With regard to the recent newspaper articles
about magnets being ineffective - click
here
Ultimately
this could be due to the cause of the problem and not the therapy;
but in the case of magnetic therapy it depends on how and where
it's worn, comfort and strength. The size and power of the magnet
will ultimately dictate how effective the product works and not
all magnets are the same! For example the Pulse Wristband will put
a magnetic field 8 to 10cm (3 to 4 inches) away from the surface
and into the area being worn! By comparison most jewellery items
being offered as therapy products will only put a field 3 to 4mm
away from the surface even with the same gauss strength!
There are 2 common ways of using magnets as a therapy; direct and indirect. DIRECT is when the products are worn on the area concerned in the form of wraps or supports. INDIRECT is when the product is worn on an acupressure or pulse point. For example, when the Pulse Wristband is worn on a pulse point the magnetic field stimulates the red blood cells into absorbing oxygen more efficiently which is then delivered to the whole body thereby aiding the body's natural healing mechanism. (See "HOW IT WORKS").
No! Magnetic
therapy can help the body's natural healing mechanism work more
efficiently and some people do feel as if the problem is "cured"
but unless you remove the cause of the problem, the problem is not
going to go away! This is why the Pulse Wristband is so successful;
it works on the whole body, so even if the problem is caused by
referred pain the whole body benefits and it can be placed on the
site of pain if necessary.
Most magnets
are large, bulky and can loose power and then they have to be held
in place! The strength and polarity of the magnet is also important
in order for it to effect a change. The majority of MAGNETiC's therapy
products are handmade in the U.K under stringent controls. The "rare
earth" magnets are manufactured in a controlled and protected environment
then checked for strength and polarity before being placed into
the product and are guaranteed for at least 70 years.
BMJ Trial Report
The following is in response to the recent publicized
report on the use magnets to help with pain relief.
On or around the 18th December 2004 a report was
published in the British Medical Journal on the result of a "Randomised
controlled trial of magnetic bracelets for relieving pain in osteoarthritis
of the hip and knee".
The preceding weeks saw a plethora of articles appearing in most
of the UK newspapers citing the report together with images of some
magnetic jewellery.
The report showed that a difference was seen with
those wearing a magnetic therapy product of a certain strength and
size but failed on several points to check whether the information
supplied by the product supplier was correct. Set out below are
my comments and corrections I feel will clarify the overall concept
of the trial.
1. The size of magnet that was quoted in the journal
is said to have been 20mm Dia. It was in fact 15mm Dia. The 20mm
Dia quoted was in fact a 15mm Dia magnet set in a non - magnetized
metal cup giving an impression of a larger surface area which would
in effect create a larger flux field than was actually the case.
2. The term "bracelet" is misleading.
The product used was in fact a strap with a plastic case holding
the magnetic medium. A bracelet implies an item of jewellery which
is also sold by some magnetic therapy suppliers. The magnets in
a bracelet are much smaller and some are much weaker in strength
than that which was used in the trial.
3. The magnetic field strength was measured using
a gauss meter and was published in both the journal and the newspapers
in the unit of mTesla. Unless someone works in field of magnetism
(no pun intended) they would not know what a mTesla was! The resulting
newspapers reports of this and the term "bracelet" only
compounded the confusion of what to look for in a magnetic therapy
product.
4. In both the trial paper and subsequent newspaper
articles they quoted the ideal price range of between £30
and £50!!!
5. Pictures published in some newspapers not only
showed items that were not used in the trial but were also less
likely to help those with hip or knee pain due to the weak magnets
used in these particular items.
I will now set out my response to the above.
1a. The 15mm magnet used was a Neodymium alloy
magnet with a surface gauss rating of between 1700 and 2000 gauss.
The depth of flux field is approx 5cm (2 inches) from the surface
and as with any magnet, weaken the further away from that surface.
The magnet was set in a metal "cup" set within a resin
to hold it in place with an overall diameter of 20mm. This "cup",
which is not magnetized, is then seated in a plastic case with a
plastic cover which in effect further reduces the surface gauss
measurement if taken on the surface of the plastic cover? A strap
held the whole device on the wrist. The pattern and concept of this
design is not unique.
2a. The term "bracelet" was used throughout
and in my view is very confusing as this term commonly used to describe
an item of jewellery in the form of either links or chains with
a clasp. Some companies market magnetic bracelets which have magnets
set between the links or set into the links themselves and are usually
made in stainless steel or a light alloy or copper with gold or
silver plating. The gauss rating of these magnets vary and fall
between 1000 to 2000 gauss, however the size of magnets used in
these items are small usually 5mm Dia and as such have a limited
flux depth which at best can be 2cm (3/4 inch) from the surface
but more often than not no more than about 5mm!
