-12; discussion 12.
146. Wackermann J, Seiter C, Keibel H, Walach H. Correlations between brain electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects. Neurosci Lett. 2003;336(1):60-4.
147. Radin D, Stone J, Levine E, et al. Compassionate intention as a therapeutic intervention by partners of cancer patients: effects of distant intention on the patients’ autonomic nervous system. Explore (NY). 2008;4(4):235-43.
148. Nelson R, Bancel P. Effects of mass consciousness: changes in random data during global events. Explore (NY). 2011;7(6):373-83.
149. McCraty R, Deyhle A, Childre D. The global coherence initiative: creating a coherent planetary standing wave. Global Adv Health Med. 2012;1(1):64-77.
150. Tiller WA, Kohane MJ, Dibble WE. Can an aspect of consciousness be
imprinted into an electronic device? Integr Physiol Behav Sci. 2000;35(2):142-62; discussion 163.
151. Kohane MJ, Tiller WA. Biological processes, quantum mechanics and electromagnetic fields: the possibility of device-encapsulated human intention in medical therapies. Med Hypotheses. 2001;56(6):598-607.
152. Korotkov KG. Williams BO, Bugno TJ, Parsons PH, et al, editors. Human energy field: study with GDV bioelectrography. Fair Lawn, NJ: Backbone
Publishing; 2002.
153. Konikiewicz LW. Introduction to electrography: A handbook for prospective researchers of the Kirlian effect in biomedicine. Harrisburg, PA: Leonard’s Associates; 1979.
154. Earle L. Electrophotography. San Francisco: And/Or Press; 1975.
155. Boyers DG, Tiller WA. Corona discharge photography. J Appl Physics.
1973;44(7):3102-12.
156. Bankovskii NG, Korotkov KG, Petrov NN. Physical processes of image formation during gas-discharge visualization (the Kirlian effect) (Review).
Radiotekhnik Elektronik. 1986 Apr;31:625-43. Russian.
157. Wisneski LA, Anderson L. The Scientific Basis of Integrative Medicine, Second Edition. 2009, CRC Press. p. 205–229.
158. Cohly H, Kostyuk N, Isokpehi R, Rajnarayanan R. Bio-electrographic method for preventive health care. Paper presented at: IEEE 1st Annual Bioscience and Biotechnology Conference Proceedings; March 18-19, 2009; Oak Ridge, TN.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=5073918.
Accessed August 20, 2015.
159. Korotkov KG, Matravers P, Orlov DV, Williams BO. Application of electrophoton capture (EPC) analysis based on gas discharge visualization (GDV) technique in medicine: a systematic review. J Altern Complement Med. 2010;16(1):13-25.
160. Jakovleva E, Korotkov K, eds. Electrophotonic applications in medicine: GDV bioelectrography research. e-book. 2013. ISBN 978-1481932981.
161. Gagua PO GE, Georgobiani LG, Kapanadze A, et al. The GDV technique application to oncology. In: Korotkov K, Tunik A, editors. Measuring energy fields: state of the science. Fair Lawn, NJ: Backbone Publishing; 2004:43-50.
162. Yurth DG. Torsion field mechanics: verification of non-local field effects in human biology. June 23, 2000. http://www.clayandiron.com/news.
jhtml?method=view&news.id=1509. Accessed August 20, 2015.
163. Swanson C. Life force, the scientific basis: breakthrough physics of energy medicine, healing, chi and euantum consciousness. Tucson, AZ: Poseidia Press; 2011.
164. Blumenfeld R. Willhelm Reich andcharacter analysis. In: Blumenfeld R, ed. Tools and techniques for character interpretation: a handbook of psychology for actors, writers, and directors. Pompton Plains, NJ: Limelight Editions; 2006:135-7.
165. Bellis M. Wilhelm Reich and the orgone accumulator. About Money.
http://inventors.about.com/od/qrstartinventors/a/orgone.htm Accessed
August 20, 2015.
166. Gardner M. Fads and fallacies in the name of science. New York: Dover; 1957.
167. Patten T, Hutchison M. Interview with Lt. Col. Thomas E. Bearden (ret).
Megabrain Report. Febraury 4, 1991. http://www.cheniere.org/misc/interview1991.htm.
Accessed August 20, 2015.
168. Scalar Waves Healing Center. History and health benefits of scalar wave healing.www.wavesofhealing.net/aboutscalarwaves.html. Accessed
August 20, 2015.
169. Havelka D, Cifra M, Kucera O, Pokorný J, Vrba J. High-frequency electric field and radiation characteristics of cellular microtubule network. J Theor Biol. 2011;286(1):31-40.
170. Schneider MV. Defining systems biology: a brief overview of the term and field. Methods Mol Biol. 2013;1021:1-11.
PDF: 2015-An-overview-of-biofield-devices
See more on Aura photography Department
2015-An-overview-of-biofield-devices