Andy Smith 00:00 
Quick  disclaimer before we begin, the PEMF podcast does not contain any medical advice and the content provided is for informational purposes only. If you have any health concerns, please visit a healthcare professional. 

Welcome back to another episode of the PEMF podcast. Today's episode might be a controversial one, but it's a conversation that needs to be had. We're diving into all things intensity with one of our favorite past guests, Brian Myers. Firstly, welcome back, Brian. And if anyone missed the first episode, can you just quickly introduce yourself and anyone who missed the first part?

Bryant Meyers 00:36 
Yeah, I'm Bryant Myers. I'm author of a bestselling book. I'm PEMF called Fifth Element of Health. I've been doing PEMF therapy for 18 years. It's been my passion to help thousands of people. I've been in energy medicine for 30 years, but I've seen that PEMF just works better and faster than a lot of other forms of energy medicine, even though I like other forms like red light and others. But for me, if there's one thing I wouldn't do without, it'd be PEMF because it's just my go-to for any injury, any health problem, anything that goes on in my body where it's out of balance, or performance. I play pickleball, so I use it for performance to perform better too. It's my passion because I've seen it change lives, save lives. I used to teach physics at the college level way back in the day. I use all that knowledge of physics to give a scientific solid foundation to PEMF. I find a lot of people in the industry don't seem to understand some of the basic scientific principles behind PEMFs, which leads to a lot of errors in their recommendations, which we're of course going to get into some of that today. Anyway, just a little bit about me. Definitely, this is my full-time passion right now.

Andy Smith 01:51 
No, and we can see that because, you know, doing some research for this episode, we look to your buyer's guide and our podcast producer, Josh, downloaded it for me to read and it was 200 pages. So, yeah, there's definitely some extensive research has gone into this part. Yeah. But, you know, as an advocate, we talk about PEMF obviously on this podcast quite a lot and there's ways of breaking it down. And one of the main ways is through intensity. So you see a lot of low intensity versus high intensity going on in the market. I think there seems to be this notion of them and us a lot of it because it's quite rare that you get one manufacturer that does both. Yeah. And therefore, when you get a low intensity manufacturer, they're obviously going to say that it's better than high intensity. If high intensity, you're obviously going to say it's better than low intensity. So there is a lot of kind of myths and misconceptions going on out on the market. And we want to have this discussion today to really get nitpicky into, you know, more on the high intensity side of things, because high intensity is a lot more expensive, which we'll get on to. And there seems to be this notion that it seems it's the one size fits all. And we want to just kind of make an understanding for that, that it's not the one size fit or we don't want people to be spending more than they need to. Yes. And they can get, you know, healing powers from other products. So before we get into the myths and science about the intensities and that's why that's such kind of a misunderstood topic. We talked a lot about slew rate last time being like the most important thing to look out for. But how important do you think is intensity?

Bryant Meyers 03:33 
Yeah, intensity now, slew rate I think is the most important parameter in PEMF, in my opinion now, based on my current understanding, because even the frequency resonance side of PEMF, when you have a higher slew rate, you get more frequencies by a Fourier transform. It's just the nature of the steeper slope gives you more frequencies in the spectrum, right? So I do feel slew rate's the most important parameter, but unfortunately, most PEMF studies do not list slew rate. In fact, I have about 19 or 20 good slew rate studies, and I'm hard pressed to, through extensive searches on PubMed, define PEMF studies that list the slew rate. Sometimes you can figure it out, like with the I1 and that inflammation study, I was able to contact, I was able to see their website, they publish their rise time, their peak intensity, you can kind of calculate, but their studies don't list slew rate, they all go by intensity. So intensity is important because it seems that the medium intensity, if you just play the odds, you're probably gonna get a pretty good slew rate, assuming it's not just a slow sine wave, like the Chinese crystal mass, right? Because they do have, they can get up to a medium intensity, right? It got such a slow rise that their slew rates are dismally low.

Andy Smith 04:48 
So that's a good point because we did our own testing when we were testing the CELLER8 mat to look at our slew rate and coming on to your point, you know, it's it's actually very difficult to measure slew rate and that's probably why a lot of people don't publish their slew rates.

