Study frequency-specific microstrom cell regulation
This post is also available in: Deutsch (German)
Study on the effect of frequency-specific microcurrent
Can frequency-specific microcurrent regulate cells?
Many people talk about it, but few actually ask and measure. The current hype that goes through the therapist and trainer scene is the frequency-specific microcurrent therapy.
It is claimed in many places and the thesis is put forward that frequency-specific and even ‘normal’ microcurrent is supposed to influence cell metabolism.
But would the critical user or microcurrent-interested person like to ask himself the question, how exactly is the cell metabolism influenced? How is this measured the frequency in the microcurrent and if there is frequency-specific microcurrent, then there is also non-specific microcurrent?
In 1991, Dr. McMakin met the osteopath Dr. Van Gelder. This was in possession of a ‘nostalgic’ device and a list of different frequencies, each of which should have a very specific effect in the human organism. (Carolyn R. McMakin, 2011, p. 2) However, the literature here leaves open information about what these frequencies looked like or how they were measured.
Although the literature mentions exact frequencies and frequency combinations, how does the critical user know what actually comes out of his device?
In a study of was attempted to explain the effect of specific frequencies. Chaikin & Kashiwa et al. (2015) quote after Reilly (2004) that an animal experiment has shown how far frequencies in the microcurrent have an effect. An immune response in the form of inflammation was triggered in the ears of mice. Arachidonic acid was used. The combination 116 Hz with 40 Hz was used to influence this inflammatory reaction. 116 Hz represent the immune system and 40 Hz represent general inflammation. The result showed a 62-year reduction in immune response within 4 minutes. (Chaikin, Kashiwa, Bennet, Papastergiou & Gregory, 2015, p. 2346)
The problem with specific frequencies
However, the authors of the study did not provide any further information on how concrete the technical structure of the study was.
Specifically, how they verified the frequencies. It should be borne in mind, for example, that in microcurrent therapy, patient conduction (therapy cables) are used. These are needed to get the microcurrent to the respective location. The cables are usually classy stranded cables with copper strands or a comparable conductive metal. These cables are coated with flexible (with very good bottoms with highly flexible) plastic.
By the way, the plastic of these pipes must be checked in the laboratory for its biocompatibility!
The problem with these lines, or what you can think about when talking about frequencies, is that in our daily environment we are surrounded by a mass of frequencies.
This can be described as ‘basic noise’. Take, for example, radio frequencies, mobile phones, Wi-Fi, DECT, or simply the power line to which the microcurrent device is connected. There is usually a frequency of 50 Hz. By the way, you must not forget your light in practice. Especially when LED lamps are used. These rays not only light but also electromagnetic waves or frequencies. The cables of a microcurrent device are usually not shielded. This makes them excellent antennas and absorbs everything in their environment at frequencies.
Basic noise and the actual effect of frequencies
When we talk about the actual effect of frequencies and specific frequencies in particular, this should be taken into account in any case. It is therefore important to know and measure what has been done by the manufacturer of the micro-power device to attenuate or filter unwanted frequencies. In addition, one should check whether the actual set frequency can actually be used by the microcurrent device!
If you don’t do all this, it’s rather bad to talk about specific frequencies. After all, how do you want to know what the actual frequency is? How do you know what the actual effect of these frequencies is?
Do you think about when the original frequencies of frequency-specific microcurrent therapy were determined and compare how much ‘basic noise’ was present at that time?! Was there already Wi-Fi, LTE & Co.?
From a perspective, one can be quite careful with the term frequency-specific.
What a German manufacturer with frequency-specific microcurrent was able to prove in a pilot study
Schönfelder et al. (2017) showed in an in vitro study with human cell cultures that a change in cell morphology can be seen. “This proves that the applied current reaches the cells and is able to influence them.” (Schönfelder, Walker & Kenner, 2017, p. 11)
The study was carried out with the HD2000+ by Luxxamed GmbH. Luxxamed GmbH was born out of the company Walitschek Medzintechnik and thus looks back on a 20-year history and experience in microcurrent therapy.
Metabolic activity can be demonstrably increased by the use of frequency-specific microcurrent. Human keratinocytes, which have previously been pre-damaged with cyclohexiide, were observed. This should achieve a reduction in metabolic activity of 20 – 30. Treatment of the damaged cells showed an increase in metabolic activity of up to 56 . (Schönfelder et al., 2017, p. 15)
Looking at the treatment of vital keratinocytes, it was found that the use with microcurrent can lead to a 48-igen increase in vital. In sick or pre-damaged cells, showed reduction of apoptotic and necrotic cells of up to 12 . (Schönfelder et al., 2017, p. 17)
There is still a lot of research to be done, especially with regard to the oh-so-specific frequencies. This research should not be considered exclusively from a medical perspective, but also from the technical point of view. The procedures and methods should be properly evaluated to verify the results.
In Germany, this is already being tried and, as you can see, quite successful. User observations and user studies are extremely important, but laboratory studies should not be neglected either.
Carolyn R. McMakin. (2011). Frequency-Specific Microcurrent in Pain Management. Edinburgh: Elsevier.
Chaikin, L., Kashiwa, K., Bennet, M., Papastergiou, G. & Gregory, W. (2015). Microcurrent stimulation in the treatment of dry and wet macular degeneration. Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 9, 2345-2353. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S92296
Schönfelder, J., Walker, S. & Kenner, L. (2017). Effect of a new generation of devices on in vitro cell cultures. WP 3: Effect of microcurrent therapy on in vitro cell cultures (Frauenhofer FEP, ed.).