satire
Hair loss is prevalent and can affect both males and females of different age groups. Despite the availability of many conventional treatment options, these might cause side effects, leading to a growing interest in natural and herbal remedies (HRs).
This review aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of various HRs for hair loss and examine the current scientific evidence behind them. A literature search identified relevant studies published up to March 2024. The results suggested potential benefits in promoting hair growth and treating various forms of hair loss (HL). Several remedies were found to be effective in different conditions, including:
- androgenetic alopecia (AGA),
- telogen effluvium,
- alopecia areata (AA).
Various mechanisms of action (MOA) seem to be involved,
including
- 5α-reductase inhibition,
- increased microcapillary blood flow,
- antioxidant effects,
- modulation of the hair growth signaling pathways.
The authors concluded that natural and herbal remedies show promise in treating hair loss, However, many of these studies have limitations such as lack of long-term follow-up, small sample sizes, and short treatment durations. Due to this variation in the quality of evidence, further well-designed randomized trials with larger sample sizes are required to confirm the efficacy of these HRs.
The herbal remedies included in this review are:
- rosemary,
- saw palmetto,
- onion juice,
- Korean red ginseng,
- pumpkin seed oil,
- azelaic acid,
- olive oil,
- coconut oil,
- henna,
- honey,
- rice bran extract,
- Ashwagandha,
- Amla.
The authors claim that they “show promise”. Is it ‘splitting hair’ to ask: all of them? Closer inspection finds significant ‘hair in the soup’ and reveals that this statement is ‘pulled by the hair’ and based largely on wishful thinking. The truth is that evidence from rigorous clinical trials is almost totally absent.
I am tempted to say that this review is ‘hair-raising’ – alas there is not much hair left on my head to raise – even for a review as poor and misleading as this one.
In case you are new here and don’t know, the ‘ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME’ is an illustrious group of people researching so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). They have been elected [by myself] for one main reason: they have managed to go through their entire carrer publishing nothing but positive results related to their ‘pet SCAM’.
So far, the group consists of:
- Josef M Schmid (homeopathy, Germany)
- Meinhard Simon (homeopathy, Germany)
- Richard C. Niemtzow (acupuncture, US)
- Helmut Kiene (anthroposophical medicine, Germany)
- Helge Franke (osteopathy, Germany)
- Tery Oleson (acupressure , US)
- Jorge Vas (acupuncture, Spain)
- Wane Jonas (homeopathy, US)
- Harald Walach (various SCAMs, Germany)
- Andreas Michalsen ( various SCAMs, Germany)
- Jennifer Jacobs (homeopath, US)
- Jenise Pellow (homeopath, South Africa)
- Adrian White (acupuncturist, UK)
- Michael Frass (homeopath, Austria)
- Jens Behnke (research officer, Germany)
- John Weeks (editor of JCAM, US)
- Deepak Chopra (entrepreneur, US)
- Cheryl Hawk (chiropractor, US)
- David Peters (osteopathy, homeopathy, UK)
- Nicola Robinson (TCM, UK)
- Peter Fisher (homeopathy, UK)
- Simon Mills (herbal medicine, UK)
- Gustav Dobos (various SCAMs, Germany)
- Claudia Witt (homeopathy, Germany/Switzerland)
- George Lewith (acupuncture, UK)
- John Licciardone (osteopathy, US)
Inspired by my post from yesterday which focussed on a study by NAFKAM, I had a look at the director of this institute, Miek C Jong. Her pet SCAM seems to be homeopathy. She has published, as far as I can see, 4 clinical trials and two reviews of homeopathy (in case I have missed any, please let me know). Here are the links and key sentences from all of these papers:
CLINICAL TRIALS
- …the added value of homeopathy compared with usual care was demonstrated by significant differences in symptom score changes…
- An integrative treatment approach where SilAtro-5-90 (a homeopathic product) is given alongside mainstream symptomatic treatment may bring therapeutic benefit to patients suffering from recurrent tonsillitis.
- Both complex homeopathic products led to a comparable reduction of URTIs.
- In primary care, homeopathic treatment for acute respiratory and ear complaints was not inferior to conventional treatment.
REVIEWS
- This meta-analysis revealed that the proportion of patients experiencing adverse effects was significantly higher when receiving conventional medicine and herbs, compared to patients receiving homeopathy.
- Our systematic evaluation demonstrated that the reporting rate of ADRs associated with anthroposophic and homeopathic solutions for injection is very low.