Bryant Meyers 05:03 
my little hall effect probe thing here. It's just that it's a cheap $12. It's not even a very expensive one, but it is not easy to measure slew rate because you got to have a nice oscilloscope and the hall effect probe and you got to know how to convert like 65 millibolts to one millitest or whatever. But the point, yeah, the point is, is most people in industry don't know how to measure slew rate or they don't even, I mean, I hate to say things, probably true. They probably don't even know what slew rate is unless they've seen Robert Dennis or some of my recent stuff or, but medium intensity is almost always listed in PEMF studies. So, and we'll get into that meta analysis, you know, of over, 3,200 studies. But so it's just kind of my hypothesis that if a study doesn't have the slew rate listed, if it's a medium intensity, it's probably going to have a decent slew rate, but maybe not. I mean, if it's, again, if it says it's a sine wave and a low frequency sine wave, then you can probably know that it may not, right? So if the wave shape is listed, let's say it's a square wave. Well, if they list it as a square wave wave shape and a medium intensity, you can almost be guaranteed it's going to be a good slew rate or at least a decent slew rate. So that's why intensity is important. And intensity is also of secondary importance in slew rate, scientifically because it's DBDT, right? It's the change, it's how, slew rate is how fast a PEMF signal reaches its peak intensity and how fast is the rise time or the, you know, so you do need a certain amount of intensity if you want to, you know, otherwise it, because it's hard to get a really fast rise time, right? So a medium intensity allows you to have, again, you're kind of makes it easier to get a therapeutically, clinically backed slew rate, which I have 19 studies that I took the average of mean, medium and mode and around 30 Tesla a second is kind of the average of those. But remember some of those are smaller devices too. So, I mean, it's easier to get a high slew rate and smaller device. But yeah, I would say that's why intensity is of secondary importance because it's kind of in slew rate and it's most PEMF studies don't list slew rates. So we have to, you know, the intensity can give us a hint, you know, that might be a good signal has a good slew rate.

Andy Smith 07:31 
So yeah, I mean, you know, intensity, we see intensity as such an important factor because like you mentioned, it's really one of the only defining features online when people are trying to buy a device. So you can't really compare slew rate very easily, but most companies will list their Gauss rating or their intensity rating. So, and you know, if you go onto web websites like Dr. Pollock's website, he literally says this intensity will fix this, you know, so there's no mention of slew rate, there's no mention of coils or anything like that is his results are based solely on what the intensity is offered by that product. So obviously people are using that to categorize what system. And, you know, we have always been looking at different websites and how they differentiate and direct people when they're buying product. And, you know, one of them is specifically saying you need the most intensity to get the most results and to get the deepest penetration. And so all these different things will come on to all these people that are saying high intensity online and some of them are saying that is dictating your result. And that's the only way to go. Do you agree with that?

Bryant Meyers 08:53 
But of course, absolutely not. I mean, I give the example, the exaggerated example, that you could have a big six foot full body mat and a little tiny coil just in the middle and you could have a thousand gauss, you know, but it's just a little tiny spot and it's not gonna penetrate very far because it's a small coil, right? And it turns out it's easier to get a high intensity and a smaller coil. I mean, it's just the nature of current. I mean, if you take a certain amount of current and you put it into a bigger coil, you're gonna get less intensity than if you have the same amount of current and a smaller coil. It's like focusing a flashlight, right? If you have a flashlight spread out and you focus it on a spot, it's the same amount of light total, but you've got all of it on one spot. So it seems like, you know, but so, I mean, it's just harder to get a higher slew rate and more intensity and larger coils. So that's one problem with intensity is it doesn't tell you how much area you're covering in the body and how deep it's going. And again, the other problem with intensity only is it doesn't tell you what really the slew rate is or the signal shape. So, you know, you could use like we've seen with the Chinese mats, you could have a decent intensity. You know, they can get 10, 20 Gauss or whatever they could get up to 30, but because they only have a sick, the rise time is only 8.3 milliseconds, their slew rates are like one Tesla a second or less. And though, so having a slow rising signal is not a very therapeutic way to do PEMF, even if you get a decent intensity. And even if you get high intensity, I mean, I really wanna test some of these higher intensity because they're putting a lot of like a poor signal through a lot of inductance or a lot of windings and big coils. And my guess is some of those may not even have a great slew rate. They probably will though, because there's just so much horsepower that you're gonna, that's the thing with high intensity is almost by default, you're gonna get a relatively high slew rate, but then it gets to be too high and usually is the case. And studies show like the PhysioSim study showed that when you go to beyond 30 Tesla a second for bone healing, we're just talking about bones now, at 100 Tesla a second, it didn't work as well as 30. And 30 worked better than 10, right? So, and then 300 didn't even work as good as 10 Tesla a second. So you can see more is not better. And with the PhysioSim study, they had the same rise time in their signal, right? So they were just turning up the intensity and they were in that night. And I, in my buyer's guide, I list like seven or eight studies to show that not just this one more than, there's more studies to show that when you go to higher, the healing goes down at a certain point. And there's no consensus where this biphasic dose like rest because there's so many variables, but it does seem to me slew rate is the most biologically active aspect of PEMF in my opinion, because that's what's actually inducing microcurrents in your body through Faraday induction.

