Spectra HSR vs Pure Wave Ultra
Spectra HSR vs. PureWave PEMF Mats: The Truth About What You're Actually Getting
PEMF therapy works by delivering magnetic pulses into your body's cells. Think of it like jump-starting a car battery; the pulse needs to be strong enough and fast enough to actually do something. There are two key measurements that determine whether a PEMF device is truly effective: intensity (how strong the pulse is) and rise time (how fast the pulse fires). Together, they define the slew rate of a PEMF signal (intensity/rise time), usually measured in Tesla per second (T/s). The slew rate is the POWER of a PEMF system, which is why NASA and many key PEMF studies consider it the most important parameter in all of PEMF. Why? The slew rate, as described by Faraday's Law, determines how much energy is transferred to your body. The higher the slew rate, the more energy your body receives. Clinical research has established specific benchmarks for the slew rate (5 T/s to 160 T/s) [1-19] and the optimal intensities and rise times to achieve it [20-26]. This is where the PureWave falls embarrassingly short.
The PureWave Mat - Weak, Slow, and Clinically Irrelevant
When tested with professional-grade equipment, the PureWave full-body mat produces a magnetic pulse of only 1.0 Gauss (0.1 millitesla) at the surface, with a rise time of only 1 millisecond (low and slow, respectively, by research standards). From this, it is easy to calculate the slew rate from .1 millitesla/1 millsecond = 0.1 T/s). Not only that, but it quickly drops off the moment it tries to penetrate even a few inches into your body. At 5 inches (where many joints, organs, and deeper tissues lie), the PureWave has lost nearly 80% of its already weak signal. These dismally low slew-rate readings on the PureWave are well below the slew-rate thresholds documented in peer-reviewed PEMF research. In other words, it's not just weak, it's also too slow to trigger the cellular responses that make PEMF therapy worth doing in the first place.
Medium Intensity PEMF (10-100 Gauss) is the best researched
Also of significance is a meta-analysis of 3249 PEMF studies, which found that 73.7% used intensities between 10 and 100 Gauss (medium intensity). Only 20.5% used low intensity or less than 10 Gauss. Even more significant was that medium intensity elicited a MUCH better cellular response than low intensity [20]. PureWave uses a much lower intensity (only 1 Gauss) than this research-proven range.
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. 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.
The Bottom Line
The PureWave mat produces numbers that look good on a marketing brochure but fail completely when held against the specifications validated by clinical science. If a PEMF device can't achieve the intensity and slew rate research says are needed, it simply isn't doing what PEMF is supposed to do. The PureWave doesn't come close. Spending money on a PureWave mat is, by the clinical evidence, spending money on something that is overpriced and largely doesn't work.
PEMF therapy works by delivering magnetic pulses into your body's cells. Think of it like jump-starting a car battery; the pulse needs to be strong enough and fast enough to actually do something. There are two key measurements that determine whether a PEMF device is truly effective: intensity (how strong the pulse is) and rise time (how fast the pulse fires). Together, they define the slew rate of a PEMF signal (intensity/rise time), usually measured in Tesla per second (T/s). The slew rate is the POWER of a PEMF system, which is why NASA and many key PEMF studies consider it the most important parameter in all of PEMF. Why? The slew rate, as described by Faraday's Law, determines how much energy is transferred to your body. The higher the slew rate, the more energy your body receives. Clinical research has established specific benchmarks for the slew rate (5 T/s to 160 T/s) [1-19] and the optimal intensities and rise times to achieve it [20-26]. This is where the PureWave falls embarrassingly short.
The PureWave Mat - Weak, Slow, and Clinically Irrelevant
When tested with professional-grade equipment, the PureWave full-body mat produces a magnetic pulse of only 1.0 Gauss (0.1 millitesla) at the surface, with a rise time of only 1 millisecond (low and slow, respectively, by research standards). From this, it is easy to calculate the slew rate from .1 millitesla/1 millsecond = 0.1 T/s). Not only that, but it quickly drops off the moment it tries to penetrate even a few inches into your body. At 5 inches (where many joints, organs, and deeper tissues lie), the PureWave has lost nearly 80% of its already weak signal. These dismally low slew-rate readings on the PureWave are well below the slew-rate thresholds documented in peer-reviewed PEMF research. In other words, it's not just weak, it's also too slow to trigger the cellular responses that make PEMF therapy worth doing in the first place.
Medium Intensity PEMF (10-100 Gauss) is the best researched
Also of significance is a meta-analysis of 3249 PEMF studies, which found that 73.7% used intensities between 10 and 100 Gauss (medium intensity). Only 20.5% used low intensity or less than 10 Gauss. Even more significant was that medium intensity elicited a MUCH better cellular response than low intensity [20]. PureWave uses a much lower intensity (only 1 Gauss) than this research-proven range.
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. 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.