I hope you agree that publishing all these homeopathy-papers without even a hint of a negative finding is a remarkable effort (bearing in mind that trials of highly diluted homeopathic remedies are, in fact, testing one placebo against another) In my view, this achievement is so remarkable that, today, I take the pleasure to admit Miek Jong into my ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME.
WELCOME MIEK!
I am sure you remember Didier Raoult:
- Didier Raoult’s research is being called into question
- Didier Raoult and the hydroxychloroquine controversy ( part 1 )
- A census of untruths about chloroquine ( part 2 )
- HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE: This is NOT a Hollywood blockbuster ( Part 3)
Raoult has been banned from practising medicine for two years, and his ‘landmark study’ on hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for Covid-19 has been retracted. But, as the French magazine ‘LE POINT’ reported, he can’t stop himself from producing BS. On the ‘Magnifiscience’ website, the name of the cosmetics company in which he is a partner, we learn that (my translation):
Magnifiscience, the alternative to injections and facelifts!
Science at the service of skin health
Discover a range that smoothes the skin, reduces wrinkles and fine lines, while plumping and firming for a more radiant complexion.
Our skin care products work deep down to improve the skin’s natural composition. They stimulate the production of collagen, elastin and hyaluronic acid, while moisturising, optimising cell renewal and strengthening the skin’s barrier.
A molecular innovation that redefines the boundaries of science.
Scientific Cosmetics
At Magnifiscience, we push back the boundaries of beauty by combining the power of science with cosmetic innovation.
Our formulas are the result of advanced biomedical research, combining high-performance active ingredients to stimulate skin regeneration, protect against external aggressors and slow down the visible signs of ageing.
Each skin care product is designed to work in depth to deliver proven, visible and long-lasting results.
__________________________
For 75 euros per 60 ml, LE POINT explains, the Tonitence 1 and Tonitence 2 contain DRNB7 and DRNB8 ‘powerful active ingredient’ complexes. These acronyms are based on the initials of the partners: Didier Raoult and Nina Basri, a ‘specialist in the formulation of cosmetic active ingredients’. Her LinkedIn profile shows no studies or degrees in pharmacy or dermatology, but a series of company start-ups in beauty products. A Forbes Brand stories advertorial explains that her vocation was born ‘from the observation of a curious little girl: the powers of water. Since most of the human bodý is made up of water, Nina Basri saw this as a lever for action.’ Water is indeed present in both creams. It’s even their main ingredient. In addition to water, there are mainly nourishing sunflower and safflower oils. For hydration, there’s squalane, but no hyaluronic acid or even glycerine; they chose propylene glycol, which is less effective. For 75 euros for 60 ml, you’d expect something better. Vitamin C is also present, albeit indirectly, via orange extract, and in low doses. The formula also contains a number of active plant ingredients, including extracts of ginseng, apple… and ‘garlic bulb and onion.
In addition to the AMAP basket, which, let’s be fair, may contain small doses of exfoliating fruit acids and antioxidant vitamins and polyphenols, there’s a good ladleful of polymers that deposit a film on the skin: hydroxyethyl acrylate/Sodium acryloyldimethyl taurate copolymer and cetearyl dimethicone crosspolymer, as well as silicone (dimethicone), which also forms a film. The result is a temporary, mechanical filling effect that disappears when the make-up is removed. More worryingly, the cream contains Benzyl Alcohol and Tetramethyl Acetyloctahydronaphthalenes, which (like garlic and onion) are potentially allergenic.
_________________________
So, what about Raoult’s/Magnifiscience’s dermatological claims that their creams:
- reduce wrinkles,
- reduce fine lines,
- improve the skin’s natural composition,
- stimulate the production of collagen, elastin and hyaluronic acid,
- optimise cell renewal,
- strengthen the skin’s barrier,
- stimulate skin regeneration,
- protect against external aggressors ,
- slow down the visible signs of ageing?
Any evidence?
As far as I can see, no!
Harald Walach is probably known to many of my readers (he is also a co-author of the paper that was the subject of yesterday’s post), not least because I posted numerous articles about him on this blog, e.g.:
- Prof Walach: what lies ahead for research into SCAM?
- Walach’s new meta-analysis of homeopathy revisited
- A new review of the ‘efficacy’ of homeopathic Arnica by Harald Walach & Co
- Prof Harald Walach and the intriguing ‘Vaccination Control Group’ project
- Prof Harald Walach is really unlucky
- Is Prof Harald Walach incompetent or dishonest?