Bryant Meyers 11:52 
The intensity doesn't, you could take, to me intensity is for measuring static magnets, right? Because you can, if you'd like have a galvanometer, you can get a current going through a wire with just moving a magnet through Faraday induction, right? You could have a 20,000 Gauss neodymium magnet in the middle of that coil and you're sitting there doing nothing and you get no current. So it doesn't matter how much intensity you have, if you're not moving it, you're not gonna create any induction.

Now, because the body has moving charges through the blood and lymph, you get a relativistic effect from even stick magnets, right? But in general, the intensity, I tell people it's like saying that volume is the most, or loudness is the most important aspect of music. Saying intensity is the most important aspect of PEMF, because it just, yes, you need a certain amount of loudness to enjoy the music, if it's too quiet or too loud, that's kind of a good metaphor because with PEMF, I mean, I think you can go too low, you know, especially for regenerative benefits. For resonance and relaxation, yes, low intensity can be nice, but for really healing the body, I mean, you need a certain amount of volume, I mean, to get the slew rates that are therapeutic, but too much, you know, you hurt your eardrums, if you go to a rock concert and you're next to a speaker or something. I mean, it's just too much, but again, we'll talk about high intensities and it's places, it does have a place in a clinic, but it's just, to me, it's a more narrow range.

Andy Smith 13:37 
Yeah is a good notion to kind of break it down, you know, like I'm a good advocate for low intensity and high intensity and I think you are too, but it doesn't mean, you know, if I have a Ford car and a Lamborghini, you know, one is a hell of a lot more expensive than the other, but they're both going to get to the same destination. And I think that's what we're trying to kind of demystify a lot of the time.

And it's how you get there. And, you know, if you put your foot down in the Lamborghini, the wheels might spin. You might actually apply too much power. Yeah. So this is the, you know, it's an easy way to break it down and explain the difference between the high and the low intensity is that, you know, the destination's there. We're going to get there. It's kind of how we get there. Doing some, doing some digging before this episode, we, we looked at your buyer's guide and there was a bit about repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. So yeah, TMS versus high intensity studies. And there's a lot of confusion in that, which kind of inflate the numbers. Can you break that down for our audience?

Bryant Meyers 14:40 
So, a lot of people, a lot of the PEMF's high-intensity studies that are quoted by, and we'll talk about Dr. Pawlukmore, but his books are just the top-selling books I have in right here. They're actually, they're decent books. The first book is, I think, the better of his two books because now it does some of the stuff on intensities not right, some as recommendations, but just the history of PEMF. But he quotes in this book 508 PEMF studies, and I actually went through all of them. And I will get into this, I created the table, it took me three weeks to do this. And I not only went through this book, but I went through all of his e-books. He's got like a lot of these e-books online, I got like 12 of them. And I went through his other supercharged book, and then he has many contributing chapters and many books on electro-medicine, right? And so all the citations that he quoted on high intensity, over two-thirds of them are RTMS, repetitive transcranial medical stimulation. And I don't think that's a fair, it's fair to cite those studies for when people are looking for a home device and you cite an RTMS study to justify high intensity because you've seen like the neuro star, it's almost like a figure eight loop for the brain. And you have to be trained, I mean, this is for clinics only, right? And you're focusing the PEMF energy on a specific lobe and the brain for a specific purpose. And it's kind of, I mean, it is kind of like electroconvulsive therapy, which used to be called electroshock therapy. And they still do that, by the way, you know, but they put people under and then they put, and it's to me that's not, I mean, but I guess in psychiatry, when you have certain extreme cases of, you know, psychiatric disorders, sometimes there's a necessary place for it. So RTMS is certainly a more, you can say a softer or it's not as intense or as invasive as electroconvulsive therapy, right? But when you look at all the RTMS studies, they are mostly all on the brain, right? So when you reference those studies as a justification for high intensity, you're really, I mean, yes, it does have its place for brain health for, you know, the studies on RTMS center around PTSD, depression, especially major depression disorder, anxiety, addictions, you know, food addictions, smoking, drug addictions, even certain brain, they use it on certain brain disorders, even like Parkinson's and MS and TBI. Although interestingly, Dr. Pollock, one of his only studies he did on TBI was with Robert Dennis, and it was using a 10 millitestal intensity. So it's kind of ironic that his own study is middle intensity. But the RTMS does, again, it's got a lot of research, it's got FDA approval even, right? But it's just a narrow range of applicability for these psychiatric disorders in a few brain related physical issues. But interestingly, the MS, Parkinson's, a lot of those middle and lower intensity have actually a lot more studies for those. Where the RTMS will have more studies for seizures, PTSD, but even like depression, I found more studies with low and medium intensity than high intensity, even RTS.

