Spectra HSR vs iMRS Prime
Spectra HSR vs. iMRS Prime: The Truth About What You're Actually Getting
PEMF therapy works by sending magnetic pulses into the body that help stimulate cells, improve circulation, and support the body’s natural healing processes. For these pulses to actually do something meaningful, they must be both strong enough and fast enough. Scientists measure this using a metric called slew rate, which indicates how much energy is delivered to the body. Research shows that effective PEMF systems typically operate within specific ranges of intensity and speed so the cells can respond properly.
The Spectra Apex HSR PEMF systems are engineered to deliver pulses within these research-supported ranges. Their higher slew rate allows more energy to transfer into the body’s tissues, which may help activate cellular repair, reduce inflammation, and support recovery. In contrast, testing of the iMRS Prime PEMF mat shows that it produces a weak magnetic signal with a low slew rate. Because the signal is so low, it quickly fades as it tries to penetrate into the body, meaning very little energy reaches deeper tissues like joints, muscles, and organs.
In simple terms, the difference comes down to how much useful energy actually reaches your cells. Spectra Apex HSR systems are designed to deliver stronger, faster pulses that align with what PEMF research shows is effective. The iMRS Prime PEMF mat, by comparison, operates far below those levels, which means that scientifically, it won’t deliver the same meaningful stimulation to the body. For people seeking a PEMF system that matches the performance levels used in scientific studies, the Spectra Apex HSR technology provides a more powerful and effective solution.
PEMF therapy works by sending magnetic pulses into the body that help stimulate cells, improve circulation, and support the body’s natural healing processes. For these pulses to actually do something meaningful, they must be both strong enough and fast enough. Scientists measure this using a metric called slew rate, which indicates how much energy is delivered to the body. Research shows that effective PEMF systems typically operate within specific ranges of intensity and speed so the cells can respond properly.
The Spectra Apex HSR PEMF systems are engineered to deliver pulses within these research-supported ranges. Their higher slew rate allows more energy to transfer into the body’s tissues, which may help activate cellular repair, reduce inflammation, and support recovery. In contrast, testing of the iMRS Prime PEMF mat shows that it produces a weak magnetic signal with a low slew rate. Because the signal is so low, it quickly fades as it tries to penetrate into the body, meaning very little energy reaches deeper tissues like joints, muscles, and organs.
In simple terms, the difference comes down to how much useful energy actually reaches your cells. Spectra Apex HSR systems are designed to deliver stronger, faster pulses that align with what PEMF research shows is effective. The iMRS Prime PEMF mat, by comparison, operates far below those levels, which means that scientifically, it won’t deliver the same meaningful stimulation to the body. For people seeking a PEMF system that matches the performance levels used in scientific studies, the Spectra Apex HSR technology provides a more powerful and effective solution.
|
|
Spectra HSR vs iMRS Prime Comparison Chart
Part 1: Slew Rate & Intensity
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to iMRS
The Y-axis is expanded for the iMRS to make the signal more visible
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to iMRS
The Y-axis is expanded for the iMRS to make the signal more visible
Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF) therapy functions by delivering time-varying magnetic fields that induce electric currents within biological tissues. The effectiveness of a PEMF system depends primarily on two parameters: magnetic field intensity (typically expressed in Gauss or millitesla) and rise time (the time required for the magnetic field to reach peak amplitude). These two variables define the slew rate of the magnetic pulse.
Point #1: Look for a PEMF Device with Research-Proven Slew Rate (The most important parameter in PEMF).
Based on Faraday's Law, slew rate is a quantitative measurement of how quickly the magnetic field changes with time and it is measured in Tesla/second (T/s) or Gauss/second (G/s). As shown in the graphic here, slew rate is essentially the peak magnetic field intensity (B) divided by the rise time (t). The rise time is the time a PEMF signal takes to reach its peak (the shorter or "faster" the rise time, the greater the slew rate)! This gives us rise/run (dB/dt) or the slope of the PEMF signal as seen on an oscilloscope. A high slew rate means that the PEMF is pulsing or changing quickly and has a steeper slope which means more energy is transferred to your body, tissues and cells which then translates into giving you more energy, less pain, and better health/healing.