- Prof Harald Walach’s new ground breaking study of praying the Rosary
- COVID-19 vaccinations: Prof Walach wants to “dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts”
The reason I dedicate yet another post to Walach is that recently I looked him up on Wikipedia where I learned things I did not previously know. As Walach is (since 2021) a member of our illustrious ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME, I find it appropriate to discuss him once more. The following is a slightly abbreviated version of his impressive Wikipedia page:
Walach was born in 1957. He received a degree in Psychology from the University of Freiburg in 1984, a PhD in Clinical Psychology from the University of Basel in 1991, and a PhD in History of Science from the University of Vienna in 1995. In 1998 he received his habilitation in psychology from the University of Freiburg. He was affiliated for a time with the Samueli Institute before its closure in 2017.
He worked for a time at the University of Northampton, then as director of the Institute of Transcultural Health Studies at Europa Universität Viadrina, where he led a training course for doctors in complementary medicine and cultural sciences. In 2012, the state of Brandenburg’s commission for reviewing Universities concluded that Walach’s institute should not be continued within the university.
In 2017, he was a part-time associate professor at Poznań University of Medical Sciences, teaching mindfulness to the international medical students. In July 2021 the university cut its ties with Walach, in response to a paper that he published in Vaccines, stating that Walach’s work “misleadingly used data to yield conclusions that are wrong and may lead to public harm.”
In 2017, he started the CHS Institute to publish his own writing, including COVID-19 satire and denial. Starting in 2001, along with theoretical physicists Hartmann Römer and Harald Atmanspacher, Walach developed what they termed a model of “weak quantum theory” or “generalised entanglement” that purported to explain anomalous phenomena, such as non-specific therapy effects and parapsychological claims. This was not taken seriously by other physicists.
In 2012, Walach received the negative prize “Goldenes Brett” from Austrian skeptics, an annual award for the “most astonishing pseudo-scientific nuisance” of the year. The prize was awarded in part for a masters thesis about the Kozyrev mirror conducted under his supervision, which was widely regarded as unscientific.
Walach was on the scientific advisory board of a blog called “CAM-Media Watch”, which was sponsored by the alternative medicine company Heel, among others. The blog described itself as a “spin doctor” for promoting Complementary and Alternative Medicine (“CAM”). In 2012, it was reported that the blog had been paid to smear Edzard Ernst, a scientist critical of homeopathy.
As of 2024, Walach has had three publications retracted.
In June 2021, Walach published two high profile papers containing research pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic, one exaggerating the risks of vaccination, and the other concluding that children should not wear masks. Both papers were retracted the following month.
- The first paper, published in Vaccines, was retracted within a week because of “misrepresentation of the COVID-19 vaccination efforts and misrepresentation of the data,” “several errors that fundamentally affect the interpretation of the findings,” and “incorrect and distorted conclusions”. Five members of the editorial board of Vaccines resigned when the article was published, protesting it as “grossly irresponsible”.
- The second paper was published in JAMA Pediatrics, to immediate criticism. This study was funded by an organization (MWGFD) that was founded to fight governmental pandemic protocols, and is known in Germany for promoting COVID conspiracy theories and distributing anti-vaccine flyers. The journal retracted the paper 12 days later, after the authors did not provide sufficiently convincing evidence to resolve the scientific issues raised about the study.
In 2023, another paper about the efficacy of homeopathy was retracted “due to concerns regarding the analysis of the articles included in the meta-analysis”.
In a press statement, the Poznań University of Medical Sciences dissociated itself from Walach and asserted that his vaccine study “misleadingly used data to yield conclusions that are wrong and may lead to public harm.”
_________________
I know, some people are not impressed by Wikipedia, yet I must say that I did learn a lot from this page. I thought I knew everything relevant about Walach, but I was mistaken.
In any case, I am proud to have – since already 3 years! – such a prominent man in our
ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME.
PS
I should perhaps mention that the ‘ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME’ is a gathering for pseudo-scientists who managed during their entire career to publish only or almost only positive results of their favorite SCAM (feel free to search on my blog for other members of this exceptional club)
The full title of this paper is “Role of Energy Medicine in enhancing hemoglobin levels – A case study”. Readers who thus expect to learn about the effects of ENERGY MEDICINE (a branch of so-called alternative medicine based on the belief that healers can channel “healing energy” into patients and effect positive results) might be disappointed.
The abstract reveals that the article “explores the potential benefits of Acupuncture and Energy Medicine as energy therapies in managing anemia”. If you now expect to learn something about the combination of ACUPUNCTURE and ENERGY MEDICINE, you would be mistaken.