Andy Smith 18:13 
Yeah I mean the confusion is coming in the market is that these are intensity devices that are designed to be used at home with a map and smaller applicator are citing these rtms studies which effectively you could never apply the same same application same you know so it's kind of saying. We have all these benefits but actually you you can't do that with our device so it's just causing a bit of confusion we're talking about studies and you mentioned studies there was three thousand two hundred studies that you've looked at.

Yeah and you reference that only two to three percent of these studies are actually using high intensity devices so. Right there's a very small amount of of studies out there at the moment that are using high intensity devices so again it's not to say that there's no benefits or no effects or anything but the studies around high intensity is a lot less at the moment but in the last last year. What is the most and least research intensity ranges that you've you found so going from low to high.

Bryant Meyers 19:13 
So just to be clear, I didn't read every one of those studies. This was what's called a meta-analysis, which is a study of studies, where you're basically taking studies and you're putting it into a submitted research paper where you're summarizing all the studies statistically and trying to come to conclusions about all that study.

So it's actually some of the best research is these meta-analysis type of studies. And this meta-analysis with PEMF looked at over 3,200 studies on PEMF. And what they found was 75%, now it says 60% in the table, but you've got to understand 20% did not list the intensity. So only 80%, because 80% listed the intensity, 60% of 80% is 3.4. So 3.4 or 75% of the studies that reported intensity were medium intensity between 1 and 10 millitestle or 10 to 100 gauss. That's a huge lion's share of PEMF studies. Okay, about 20% were low intensity or so, something like that. And then you had this sort of medium-high range that hardly end, maybe only a couple percent. And then the high intensity had two to three percent. So anything over, let's see, 10 millitestle, which is 100 gauss, was less than 5% of these studies. And then we'll talk about this too. And then on top of that, the medium intensity by far had the best cellular response, meaning that it's almost like the cells could hear the medium intensity better than low and high, because of all things, you got things like protein expression and gene expression, cell viability, meaning the cells are stronger, cell motility, cell differentiation for creating new tissue, cell proliferation where cells divide to create new tissue and to heal, because our cells are dying every day in our body, so we have to keep making new cells. And then transduction pathways, the H2A receptor for its inflammation. So all these at the cell level, the medium intensity were creating the most dynamic effects. It was like 50% versus 38% and 36% with high and low. Low is a little better than high, but medium was way better than both.

Andy Smith 21:46 
Yeah, yeah. And it's an interesting conclusion you come to because, you know, when I was designing Setter 8, like started the design eight years ago, it took six years to get it to market. It's the intensity range I ultimately settled for was one to a hundred gauss because the research I'd done at the time was finding that, you know, these were all the clinical papers that had been done on it. These were the ones that the results and everything. And yeah, but it's hard to get that across to everybody, you know, people because of this intensity myth. It's very often that people come to us and say, well, when you designed it, if you had complete free reign to design it, why did you only go up to a hundred and hundred gauss? And it's like, no, it's not only it's the reason why we went within that range because it's most effective to the cells. But something I hear quite a lot in the market and actually, you know, I'm quite guilty of saying this as well, which will come to where I got my training, which was actually kind of through Dr. Pawluk, but it's this notion of the higher intensity, the deeper the penetration. And it's, you know, quite a common thing that is mentioned and even some of the podcasts, the very beginning ones, we talk about intensity and the bigger frilled range and things. But actually, when testing the Celerate, you know, the mat only goes up to 50 gauss. I said only, I mean, the mat intentionally goes up to 50 gauss, but we were measuring the filled range at least two meters from the surface of the mat. So it kind of doesn't match up with this higher penetration, higher, you know, higher intensity. So can you explain why that's not so much the case in terms of you need higher penetration to get to, you know, to get to certain organs of the body or, you know.