Based on Faraday's Law, slew rate is a quantitative measurement of how quickly the magnetic field changes with time and it is measured in Tesla/second (T/s) or Gauss/second (G/s). As shown in the graphic here, slew rate is essentially the peak magnetic field intensity (B) divided by the rise time (t). The rise time is the time a PEMF signal takes to reach its peak (the shorter or "faster" the rise time, the greater the slew rate)! This gives us rise/run (dB/dt) or the slope of the PEMF signal as seen on an oscilloscope. A high slew rate means that the PEMF is pulsing or changing quickly and has a steeper slope which means more energy is transferred to your body, tissues and cells which then translates into giving you more energy, less pain, and better health/healing.
As a result, slew rate is widely considered one of the most critical performance parameters in PEMF systems because it determines the magnitude of energy transferred to biological tissues. Numerous clinical studies evaluating PEMF therapy have used slew rates ranging from approximately 5 T/s to 160 T/s, along with medium magnetic intensities typically between 10 and 100 Gauss, which have been shown to produce maximum biological effects.
Quantifying the Best Slew Rates Based on 19 Successful Slew Rate Studies [10-120 T/s]
Based on a thorough investigation, we found 19 successful slew rate PEMF studies that can help guide us in what the best slew rates to use. The successful slew rates from these clinical studies (from low to high - all in T/s or Tesla/Second) are 5.3, 5.3, 7.9, 9.5, 10, 15, 15.3, 17, 17, 17, 17, 18, 30, 30, 30, 30, 90T/s and 120 T/s. The average slew rate across these studies was 26.7 T/s, which can serve as a ballpark figure for the ideal slew rate to use. It is noteworthy to add that these 19 studies covered a wide range of tissue healing and regeneration from nerve to muscle to bone to joint/cartilage to tendons. Also, difficult conditions like breast cancer, major depression, prosthetic recovery, and overall inflammation (inflammation is a root cause of most diseases). All of these slew rate studies are summarized in the chart shown here.
Quantifying the Best Slew Rates Based on 19 Successful Slew Rate Studies [10-120 T/s]
Based on a thorough investigation, we found 19 successful slew rate PEMF studies that can help guide us in what the best slew rates to use. The successful slew rates from these clinical studies (from low to high - all in T/s or Tesla/Second) are 5.3, 5.3, 7.9, 9.5, 10, 15, 15.3, 17, 17, 17, 17, 18, 30, 30, 30, 30, 90T/s and 120 T/s. The average slew rate across these studies was 26.7 T/s, which can serve as a ballpark figure for the ideal slew rate to use. It is noteworthy to add that these 19 studies covered a wide range of tissue healing and regeneration from nerve to muscle to bone to joint/cartilage to tendons. Also, difficult conditions like breast cancer, major depression, prosthetic recovery, and overall inflammation (inflammation is a root cause of most diseases). All of these slew rate studies are summarized in the chart shown here.
Independent measurements of the iMRS Prime full-body PEMF mat demonstrate a maximum magnetic field intensity of approximately 1.3 Gauss (0.13 mT) at the surface with a rise time of roughly 165 microseconds. When these values are used to calculate the system’s slew rate, the result is approximately 1.2 T/s at best. This “best” slew rate value of the iMRS Prime is substantially below the slew-rate ranges commonly used in published PEMF research. Additionally, field strength declines rapidly with distance from the coil. Measurements indicate that at approximately 5 inches of depth, the iMRS Prime signal has already diminished by nearly 92%, significantly limiting the amount of electromagnetic energy reaching deeper musculoskeletal structures or internal tissues. Given both the low initial intensity and the rise time, the resulting induced electric fields within tissue are correspondingly small and may fall below thresholds typically associated with cellular stimulation in many PEMF studies.
By contrast, the Spectra intensity at the surface is 24 gauss, with a fast 100 microsecond rise time, which yields a slew rate of 24.0 T/s. In fact, this is close to the average slew rate across 19 of the highest-level slew rate studies! [1-19]. The Spectra's slew rate is 221 times greater than the PureWave at the surface (and 640 times greater 5 inches up!).
By contrast, the Spectra intensity at the surface is 24 gauss, with a fast 100 microsecond rise time, which yields a slew rate of 24.0 T/s. In fact, this is close to the average slew rate across 19 of the highest-level slew rate studies! [1-19]. The Spectra's slew rate is 221 times greater than the PureWave at the surface (and 640 times greater 5 inches up!).