Here is the abstract of the case report:
A 43-year-old female with severe anemia (hemoglobin 6.5 g/dL) participated in a three-month treatment plan that combined acupuncture and energy therapy. Acupuncture targets specific points to enhance Qi flow, stimulate blood production, and restore energy balance. The energy therapy plan focused on blood-nourishing foods aimed at supporting hematopoiesis.
After three months of treatment, the patient’s hemoglobin levels increased by 4.9 g/dL, reaching 11.4 g/dL. Clinical symptoms, including fatigue, dizziness, and weakness, showed marked improvement. Additionally, the patient reported better sleep, enhanced mood, and an increase in appetite, all of which contributed to an improved overall sense of well-being.
The authors concluded that the results suggest that Acupuncture and Energy Medicine can serve as effective energy therapies in managing anemia, particularly for cases that do not respond well to conventional treatments. This case study provides preliminary evidence of their potential to improve hemoglobin levels and alleviate anemia-related symptoms. However, further research is necessary to validate these findings and explore the broader application of acupuncture and energy medicine in anemia management.
The authors of this paper, who come from the ‘International Institute of Yoga and Naturopathy Medical Sciences‘, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India, never bothered to explain what type of ENERGY MEDICINE they applied to their patient. As it turns out, they used no ENERGY MEDICINE at all! Here is what they disclosed about the treatments in the full paper:
The patient was treated with energy medicine and the treatment protocol includes Acupuncture, Diet therapy that was designed in such a way to improve the blood circulation, balance energy flow, and address underlying deficiencies in Qi and blood, particularly in relation to the Spleen, Liver and Kidney meridians, which are believed to play a role in blood production in Traditional Chinese Medicine.
So, we now know that the case report entitled “Role of Energy Medicine in enhancing hemoglobin levels – A case study” was, in fact, about a patient receiving ACUPUNCTURE and DIET.
Next, we might wonder what condition the patient had been suffering from (anemia is not a disease but a sign that can be caused by a range of diseases). All we learn from the paper is this:
She had been diagnosed with anemia three months prior and had been taking iron supplements without significant improvement in her hemoglobin (Hb) levels.
So, we now know that despite the title of the paper ( “Role of Energy Medicine in enhancing hemoglobin levels – A case study”), the authors used no ENERGY MEDICINE. We also know thet they did not bother to adequately diagnose the patient. But we are told that the case shows that Acupuncture and Energy Medicine can serve as effective energy therapies in managing anemia, particularly for cases that do not respond well to conventional treatments. Just to be clear: if a doctor sees a patient with a dangerously low hemoglobin and does not bother to establish the cause and treats her with acupuncture and diet, the physician is, in my view, guilty of criminal neglect.
At this point, I have to admit that I lost the will to live – well, not quite, perhaps. But I certainly have lost the will to take the ‘International Institute of Yoga and Naturopathy Medical Sciences‘, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India, seriously. In fact, I seriously doubt that this institution should be allowed to educate future doctors. If they are able of doing anything useful, they could try to publish a book on:
HOW NOT TO WRITE A MEDICAL PAPER.
The ‘Code of Professional Practice‘ for UK chiropractors (applicaple from 1.1.2026) has just been published by the UK General Chiropractic Council (GCC). It demands in no uncertain terms numerous things from chiropractors:
- You must put the interests of patients first
- You must ensure safety and quality in clinical practice
- You must act with honesty and integrity and maintain
- You must provide a good standard of clinical care and professional practice
- You must establish and maintain clear professional
- You must obtain appropriate, valid consent from patients
- You must communicate professionally, properly and effectively
- You must foster collaborative healthcare, effective professional relationships and safe, supportive workplace practice
- You must maintain, develop and work within your professional knowledge and skills
- You must maintain and protect patient information
It seems obvious to me that many of these demands cannot possibly met. Let me just pick two examples. The code explains that, as a chiropractor, you must:
- protect patients by promoting and maintaining a culture of safety, seeking to prevent harm before it occurs.
- use the findings of the clinical assessment and the best quality of evidence that is available at the time, to propose (and record) a plan of care for the patient. You must tell the patient where your proposals are not supported by evidence of accepted quality and record your rationale and discussions.
Ad 1
Chiropractors administer spinal manipulations to well over 90% of their patients regardless of their condition or complaint. As we have often discussed on this blog, such treatments are not free of serious risks. It follows that preventing harm from patients and earning your living as a chiro is not really possible. Either you do one or you do the other; to be able to do both at the same time seems pure fantasy.
