Subject: (Kelley) (Weiner) (Stone) Mag fields & Psychiatry (fwd)
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 220438 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:41:13 -0700
From: Libby Kelley
To: "Roy L. Beavers"
Subject: Re: (Weiner) (Stone) Mag fields & Psychiatry (fwd)
This is an interesting article. Sure does support the notion that low
intensity radiation has biological effects, doesn it?
I attended the Orthomolecular Society Annual meetings in San Francisco (a
group of health medicine MDs founded by Linus Pauling in the early 1980s)
recently. There was a booth selling these cranial stimulation devices. I
picked up some material - costs about $450.00 +. Could it be that, at the
right dose, this non-ioniving radiaiton device would have a beneficial
effect? How much exposure is needed for me to get that beneficial effect?
The mannual says not to leave it on while sleeping. It is really up to
the home user to decide how much is enough I guess. Perhaps the doctor can
explain it to me. When I asked whether the manufacturer had done any
studies to look at cell proliferation or adverse neurological effects which
might result from excessive use, the salesman looked rather uncomfortable
and said they they were "going to be looking into it".
Consider this scenario - Senate Commerce votes out the Senate version of HR
438, which, among other things, grants immunity from liability to wireless
manufacturers. It becomes the law of the land. Someone who uses this
cranial stimulator gets an overdose and develops a brain tumor. The
manufacturer is not liable. The doctor is not liable. Buyer beware, I
guess.
Please contact Senator Mc Cain and your congressional delegation to oppose
this provision - we need to hold manufacturers accountable. Perhaps
Consumer Reports would like to evaluate this one..
Libby Kelley
At 07:09 PM 4/13/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>.......Good stuff here!!! Dr. Weiner, have you ever thought about:
>how is it possible for the science/medical community to 'vigorously'
>embrace the idea that EMF (in this case magnetic firlds) can be used
>in a controlled way to promote healing -- because clearly 'bioeffects' DO
>result.... But have no "stomach" for the notion that, on an
>**uncontrolled** basis (i.e., in our environment), those -- or
>other, still not understood -- bioeffects may be harmful???
>
>Or worse, some of them will still argue that there are no bioeffects!!!
>
>Cheerio.....
>
>Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
>rbeavers@llion.org................
>...It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness...
>.................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS...............
>
>.........DO YOU KNOW OF OTHERS WHO SHOULD BE ON THIS LIST?????.........
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 16:58:07 -0500
>From: Bob Weiner
>To: "Roy L. Beavers"
>Subject: Re: (Stone) Mag fields & Psychiatry (fwd)
>
>To Roy & the group,
>
>A patient brought in an article today from the March 8, 1999 issue of
>U.S. News & World Report on new drugs & treatment approaches for
>depression. Two paragraphs at the end of the article described "rapid
>transcranial magnetic stimulation" as a "promising experimental
>procedure." If you do a web search under "transcranial magnetic
>stimulation" or "transcranial stimulation" you will find many sites.
>Here's one:
>
>http://www.psycom.net/depression.central.transcranial.html
>
>Here's a 1995 NIMH study:
>
>Magnetic Stimulation of the brain's left prefrontal cortex may help some
>depressed patients in much
>the same way as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), but without its side
>effects, suggests a
>preliminary study by Mark George, M.D., of the National Institute of
>Mental Health (NIMH), EricWassermann, M.D., National Institute on
>Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), and NIH colleagues.
>
>They found that two of six medication-resistant patients showed marked
>mood improvement after treatment with repetitive Transcranial Magnetic
>Stimulation (rTMS) over several days. One of the two responders, a
>middle-aged woman, reported feeling well for the first time in three
>years. Two other patients experienced slight mood improvement and two no
>improvement following the experimental procedure, which employs an
>electromagnetic coil that induces a current in the brain's cortex.
>
>The treatment is administered daily for at least a week, much like ECT,
>except that subjects remain awake. Although proven effective for
>depression, ECT entails risks associated with a seizure, occasional
>memory loss, and general anesthesia, which is required. In the pilot
>rTMS study, two patients developed mild headaches, treatable with
>aspirin -- the only reported side effects. However, rTMS does entail
>some risk, especially for seizure-prone individuals, and would not
>neccessarily help all patients who respond to ECT.
>
>Unlike electricity, which gets diffused by the skull, high intensity
>magnetic pulses pass readily
>through bone, making possible more focused targeting of particular brain
>structures. The NIMH investigators aimed the magnet at the brain's left
>prefrontal cortex, since it has been implicated as a site of abnormally
>low metabolism in studies of depression. PET (positron emission
>tomography) scans performed in one patient during and after treatment
>showed widespread increases in metabolism, hinting that the magnet's
>effects may be broadly telegraphed via interconnected brain circuitry,
>suggests Dr. George. A controlled trial of rTMS for depression is
>currently underway at NIMH -- the first of a series required before its
>safety and efficacy can be established.
>
>Researchers hope this and other work with magnetic stimulation will shed
>light on the mechanism of action of ECT, which remains a mystery. If
>magnetic pulses can produce an antidepressant effect, then the seizure
>that occurs in ECT may not be necessary.
>
>Evidence is emerging from animal studies about how electrical currents,
>such as those induced in rTMS, might alter brain mechanisms. For
>example, NIMH's Susan Weiss, Ph.D., finds that low frequency electrical
>stimulation triggers lasting anticonvulsant effects in rats. Other
>investigators have found that magnetic stimulation produces an
>antidepressant effect in some animal models of depression.
>
>In addition to its possible therapeutic potential, rTMS is also being
>used as a selective probe in studies of human brain function. For
>example, depending on where the coil is placed, it can disrupt speech or
>interfere with different types of memory. Investigators are also
>following up clues that it may trigger different emotional states in
>normal subjects, depending upon magnet placement.
>
>Findings of the pilot study were published in the Oct 2 issue of
>Neuroreport. In addition to George and Wassermann, co-authors of the
>article, "Daily repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)
>improves mood in depression," are: Drs. Ann Callahan, Terrence Ketter,
>Robert Post (NIMH), Mark Hallett (NINDS), Wendol Williams (National
>Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism), and Peter Basser (National
>Center for Research Resources).
>
>NIMH and NINDS are components of the National Institutes of Health, an
>agency of the U.S. Public Health Service, part of the U.S. Department of
>Health and Human Services.
>
>Bob Weiner
>
>
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html