Intensity
Robust evidence on the optimal intensity for PEMF comes from a meta-analysis [1] of 3249 PEMF experiments and 92 publications over 20 years (1999-2019) [2]. This study is the most comprehensive analysis of PEMF studies I am aware of. One key takeaway is that a vast majority of successful PEMF studies that reported intensity (around 75%) used intensities between 10 and 100 gauss, or 1 and 10 mT (see chart above). As mentioned, this range of 1-10 mT represents a moderate-to-medium intensity level that also appears to be the "sweet spot" for achieving optimal slew rates. Based on this meta-analysis, approximately 20% of the PEMF studies fell within the low-intensity range (<1 mT or 10 gauss). High-intensity had the LEAST amount of research supporting it (only 2-3% of the studies were high-intensity) compared to low- and medium-intensity systems [2].
This extensive meta-analysis also reveals that medium-intensity studies show a significantly greater positive cellular response than both high- and low-intensity studies (See chart below) [2]. Examples of cellular responses observed in research include gene and protein expression, healthy cell proliferation, cell differentiation, cell viability (cell health), and triggering signal transduction pathways [2].
Systems operating near 1 Gauss, therefore, fall outside the intensity range used in the majority of peer-reviewed PEMF investigations. The Spectra's intensity is also at the heart of the highest level of PEMF research, and at the surface is 20 times greater than the iMRS (and 120 times greater 5 inches above the mat).
Robust evidence on the optimal intensity for PEMF comes from a meta-analysis [1] of 3249 PEMF experiments and 92 publications over 20 years (1999-2019) [2]. This study is the most comprehensive analysis of PEMF studies I am aware of. One key takeaway is that a vast majority of successful PEMF studies that reported intensity (around 75%) used intensities between 10 and 100 gauss, or 1 and 10 mT (see chart above). As mentioned, this range of 1-10 mT represents a moderate-to-medium intensity level that also appears to be the "sweet spot" for achieving optimal slew rates. Based on this meta-analysis, approximately 20% of the PEMF studies fell within the low-intensity range (<1 mT or 10 gauss). High-intensity had the LEAST amount of research supporting it (only 2-3% of the studies were high-intensity) compared to low- and medium-intensity systems [2].
This extensive meta-analysis also reveals that medium-intensity studies show a significantly greater positive cellular response than both high- and low-intensity studies (See chart below) [2]. Examples of cellular responses observed in research include gene and protein expression, healthy cell proliferation, cell differentiation, cell viability (cell health), and triggering signal transduction pathways [2].
Systems operating near 1 Gauss, therefore, fall outside the intensity range used in the majority of peer-reviewed PEMF investigations. The Spectra's intensity is also at the heart of the highest level of PEMF research, and at the surface is 20 times greater than the iMRS (and 120 times greater 5 inches above the mat).
3D scan of the iMRS Set to .03 mT (30 uT)
That is the "bubbles" are the magnetic field only showing areas on the mat that are above 30 microtesla.
For the iMRS this equates to a Slew Rate of only .18 T/s
That is the "bubbles" are the magnetic field only showing areas on the mat that are above 30 microtesla.
For the iMRS this equates to a Slew Rate of only .18 T/s
|
|
Part 2: Coils, Area Covered and Penetration Depth
Slew rate is the most important parameter of a PEMF signal, but properly engineered coils of a PEMF system will dictate how well, and how much area of your body a high-slew-rate PEMF signal will cover, and how deeply the PEMF signal will penetrate.
The Spectra Apex HSR coils cover 260% more area than the iMRS Prime full-body mat and penetrate 7 times better at 5 inches up. So not only does the Spectra have a slew rate 20 times greater than the iMRS Prime at the surface (along with better spectral content), but the coils in the Spectra Apex HSR will deliver this healing energy across more of the body and deeper into it.
Slew rate is the most important parameter of a PEMF signal, but properly engineered coils of a PEMF system will dictate how well, and how much area of your body a high-slew-rate PEMF signal will cover, and how deeply the PEMF signal will penetrate.
The Spectra Apex HSR coils cover 260% more area than the iMRS Prime full-body mat and penetrate 7 times better at 5 inches up. So not only does the Spectra have a slew rate 20 times greater than the iMRS Prime at the surface (along with better spectral content), but the coils in the Spectra Apex HSR will deliver this healing energy across more of the body and deeper into it.
|
|
Part 3: Resonance and Spectral Content
Resonance and Spectral Content
Besides slew rate, you can also transfer energy via resonance. Resonance effects are defined by the range of frequencies in a PEMF signal (called the spectral content). Even here, the PureWave, which is touted as a resonance system, underperforms. Again, when tested with professional equipment, the PureWave has a slightly below-average spectral content of 20 to 3000 Hz. By contrast, the Spectra has a frequency range from 20 to 18,000 Hz, representing spectral content more than six times that of the PureWave! Not only that, but the Spectra signal has better blankets, even the overlapping ranges, in that the spectrum, where the PureWave has more gaps. It turns out that a high slew rate will, by default, have a wide frequency spectrum with fewer gaps, which is why slew rate is easily the most important parameter to look at when comparing PEMF devices. You get the best of both worlds, maximizing energy transfer via Faraday Induction (slew rate) and magnetic resonance to your body, tissues, and cells. This energy turns off pain and inflammation and turns on healing.