Ad 2
If chiropractors were to use the findings of the best quality of evidence that is available at the time, they would have to stop using spinal manipulation, a treatment that is, for many indications chiros use it, not supported by the best available evidence. But, as I already mentioned, spinal manipulation is the main therapy of chiros. Following the GCC’s demand is therefore an impossibility.
What is the solution?
Will the new code really disallow UK chiropractors to practice?
No! I fear that the solution is much simpler than it may look at first glance.
The GCC has in the past issued similar demands only to then do nothing to enforce them. Like past documents, the new code will turn out to be a document that changes nothing, except that it makes GCC members feel good: it allows them (and some consumers) the illusion that UK chiropractic an evidence-based, ethical and well-regulated profession.
Do you remember the case of Katie May who died “as the result of visiting a chiropractor for an adjustment, which ultimately left her with a fatal tear to an artery in her neck”?
Here is the abstract:
A 34-year-old female suffered a fatal stroke 7.5 h after cervical spine manipulation (CSM) performed by a chiropractic physician. Imaging noted vertebral artery dissection (VAD), basilar artery occlusion, and thromboembolic stroke. The medical examiner opined that CSM caused the VAD which embolized to cause the fatal stroke. However, causation of VAD by CSM is not supported by the research.
We utilized an intuitive approach to causation analysis to determine the cause of the VAD and the stroke. Causation of the VAD and the stroke by CSM could not be established as more likely than not. The malpractice case was settled by bringing allegations of misdiagnosis and failure to diagnose and refer the VAD to medical emergency.
We conclude that in the absence of convincing evidence that CSM could cause VAD, forensic professionals should consider VAD as a presenting symptom prior to CSM in such cases. Adherence to the standard of care for the chiropractic profession with attention to differential diagnosis could prevent such cases.
The author states that the objectives of this case report were to:
- Perform a forensic analysis to determine the most likely causal mechanism of the VAD.
- Perform a forensic analysis to determine the most likely causal mechanism of the stroke.
- Perform a medicolegal analysis of the standard of care with the aim of determining how this case could have been prevented, and how future such cases could be prevented.
There are, as far as I can see, at least three major problems with these objectives:
- The author is not qualified as a forensic analyst.
- He is merely a chiro (and acupuncturist) with a massive conflict of interest.
- Neither does he seem to be medically nor legally qualified for doing a medicolegal analysis (Dr. Brown received his undergraduate degree in Philosophy and History from Illinois State University in 1989. He went on to attend one semester of Law school at California Western School of Law in San Diego.)
The author even states that his information was taken from publicly available court documents. Background information was taken from publicly available investigative journalism and media coverage of this case. Any information that has not been made public is not reflected in this analysis. Images of the forensic microscopic review of the vertebral arteries were not available for review.
So, how valuable is chiro Brown’s medicolegal second opinion?
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of existing literature to identify factors that contribute to high levels of satisfaction in chiropractic care. A comprehensive search was conducted to identify quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods studies exploring patient experience with chiropractic care. Forty-three studies were included in the review. The findings showed that patient satisfaction was consistently high in comparison to other professions. The review identified key factors that contribute to patient experience, which were not limited to clinical outcomes, but also the clinical interaction and clinician attributes. The findings of this review provide a core insight into patient experience, identifying both positive and negative experiences not just within chiropractic care but in the wider healthcare sector. Further work should explore factors that impact patient satisfaction and how this understanding may further improve healthcare to enhance patient experience.
I do sympathise with the chiro-industry wanting to promote chiropractic at all cost. But, please, let’s also have some understanding with the vodka industry. Here is my contribution to make sure they do not feel left out:
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of existing literature to identify factors that contribute to high levels of satisfaction in vodka consumption. A comprehensive search was conducted to identify quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods studies exploring consumer experience with vodka drinking. Forty-three studies were included in the review. The findings showed that patient satisfaction was consistently high in comparison to drinking other beverages. The review identified key factors that contribute to consumer experience, which were not limited to outcomes, but also the interactions with and attributes of fellow drinkers. The findings of this review provide a core insight into consumer experience, identifying both positive and negative experiences not just with vodka consumption but with the wider drinks sector. Further work should explore factors that impact consumer satisfaction and how this understanding may further improve drinking to enhance consumer experience.
