Two hundred years after Newton was “struck” by an apple’s fall to earth, Sir James Maxwell proposed electromagnetism as a much stronger universal force, one controlling electron movement between atoms and molecules. Such a control of this molecular microcosm was difficult for laymen but physicists, chemists, and a few practitioners were thrilled by its potential.
The modern era of quantum theory was dawning at the turn of the 20th century. Electromagnetism promised quantum physics, chemistry and intervention where life begins. Niels Bohr once said, “If you’re not thrilled by it, you don’t understand it” and Hawkings recently, in “A Brief History of Time”, celebrating electromagnetism as “the basis of biology, life itself”. Both, brilliant beyond imagination, thrilling to the idea of controlling an electron’s path to create our “biologic experience”.
And what of the AMA and chemical interests? Disdaining the scientific world’s enthusiasm for the quantum revolution they supported the Flexner report in 1910 that eradicated electromagnetism from all medical curricula in the United States. With juggernaut speed, 170 institutions that supported such “irregular” teachings were purged in the name of– “medical science”–. A treatment half the healthcare consumers in the United States embraced in the 1850s was gone in a political coup that continues to distort and rebuke the findings of a century of Nobel laureates. Drugs and surgery ruled, mocking science with fiat surgeries of “its this or nothing” and fronted studies.
While commonly employed in Europe where Flexner’s continuing efforts were laughed off the continent, only a few continued to study electromagnetism in America. Robert Royal Rife was defiled and harassed to the point of suicide for his insights. Robert Becker overcame such ignorance by publishing “The Body Electric”, a treatise exalted by millions. Bassett’s bone stimulator cracked the door, but his contribution was carefully sequestered in fracture care instead of redefining tissue restoration, perhaps “life itself” as electromagnetism is inevitably destined to do. It, and we, have been denied that future thus far.
Examples include a tax supported trip by American cardiologists in 1972 that traveled to Moscow to witness restoration of different heart conditions employing electromagnetism and found it “pretty impressive IF they were telling the truth”, (first rule: discredit the source). The work of the Myasnikov Institute went unreported as another opportunity to embrace electro-molecular understanding of our “body electric” was (dis)missed. It might be worth noting cardiac surgery, interventional cardiology, and blockbuster drugs were then emerging industries. Arthritis, stroke, and spinal cord injury are similar “oversights” here that are treated as electro-molecular disruptions in Europe.
In 2003 Goodwin and Dennis defined “the most bio-effective” pulsed electromagnetic characteristics in an exhaustive study sponsored by NASA. Their watershed study of molecular and genetic response found that nanosecond pulsed electromagnetic fields enhance genetic response in humans up to four times more effectively than all other electric or electromagnetic therapies.
The stuff of Nobel prizes from Maxwell to Hawkings is in our hands and together we can return healthcare to the altruism we, and it, deserves. We cannot allow this non-invasive, side effect free science of electro-molecular medicine to be denied us again. After 140 years of delay we must restore science to medicine. The Merlins of traditional medicine, drugs, and fiat surgery must meet the same scientific scrutiny they demand of others, thus creating a “rising tide that lifts all ships”. Let’s have people, rather than vested interests, dictate the healthcare they wish to follow. Transparency in science and open access will restore symmetry to our badly distorted healthcare system.
Glen Gordon MD gained first US approval to study pulsed electromagnetic technology to treat soft tissue injury in humans (1980) and developed the first nanosecond pulse technology in the US (1982). He continues to speak and write on this new paradigm in treating illness and injury. For more information see www.em-probe.com.