It is important to note that is often implied and rarely corrected
that because a bracelet has several magnets it is stronger! This
is not the case and each magnet is working independently of each
other unless they have opposing poles on the surface, which is unlikely.
The magnets used in most bangles are the same but some (not many)
use opposing pole magnets in each end to create a field across the
gap. In fact our Elegance range of jewellery are designed specifically
to do this!
3a. The term mTesla is used in laboratories and
in research and for example 100 mTesla equates to 1000 gauss, therefore
the gauss rating of the magnet used in the trial is between 1700
and 2000 gauss. Some companies publish a "core" gauss
rating which would be a lot higher than the surface gauss and in
my opinion is only used to confuse and/or imply that because of
the higher rating the "stronger the better" eg. 13000
core gauss!! Increased strength of a magnetic device does not necessarily
mean an increase in health benefit, and studies have shown that
magnets of a surface gauss of between 700 and a maximum of 2000
gauss is an ideal strength to show a health benefit depending on
how the product is used. Eg: Weaker magnets sited directly onto
the site of pain as opposed to over a major blood supply, have been
shown to give beneficial results in a variety of muscular aches
and pains.
4. Why mention price? A cheap magnetic bracelet
sold for between £12 and £25 may well now be inflated
to £30 plus in order to fit the criteria and indeed I have
seen the same bracelets sold for between £5 and £50
and I believe that none of them have either the strength or penetration
to give a lasting effect on health problems!
5. The pictures published showed various items
and the price range would be in the region of £12 to £30.
In both cases the magnets would have trouble in picking up a small
nail or paper clip. These items now may well be sold for a far higher
price than there worth because " it was pictured in the paper
as part of a medical report"!
There is no mention of the type of product used
in the trail that acted as the placebo! Was it the same design,
look and appearance to the trialed device? This difference may have
guided those who were used in trial into picking a certain device
by appearance rather than the look of efficacy! A sentence taken
from the report further confuses the results and the reader. Quote:
" Therefore, we cannot be certain whether our data show a specific
effect of magnets, a placebo effect, or both".
In short, whilst the study is welcome and shows
that, all of us who work within this market already know, is that
- magnets do work! The use with animals bears this out, a dog, horse
or a cat cannot tell if they are wearing a magnet, we can see only
the results.
Here at MAGNETiC we have always endeavored to
provide the best possible product in order to achieve the best possible
results and by designing and manufacturing our own range we feel
that we can provide this more than any other company in the current
market place. Our magnets not only fit the criteria set out in the
trial and in most cases they exceed them and never fall below. For
comfort, our customers have many times commented on their comfort
and ease of use. Our jewellery range is the only one of its kind
in the world and expanding.
Three of our main core products eliminate over
a dozen items designed to fit various parts of the body in the form
of wraps and supports AND ours have a stronger magnetic field! The
Pulse is covered by a money back guarantee so you can try a cheaper
product before committing to one of our more exclusive line of jewellery
for example, in real gold or silver.
Our Pulse Wristband uses a 2000 gauss (200mTesla)
magnet and exceed the criteria on depth of penetration two fold
i.e. 13/15cm (5-6 inches) it is lighter and can be adapted to be
worn around the knee or ankle AND is cheaper!! The magnets used
in our Jewellery are 1700gauss (170mTesla) minimum each.
Important note: At no time is the above meant
to be detrimental to either the trial itself or the product used
in that trial. The sole aim of this report is to clarify certain
points that were published in order that the reader can understand
more the context of the trial report and subsequent newspaper articles.
To view the trial report, go to: www.bmjjournals.com
© MAGNETiC January 2005
With regard to the recent newspaper
articles that most of you would have probably read under various
titles such as: “Magnetic bracelets fail to ease arthritis”
and “Magnets are a waste of money”.
This article was written by two supposed reputable scientists Professors
Finegold and Flamm based in the US. If you read in depth you will
see that they offer no evidence to support their theory other than
it couldn’t possibly work because of this that or the other
i.e. “MRI scans show no ill or healing effects” and
“some companies claim that magnets are effective for cancer”.
Over 20 clinical trials have been published that have showed that
static magnetic fields can and do have an effect on human tissue
and have shown to help with pain relief. Citing the effects of an
MRI scanning machine is not proof that the therapy doesn’t
work as the subject is not exposed to the field long enough or the
field is directed at the problem area and yes, claims regarding
cancer should always be avoided but again this only proves that
some companies are either unethical or simply do not know what they
are talking about which unfortunately, is in my estimation 95% of
the market place.
Why this article was published in the British
Medical Journal is beyond me and many of my peers who have studied
this subject from a professional medical or scientific perspective
and like me have contributed a counter argument to the BMJ discussion
page which can be seen at www.bmj.com
If you have any comments do please email me on
magnetic@btinternet.com
Ray.
|