Allow me to congratulate the authors – researchers from the newly renamed ‘Sciences University, Bournemouth, UK’ (formerly merely a chiro college) – on such an elegant study and cutting-edge science.
The year 2024 brought many disappointments. But let’s not dwell on those, lets get in the mood for tonights celebrations! And what could be more fitting for that than a review of the positive cardiovascular effects of wine drinking? After all wine involves both aromatherapy as well as antioxidants, botanical medicine and naturopathy! As luck would have it, we even have some recent evidence on this very subject.
The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were:
- (i) to examine the association between wine consumption and cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and coronary heart disease (CHD),
- (ii) to analyse whether this association could be influenced by personal and study factors, including the participants’ mean age, the percentage of female subjects, follow-up time and percentage of current smokers.
The searched several databases for longitudinal studies from their inception to March 2023.
A total of 25 studies were included in the systematic review, and 22 could be included the meta-analysis. The pooled risk ration (RR) for the association of wine consumption and the risk of CHD using the DerSimonian and Laird approach was 0.76 (95% CIs: 0.69, 0.84), for the risk of CVD was 0.83 (95% CIs: 0.70, 0.98), and for the risk of cardiovascular mortality was 0.73 (95% CIs: 0.59, 0.90).
The authors concluded that their research revealed that wine consumption has an inverse relationship to cardiovascular mortality, CVD, and CHD. Age, the proportion of women in the samples, and follow-up time did not influence this association. Interpreting these findings with prudence was necessary because increasing wine intake might be harmful to individuals who are vulnerable to alcohol because of age, medication, or their pathologies.
What, you suspect that this paper was sponsored by the wine industry?
No, you are mistaken! It was funded by FEDER funds, by a grant from the University of Castilla-La Mancha, and by a grant from the science, innovation and universities.
So, maybe just for tonight we put the worries about our livers aside and enjoy a (non-homeopathic) dose of wine.
Cheers!
It’s the season to be jolly!
But there seems to be so little to be jolly about!
No worries – I found something that will surely make you laugh out loud.
This article by Iurii Titarenko (PhD in Psychology, Private Scientific Institution “Scientific and Research University of Medical and Pharmaceutical Law”; European Academy of Digital Medical Technologies – “Re-Generation” Center, Ukraine) is the best comic relief Santa can offer:
Bioresonance therapy is a cutting-edge approach that uses electromagnetic waves to restore the body’s natural bioelectric balance and activate inherent self-healing mechanisms. It is steadily gaining recognition across diverse medical fields – ranging from allergology and neurology to metabolic disorders and oncology.
This article examines the clinical outcomes associated with employing bioresonance for the treatment and support of various patient groups, including those with allergies, autoimmune conditions (notably those related to Lyme disease), metabolic imbalances, chronic pain, depression, cancer, and other health challenges.
Of particular importance is the therapy’s demonstrated effectiveness in alleviating allergic reactions, stabilizing metabolic processes, managing neurological conditions, and mitigating the adverse effects of conventional cancer treatments. Beyond these benefits, bioresonance not only enhances patients’ overall well-being, but also complements traditional therapies by improving their outcomes, minimizing side effects, and hastening recovery. It has shown promise as a means to refine and optimize existing treatment regimens, thereby paving the way for more comprehensive patient care. The article also highlights the method’s potential applications in routine medical practice and emphasizes the necessity of further clinical trials to identify optimal therapeutic parameters and clarify its mechanisms of action.
Bioresonance therapy could become a crucial adjunct to traditional medical strategies, substantially improving patients’ quality of life. As ongoing research continues to elucidate its role, incorporating bioresonance into integrated treatment plans may broaden therapeutic horizons, enabling personalized, preventive, and more effective healthcare solutions for the future.
For those who do not know much about bioresonance, let me just confirm that is pure nonsense. One of the best tests of bioresonance is this one. Its results show that bioresonance:
- failed to diagnose serious diseases in the patients,
- gave a clean bill of health to a corpse,
- diagnosed a host of health risks in healthy volunteers,
- produced variable results for a sample of liver pate as well as a wet towel with standard deviations for repeated tests exceeding 200%,
- was unable to differentiate between a wet towel and the healthy volunteers.
But such findings did not stop the author of the above paper to arrive at his pseudo-scientific conclusion:
Bioresonance therapy is a promising method that opens up new opportunities in the treatment and support of patients with various diseases …
Needless to mention that he does not supply any reliable evidence for his outlandish claims.
(Mainly, I guess, because there is no such evidence)