In addition to slew rate and intensity, another mechanism for energy transfer in PEMF systems involves magnetic resonance interactions, which depend on the spectral content of the emitted signal (the range of frequencies contained within the pulse waveform).
Measurements of the iMRS Prime system indicate a spectral range of approximately 20 - 6000 Hz, which is relatively limited compared to systems engineered with broader spectral bandwidth and higher energy pulse characteristics. In contrast, measurements of the Spectra Apex HSR reach up to 16,000 Hz.
Besides slew rate, you can also transfer energy via resonance. Resonance effects are defined by the range of frequencies in a PEMF signal (called the spectral content). Even here, the PureWave, which is touted as a resonance system, underperforms. Again, when tested with professional equipment, the PureWave has a slightly below-average spectral content of 20 to 3000 Hz. By contrast, the Spectra has a frequency range from 20 to 18,000 Hz, representing spectral content more than six times that of the PureWave! Not only that, but the Spectra signal has better blankets, even the overlapping ranges, in that the spectrum, where the PureWave has more gaps. It turns out that a high slew rate will, by default, have a wide frequency spectrum with fewer gaps, which is why slew rate is easily the most important parameter to look at when comparing PEMF devices. You get the best of both worlds, maximizing energy transfer via Faraday Induction (slew rate) and magnetic resonance to your body, tissues, and cells. This energy turns off pain and inflammation and turns on healing.
In addition to slew rate and intensity, another mechanism for energy transfer in PEMF systems involves magnetic resonance interactions, which depend on the spectral content of the emitted signal (the range of frequencies contained within the pulse waveform).
Measurements of the iMRS Prime system indicate a spectral range of approximately 20 - 6000 Hz, which is relatively limited compared to systems engineered with broader spectral bandwidth and higher energy pulse characteristics. In contrast, measurements of the Spectra Apex HSR reach up to 16,000 Hz.
|
Spectra HSR: 20 - 16,000 Hz
|
iMRS Prime: 20 - 6000 Hz
|
In the case of these measurements, we are analyzing the magnetic field of PEMF mats to see what frequencies are contained in the magnetic field. It is important to know that the electrical signals that come out of the controller do not equal the magnetic fields coming out of the coil. These measurements are all taken with the same settings and the same sensor to show the relative difference between each mat. Using the same settings and sensor is important because a Fourier Transform can look very different based on the settings.
The measurements were taken with the following parameters:
The measurements were taken with the following parameters:
- Asahi Kasei Microdevices/AKM EQ-730L with 5v power supply
- A USB Ossilocope with configurable FFT settings in the software (waveforms software in particular used with these measurements)
- The start frequency is 20hz and the end frequency is 20khz
- The window setting is rectangular
Conclusion
The Spectra HSR — Built to Match What the Research Actually Requires
The Spectra HSR was engineered specifically around the intensity and slew-rate parameters that repeatedly appear in legitimate clinical studies, and supported by solid physics and biophysics. It doesn't just loosely approximate those numbers; it meets and exceeds them. The slew rate of the Spectra HSR is an order of magnitude higher than the iMRS, meaning its pulse fires with the kind of speed that actually stimulates cells at a meaningful level. Its intensity holds up at depth, so the signal reaching your tissues is real and therapeutically relevant — not a ghost of what started at the surface. And the Spectra even "out-resonances" the iMRS Prime, which is a big part of the iMRS Prime marketing angle.
By combining optimized magnetic intensity, rapid pulse rise times, and broader spectral content, Spectra Apex HSR systems maximize energy transfer into biological tissues through both Faraday induction (high dB/dt) and frequency-dependent resonance mechanisms. This design approach enables more efficient stimulation of cellular pathways associated with inflammation modulation, tissue repair, and neuromuscular regulation, aligning system performance more closely with the parameters utilized in many published PEMF studies.