Bryant Meyers 23:36 
There's actually several layers to the confusion, it's not just one. The first layer is just straightforward. Sometimes I've heard high intensity people say that the tissues will block certain amounts of energy, but it turns out that the body's transparent to magnetic fields. So the magnetic permeability constant is what it's called physics, is almost, I mean, it's in like a half a percent of free space, meaning magnetic fields go through you as much as they just go through space. See that's not the case with electric fields. Electric fields, your dielectric of your body is about 50, because water is about 50 and you're mostly water. Meaning electric fields get blocked from going all the way in, or they will go in, but they get blocked very quickly, and it's also frequency sensitive, so higher frequencies get blocked and different. So with magnetic fields, it's totally different. And light's the same way too, if you do red light therapy, you gotta deal with reflection, you gotta deal with scattering, you gotta deal with absorption, and the light only goes about, I don't know if you know this, but in red light therapy, you're only getting about five centimeters at ratio. And that's from the cadaver studies, I mean, so there's been some good research on red light to show that the light is not blown much more than five centimeters in. PEMF, I can lay somebody on a PEMF mat, measure above their belly button the intensity, take them off the mat, measure it again, and it's about the same. Now this doesn't mean that none of the energy is getting absorbed, it's just that, and it's really interesting, I think Robert Dennis kind of talked about this, I'm not gonna take credit for it, but if we have an injured area, like the cells rupture, all the electrolytes will leak out, and that becomes more conductive. So PEMF is almost like honing in on those injured areas. So the energy gets absorbed primarily in those damaged injured areas. And then what's not used just passes through. So if you've got a really accurate measurement, you're gonna find maybe it does get a little bit of absorption, but it's such a small amount. But for the most part, and you can do this test yourself, get somebody on the mat, measure the intensity, and then have them get off the mat and measure it again, and that kind of proves that the body's very transparent to magnetic fields, because you can't do that with red light. You don't see red light coming through your belly button unless you're like really, really thin. I mean, you can see it through your hand, because again, your hand's less than five centimeters, so I can shine a light on my hand and get light to come through. So if you could shine PEMF, or we can't see PEMF, but it would come through, you'd just shine right through your whole body. And then, okay, that's one layer. The other layer is the idea that magnetic fields drop off with an inverse square law, and this mainly comes from Dr.

Bryant Meyers 26:30 
Pawluk and his tables. And unfortunately, he's got this in all his books, all his articles. He talks about it on his podcast over and over again. And it's really the basis of his recommendations. And we'll get a little bit into it if you want to. It's really the Masari study in inflammation plus the inverse square law equals Dr. Pawluk's intensity recommendation, depending on what tissue you're trying to target. And it's alpha. But the problem with that is it's not the inverse square law. It's the Biot-Savart law. And I spent a lot of time going through this stuff, because initially, I was like, where in the world did he get this table from? It turns out, you see here, this is a half inch diameter sphere. His tables are coming from a half inch diameter sphere. And if you work out the inverse square law, one over R squared, you'll find that what I'm saying is true, and I know it sounds ridiculous, and it is ridiculous. But I don't think, see, Dr. Pollack just had no idea that the inverse square law only applies to point sources. And at zero distance away from a point source, you get a singularity, so you'd have an infinite intensity. So of course you can't do that. So you have to, you gotta use a sphere. So if you look at his tables at a half inch away, he says that you're now at 25%, okay? That comes from one over R, so the R here is a quarter inch. If you take another quarter inch, now that's a half inch, and then you find that that's 25% from a one quarter inch sphere. An easier way to look at is the Earth. The Earth, I'll put in kilometers since here in the UK. The Earth, the radius of the Earth is 6,300 kilometers. Now it is a one over R squared law for gravity, but the gravity drops off to one quarter, or one over R squared at an extra radius distance from the Earth, so you have to go up 6,300 kilometers, and then you find that the Earth's gravity drops off to one fourth based on the inverse square law. So you can apply the inverse square law to spheres, right? But then you would need a different table for every size sphere, but of course PEMF coils aren't spheres. But I promise you this is true. You can just take it as an hypothesis now, but if you work out the numbers on Dr. Pawluk's charts, and I challenge anybody out there watching this can prove this to themself, all of his charts are coming as if a PEMF magnetic source is a quarter inch radius sphere. And it's just what it is. Now, why he chose this, you gotta ask him. I don't know if he was smoking something that day, but it's ludicrous. And so, and again, when you use the Bios of Art law, you also have to have a different size, like I have here a tenant. Loops are easy to measure with the Bios of Art law, because when you got a coil, it's more complicated calculation. So I was able to look at the Bios of Art law with just to prove Dr. Pawlukwrong once and for all.