The Bottom Line
The PureWave mat produces numbers that look good on a marketing brochure but fail completely when held against the specifications validated by clinical science. If a PEMF device can't achieve the intensity and slew rate research says are needed, it simply isn't doing what PEMF is supposed to do. The PureWave doesn't come close. Spending money on a PureWave mat is, by the clinical evidence, spending money on something that is overpriced and largely doesn't work.
|
|
Part 1: Slew Rate & Intensity
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to Pure Wave Ultra and Ultra+ (Bottom)
(Note: Pure wave would be totally flat, but the Y-axis is expanded to make it visible)
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to Pure Wave Ultra and Ultra+ (Bottom)
(Note: Pure wave would be totally flat, but the Y-axis is expanded to make it visible)
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.
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 of these studies was 26.7 T/s which can be a guiding light and a ballpark number 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, protheses recovery and overall inflammation (inflammation is a root cause of most disease). All of these slew rate studies you can see summarized in the chart shown here [54-69.4].
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.
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 of these studies was 26.7 T/s which can be a guiding light and a ballpark number 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, protheses recovery and overall inflammation (inflammation is a root cause of most disease). All of these slew rate studies you can see summarized in the chart shown here [54-69.4].
|
iMRS Prime Slew Rate (T/s) Compared to Minimum Clinically Effective
|
iMRS Prime and Spectra Slew Rate Comparisons (0,1,2,3,4 and 5 inches).
|
Intensity
Robust evidence as to the best intensity to use in 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 reporting 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].
Not only are there 25 times as many medium-intensity studies as high-intensity studies, but 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]. That is, medium-intensity PEMF signals are the optimal intensities for triggering, at the cellular level, all the primary benefits of PEMF that we examined towards the end of Chapter 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].
Not only are there 25 times as many medium-intensity studies as high-intensity studies, but 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]. That is, medium-intensity PEMF signals are the optimal intensities for triggering, at the cellular level, all the primary benefits of PEMF that we examined towards the end of Chapter 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].
|
iMRS Prime and Spectra Intensity (mT) Comparisons (0,1,2,3,4 and 5 inches).
|
Part 2: Coils, Area Covered and Penetration Depth
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to Pure Wave Ultra and Ultra+ (Bottom)
(Note: Pure wave would be totally flat, but the Y-axis is expanded to make it visible)
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to Pure Wave Ultra and Ultra+ (Bottom)
(Note: Pure wave would be totally flat, but the Y-axis is expanded to make it visible)
|
|
Part 3: Frequency, Programs, and Spectral Content
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to Pure Wave Ultra and Ultra+ (Bottom)
(Note: Pure wave would be totally flat, but the Y-axis is expanded to make it visible)
Visual Showing Spectra's Higher Slew Rate Pulse (Top) Compared to Pure Wave Ultra and Ultra+ (Bottom)
(Note: Pure wave would be totally flat, but the Y-axis is expanded to make it visible)
Spectral Content (0-20,000 Hz Window)
|
Spectra HSR: 20 - 18,000 Hz
|
Pure Wave: 20 - 3000 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
Part 4: Electrosmog Tests and Safety
Purewave Full Body Mat Electrosmog Test (Both Plugged in)
|
RF Test Plugged in : .042 mW/m^2 [Clean]
No Battery Option Because High Power 
|
RF Test Plugged in: 1.518 mW/m^2 [Moderate]
RF Test on Battery: .015 mW/m^2 [Clean] 
|
Slew Rate and Intensity Testing
Max, 0,1,2,3,4 and 5 inches up.
Max, 0,1,2,3,4 and 5 inches up.
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. |
Purewave Mat MAX Slew Rate & Intensity
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 639 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals 1.39 gauss intensity. For this measurement, with a rise time of 1 ms, the slew rate is .139 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) |
Purewave Mat CENTER Slew Rate & Intensity - 0"
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 460 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals 1.0 gauss intensity. The pulse rise time in this measurement is 1.0 millisecond (ms). So for this measurement, the slew rate is .1 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. |
Purewave Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 1"
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 460 mV divided by 298mV per gauss equals .65 gauss intensity. The pulse rise time in this measurement is 1.12 millisecond (ms). So for this measurement, the slew rate is .058 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. |
Purewave Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 2"
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 206 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .44 gauss intensity. The pulse rise time in this measurement is .94 millisecond (ms). So for this measurement, the slew rate is .047 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. |
Purewave Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 3"
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 181 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .39 gauss intensity. The pulse rise time in this measurement is .95 millisecond (ms). So for this measurement, the slew rate is .041 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. |
Purewave Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 4"
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 148 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .32 gauss intensity. The pulse rise time in this measurement is 1.03 millisecond (ms). So for this measurement, the slew rate is .031 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. |
Purewave Mat Center Slew Rate and Intensity - 5"
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 85 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals .18 gauss intensity. The pulse rise time in this measurement is .95 millisecond (ms). So for this measurement, the slew rate is .019 T/S. |
**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***
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.