The Spectra HSR — Built to Match What the Research Actually Requires
The Spectra HSR was engineered specifically around the intensity and slew-rate parameters that repeatedly appear in legitimate clinical studies, and supported by solid physics and biophysics. It doesn't just loosely approximate those numbers; it meets and exceeds them. The slew rate of the Spectra HSR is an order of magnitude higher than the iMRS, meaning its pulse fires with the kind of speed that actually stimulates cells at a meaningful level. Its intensity holds up at depth, so the signal reaching your tissues is real and therapeutically relevant — not a ghost of what started at the surface. And the Spectra even "out-resonances" the iMRS Prime, which is a big part of the iMRS Prime marketing angle.
By combining optimized magnetic intensity, rapid pulse rise times, and broader spectral content, Spectra Apex HSR systems maximize energy transfer into biological tissues through both Faraday induction (high dB/dt) and frequency-dependent resonance mechanisms. This design approach enables more efficient stimulation of cellular pathways associated with inflammation modulation, tissue repair, and neuromuscular regulation, aligning system performance more closely with the parameters utilized in many published PEMF studies.
**19 High Slew Rate Studies Below
[1] Dennis R. Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation - Part 2: Optimization of parameters for orthopedic injuries and pain. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2020; 1(2)DOI
[2] Caroline Androjna, Cristal S. Yee, Carter R. White, Erik I. Waldorff, James T. Ryaby, Maciej Zborowski, Tamara Alliston, Ronald J. Midura, A comparison of alendronate to varying magnitude PEMF in mitigating bone loss and altering bone remodeling in skeletally mature osteoporotic rats, Bone, Volume 143, 2021,115761, ISSN 8756-3282.
[3] Wang M, Li Y, Feng L, Zhang X, Wang H, Zhang N, Viohl I, Li G. Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Enhances Healing of a Meniscal Tear and Mitigates Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis in a Rat Model. Am J Sports Med. 2022 Aug;50(10):2722-2732.
[4] Li Y, Yang Y, Wang M, Zhang X, Bai S, Lu X, Li Y, Waldorff EI, Zhang N, Lee WY, Li G. High slew rate pulsed electromagnetic field enhances bone consolidation and shortens daily treatment duration in distraction osteogenesis. Bone Joint Res. 2021 Dec;10(12):767-779
[5] Li, Yucong & Qi, Pan & Zhang, Nianli & Wang, Bin & Yang, Zhengmeng & Ryaby, James & Waldorff, Erik & Lee, Wayne & Li, Gang. (2020). A novel pulsed electromagnetic field promotes distraction osteogenesis via enhancing osteogenesis and angiogenesis in a rat model. Journal of Orthopaedic Translation. 25. 10.1016/j.jot.2020.10.007.
[6] Hubbard, Devin. (2020). Electroceutical Technology: Anti-Inflammatory Effects Of 40-160 T/S Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation (ICES) In The Acute Inflammation Model. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2. 1-50. 10.37714/josam.v2i2.38
[7] Smith, T.L., Wong-Gibbons, D. and Maultsby, J. (2004), Microcirculatory effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields. J. Orthop. Res., 22: 80-84.
[8] Spadaro, J.A. & Bergstrom, W.H.. (2002). In Vivo and In Vitro Effects of a Pulsed Electromagnetic Field on Net Calcium Flux in Rat Calvarial Bone. Calcified tissue international. 70. 496-502. 10.1007/s00223-001-1001-6.
[9] Tucker, J.J., Cirone, J.M., Morris, T.R., Nuss, C.A., Huegel, J., Waldorff, E.I., Zhang, N., Ryaby, J.T. and Soslowsky, L.J. (2017), Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy improves tendon-to-bone healing in a rat rotator cuff repair model. J. Orthop. Res., 35: 902-909
[10] Parate, D., Franco-Obregón, A., Fröhlich, J. et al. Enhancement of mesenchymal stem cell chondrogenesis with short-term low intensity pulsed electromagnetic fields. Sci Rep 7, 9421 (2017).
[11] Craig Jun Kit Wong, Yee Kit Tai, Jasmine Lye Yee Yap, Charlene Hui Hua Fong, Larry Sai Weng Loo, Marek Kukumberg, Jürg Fröhlich, Sitong Zhang, Jing Ze Li, Jiong-Wei Wang, Abdul Jalil Rufaihah, Alfredo Franco-Obregón, Brief exposure to directionally-specific pulsed electromagnetic fields stimulates extracellular vesicle release and is antagonized by streptomycin: A potential regenerative medicine and food industry paradigm,Biomaterials, Volume 287, 2022, 121658, ISSN 0142-9612
[12] Parate, D., Kadir, N.D., Celik, C. et al. Pulsed electromagnetic fields potentiate the paracrine function of mesenchymal stem cells for cartilage regeneration. Stem Cell Res Ther 11, 46 (2020).
[13] Sisken, Betty. (2021). Enhancement of Nerve Regeneration by Selected Electromagnetic Signals.
[14] Crocetti S, Beyer C, Schade G, Egli M, Fröhlich J, Franco-Obregón A. Low intensity and frequency pulsed electromagnetic fields selectively impair breast cancer cell viability. PLoS One. 2013 Sep 11;8(9):e72944
[15] Dallari D, Fini M, Giavaresi G, Del Piccolo N, Stagni C, Amendola L, Rani N, Gnudi S, Giardino R. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic stimulation on patients undergoing hip revision prostheses: a randomized prospective double-blind study. Bioelectromagnetics. 2009 Sep;30(6):423-30.
[16] Martino CF, Belchenko D, Ferguson V, Nielsen-Preiss S, Qi HJ. The effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on the cellular activity of SaOS-2 cells. Bioelectromagnetics. 2008 Feb;29(2):125-32.
[17] Cheing, G. L., et al. «Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy increases tensile strength in the healing of rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized double-blinded study.» Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, vol. 13, no. 2018 ,1, pp. 47g
[18] Binder A, Parr G, Hazleman B, Fitton-Jackson S. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy of persistent rotator cuff tendinitis. A double-blind controlled assessment. Lancet. 1984;1(8379):695–8.
[19] Jin Y, Phillips B. A pilot study of the use of EEG-based synchronized Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (sTMS) for treatment of Major Depression. BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Jan 18;14:13.
[20] Mansourian M, Shanei A. Evaluation of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Effects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Highlights of Two Decades of Research In Vitro Studies. Biomed Res Int. 2021 Jul 29;2021:6647497. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342182/
[21] Dennis R. Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation - Part I: Overview and First Observations. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2019; 1(1)DOI
[22] Dennis R. Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation - Part 2: Optimization of parameters for orthopedic injuries and pain. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2020; 1(2)
[23] Dennis, R.G., Dow, D. E. (2007) Excitability of skeletal muscle during development, denervation, and tissue culture. Tissue Engineering, 13:10, 2395-2404, October.
[24] Dennis, R.G., Paul E. Kosnik, Mark E. Gilbert, and John A. Faulkner. (2001) Excitability and contractility of skeletal muscle engineered from primary cultures and cell lines. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 280: C288-C295.
[25] Dennis R.G., Kosnik P.E. (2000) Excitability and isometric contractile properties of mammalian skeletal muscle constructs engineered in vitro. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Anim. 36(5): 327-335.
[26] Kosnik P. Jr., Faulkner J.A., and Dennis R.G. (2001) Functional development of engineered skeletal muscle from adult and neonatal rats. Tissue Engineering, 7(5) 573-584.
[1] Dennis R. Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation - Part 2: Optimization of parameters for orthopedic injuries and pain. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2020; 1(2)DOI
[2] Caroline Androjna, Cristal S. Yee, Carter R. White, Erik I. Waldorff, James T. Ryaby, Maciej Zborowski, Tamara Alliston, Ronald J. Midura, A comparison of alendronate to varying magnitude PEMF in mitigating bone loss and altering bone remodeling in skeletally mature osteoporotic rats, Bone, Volume 143, 2021,115761, ISSN 8756-3282.
[3] Wang M, Li Y, Feng L, Zhang X, Wang H, Zhang N, Viohl I, Li G. Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Enhances Healing of a Meniscal Tear and Mitigates Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis in a Rat Model. Am J Sports Med. 2022 Aug;50(10):2722-2732.
[4] Li Y, Yang Y, Wang M, Zhang X, Bai S, Lu X, Li Y, Waldorff EI, Zhang N, Lee WY, Li G. High slew rate pulsed electromagnetic field enhances bone consolidation and shortens daily treatment duration in distraction osteogenesis. Bone Joint Res. 2021 Dec;10(12):767-779
[5] Li, Yucong & Qi, Pan & Zhang, Nianli & Wang, Bin & Yang, Zhengmeng & Ryaby, James & Waldorff, Erik & Lee, Wayne & Li, Gang. (2020). A novel pulsed electromagnetic field promotes distraction osteogenesis via enhancing osteogenesis and angiogenesis in a rat model. Journal of Orthopaedic Translation. 25. 10.1016/j.jot.2020.10.007.
[6] Hubbard, Devin. (2020). Electroceutical Technology: Anti-Inflammatory Effects Of 40-160 T/S Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation (ICES) In The Acute Inflammation Model. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2. 1-50. 10.37714/josam.v2i2.38
[7] Smith, T.L., Wong-Gibbons, D. and Maultsby, J. (2004), Microcirculatory effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields. J. Orthop. Res., 22: 80-84.
[8] Spadaro, J.A. & Bergstrom, W.H.. (2002). In Vivo and In Vitro Effects of a Pulsed Electromagnetic Field on Net Calcium Flux in Rat Calvarial Bone. Calcified tissue international. 70. 496-502. 10.1007/s00223-001-1001-6.
[9] Tucker, J.J., Cirone, J.M., Morris, T.R., Nuss, C.A., Huegel, J., Waldorff, E.I., Zhang, N., Ryaby, J.T. and Soslowsky, L.J. (2017), Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy improves tendon-to-bone healing in a rat rotator cuff repair model. J. Orthop. Res., 35: 902-909
[10] Parate, D., Franco-Obregón, A., Fröhlich, J. et al. Enhancement of mesenchymal stem cell chondrogenesis with short-term low intensity pulsed electromagnetic fields. Sci Rep 7, 9421 (2017).
[11] Craig Jun Kit Wong, Yee Kit Tai, Jasmine Lye Yee Yap, Charlene Hui Hua Fong, Larry Sai Weng Loo, Marek Kukumberg, Jürg Fröhlich, Sitong Zhang, Jing Ze Li, Jiong-Wei Wang, Abdul Jalil Rufaihah, Alfredo Franco-Obregón, Brief exposure to directionally-specific pulsed electromagnetic fields stimulates extracellular vesicle release and is antagonized by streptomycin: A potential regenerative medicine and food industry paradigm,Biomaterials, Volume 287, 2022, 121658, ISSN 0142-9612
[12] Parate, D., Kadir, N.D., Celik, C. et al. Pulsed electromagnetic fields potentiate the paracrine function of mesenchymal stem cells for cartilage regeneration. Stem Cell Res Ther 11, 46 (2020).
[13] Sisken, Betty. (2021). Enhancement of Nerve Regeneration by Selected Electromagnetic Signals.
[14] Crocetti S, Beyer C, Schade G, Egli M, Fröhlich J, Franco-Obregón A. Low intensity and frequency pulsed electromagnetic fields selectively impair breast cancer cell viability. PLoS One. 2013 Sep 11;8(9):e72944
[15] Dallari D, Fini M, Giavaresi G, Del Piccolo N, Stagni C, Amendola L, Rani N, Gnudi S, Giardino R. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic stimulation on patients undergoing hip revision prostheses: a randomized prospective double-blind study. Bioelectromagnetics. 2009 Sep;30(6):423-30.
[16] Martino CF, Belchenko D, Ferguson V, Nielsen-Preiss S, Qi HJ. The effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on the cellular activity of SaOS-2 cells. Bioelectromagnetics. 2008 Feb;29(2):125-32.
[17] Cheing, G. L., et al. «Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy increases tensile strength in the healing of rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized double-blinded study.» Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, vol. 13, no. 2018 ,1, pp. 47g
[18] Binder A, Parr G, Hazleman B, Fitton-Jackson S. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy of persistent rotator cuff tendinitis. A double-blind controlled assessment. Lancet. 1984;1(8379):695–8.
[19] Jin Y, Phillips B. A pilot study of the use of EEG-based synchronized Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (sTMS) for treatment of Major Depression. BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Jan 18;14:13.
[20] Mansourian M, Shanei A. Evaluation of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Effects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Highlights of Two Decades of Research In Vitro Studies. Biomed Res Int. 2021 Jul 29;2021:6647497. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342182/
[21] Dennis R. Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation - Part I: Overview and First Observations. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2019; 1(1)DOI
[22] Dennis R. Inductively Coupled Electrical Stimulation - Part 2: Optimization of parameters for orthopedic injuries and pain. The Journal of Science and Medicine. 2020; 1(2)
[23] Dennis, R.G., Dow, D. E. (2007) Excitability of skeletal muscle during development, denervation, and tissue culture. Tissue Engineering, 13:10, 2395-2404, October.
[24] Dennis, R.G., Paul E. Kosnik, Mark E. Gilbert, and John A. Faulkner. (2001) Excitability and contractility of skeletal muscle engineered from primary cultures and cell lines. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 280: C288-C295.
[25] Dennis R.G., Kosnik P.E. (2000) Excitability and isometric contractile properties of mammalian skeletal muscle constructs engineered in vitro. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Anim. 36(5): 327-335.
[26] Kosnik P. Jr., Faulkner J.A., and Dennis R.G. (2001) Functional development of engineered skeletal muscle from adult and neonatal rats. Tissue Engineering, 7(5) 573-584.
***END SPECIAL REPORT***
Slew Rate and Intensity Testing
Max, 0,1,2,3,4 and 5 inches up.
These are the test results from measuring the PureWave Ultra & Spectra Apex HSR PEMF devices. The measurements were performed using the NVE ALT021-10E-TR7 Quantum Well Hall Element sensor (PureWave) and the AKM EQ730L Quantum Well Hall Element sensor (Spectra). For both units, the signal was read on an Oscilloscope.
Max, 0,1,2,3,4 and 5 inches up.
These are the test results from measuring the PureWave Ultra & Spectra Apex HSR PEMF devices. The measurements were performed using the NVE ALT021-10E-TR7 Quantum Well Hall Element sensor (PureWave) and the AKM EQ730L Quantum Well Hall Element sensor (Spectra). For both units, the signal was read on an Oscilloscope.
Spectra Apex HSR Mat MAX Slew Rate & Intensity
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil).
399.62 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 30.74 gauss intensity. The pulse rises in these measurements is in the range of 98 us to 104us.
For this measurement, the slew rate is 30.74 T/S.
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil).
399.62 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 30.74 gauss intensity. The pulse rises in these measurements is in the range of 98 us to 104us.
For this measurement, the slew rate is 30.74 T/S.
Spectra Apex HSR Mat CENTER Slew Rate & Intensity - 0"
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
312.1 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 24.0 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.0 us, yielding a slew rate of 24.0 T/s.
(2.40 mT/.100 ms = 24.0 T/s)
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
312.1 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 24.0 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.0 us, yielding a slew rate of 24.0 T/s.
(2.40 mT/.100 ms = 24.0 T/s)
Spectra Apex HSR Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 1"
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
270.3 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 20.8 gauss intensity.
The pulse rises in these measurements is in the range of 98 us to 104us (or .102 milliseconds ms).
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.01 us, yielding a slew rate of 20.59 T/s.
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
270.3 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 20.8 gauss intensity.
The pulse rises in these measurements is in the range of 98 us to 104us (or .102 milliseconds ms).
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.01 us, yielding a slew rate of 20.59 T/s.
Spectra Apex HSR Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 2"
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
242.7 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 18.7 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.03 us, yielding a slew rate of 18.15 T/s.
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
242.7 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 18.7 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.03 us, yielding a slew rate of 18.15 T/s.
Spectra Apex HSR Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 3"
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
199.9 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 15.4 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.03 us, yielding a slew rate of 14.93 T/s.
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
199.9 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 15.4 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.03 us, yielding a slew rate of 14.93 T/s.
Spectra Apex HSR Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 4"
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
188.6 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 14.5 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.04 us, yielding a slew rate of 13.95 T/s.
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
188.6 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 14.5 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is 1.04 us, yielding a slew rate of 13.95 T/s.
Spectra Apex HSR Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 5"
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
157.9 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 12.1 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is .98 us, yielding a slew rate of 12.32 T/s.
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil:
157.9 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 12.1 gauss intensity.
For this measurement, the rise time is .98 us, yielding a slew rate of 12.32 T/s.
Purewave Local Applicator Center Surface (and Max) Slew Rate - 0"
Below is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 1314 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals 2.86 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .35 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .827 T/S.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .35 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .827 T/S.
Purewave Local Applicator Center Surface Slew Rate and Intensity - 1"
Below is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 600 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals 1.3 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .28 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .468 T/S.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .28 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .468 T/S.
Purewave Local Applicator Center Surface Slew Rate and Intensity - 2"
Below is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 303 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .66 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .33 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .203 T/S.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .33 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .203 T/S.
Purewave Local Applicator Center Surface Slew Rate and Intensity - 3"
Below is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 170 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .37 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .33 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .111 T/S.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .33 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .111 T/S.
Purewave Local Applicator Center Surface Slew Rate and Intensity - 4"
Below is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 119 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .26 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .45 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .058 T/S.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .45 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .058 T/S.
Purewave Local Applicator Center Surface Slew Rate and Intensity - 5"
Below is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 75 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .16 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .4 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .040 T/S.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .4 millisecond (ms).
So for this measurement, the slew rate is .040 T/S.