Bryant Meyers 29:40 
This is 10 and a half inches. This is 1.6 inches. I did many calculations, and you can see the calculations on my riotmyers.com, my full reviews and the 200 page buyer's guide you read. I've got all the calculations, and I did both the calculations and the measurements with the Hall-Fec probe, and they match very closely. And so Dr. Pawlukclaims that it, like I just say four inches away, because it's 15, this loop is about, it's 29 gauss in the middle. And then four inches away, it's still 15 gauss. That's Dr. Pawluk's magic number, 15 gauss, right?

And we'll talk a little bit about that. So he said at that distance, it's something like 0.06%. But the bottom line was his table was 7,600% wrong, meaning the intensity was 76 times higher than his tables predicted.

Because again, his tables are based on this. Look at this, what's the, I mean, you see the problem here? If you, this is a table to predict all PEMF devices that have all kinds of different coils. You see how absurd that is? And I know this sounds like Brian, what's Brian talking about? No, if you work out his tables, you will see they're all based on a quarter inch radius sphere and no PEMF coil. Now it turns out interestingly, that for really, really small coils, like this coil, this is Robert Dennis Isis coil, at three, four and five inches away, almost Dr. Pollock's tables worked okay for this coil at three, four or five inches away. So larger coils like your coil or any large PEMF coil, it's wildly inaccurate. It's not even close. And on a recent podcast with Ben Phillipson, Ben Phillipson actually took him through the Bios of art law. And he's sitting there explaining to him at the end of it all, Dr. Pawlukis like, well, the universe score law is still a good approximation, right? Like he just didn't even, he wasn't listening at all. So he's been pointed out his errors. So that's why I think we're at a point where, we know it's, we can be nice for a while, but 10 years have gone by and he's getting people buying these $12,600 devices based on the inverse square law and that's really his only justification. Yeah. Along with the Masari study, the 15 Gauss Masari study, right? That's it. I mean, look at all his stuff. He's got no other foundation to recommend high intensity except his, again, Sherry Pick citations.

Andy Smith 32:17 
Yeah, and I think the frustration comes from, you know, you offer consultations yourself. We offer consultations through the business new med where we hold other PEMF devices. And, you know, we were often kind of undoing a lot of the conversations that they had with Dr. Pawluk at through their consultations, because, you know, we'll have little old lady down the road who's trying to use PEMF for something. And, you know, she's been told that she needs 4000 gauss just to reach the kidneys. Yeah. And, you know, it's kind of that's where we're saying that this is completely inaccurate. And, you know, actually say

Bryant Meyers 32:53 
He says you need 1820 gauss to reach the kidneys. And that's actually his favorite example is the kidneys because he quotes a study, this Kuthumi study that shows that the kidneys are four inches to get all the way through. He cites that. And then he says, okay, because the Massari study, just so people know what we're talking about, is a really good study on inflammation, how PEMF shuts off inflammation. And I have a quote here I wanna read because it really debunks this whole position. Because this particular device they used was 1.5 millitussle, roughly, or 15 Gauss. But, and Dr. Pawluk actually quotes this because after 30 minutes of exposure, so there is a good, you could say case for doing 30 minutes because you get maximum, you get the maximum saturation of the A2A receptors. The A2A receptors are kind of like inflammation switches. You can shut off, this is just an easy way of saying it without getting too complicated. You can shut off inflammation with triggering the A2A receptor. And it turns out that a lot of pharmaceuticals target this receptor, but PEMF acts as what's called an agonist, which just means it stimulates, it's opposite of an antagonist, right? So it's stimulating the A2A receptor to shut off inflammation. So this study shows, makes a powerful case that PEMF shuts off inflammation. I mean, as good as some pharmaceuticals even, without all the side effects. And what they found was a saturation at 1.5 millitussle or 15 gouts. So again, here's another decent case for using medium intensity. What they found was that at 15 gouts, it just plateaus. And even, this is from Dr. Pollack's book. This is not even from the study. Dr. Pollack in his book says after 30 minutes of exposure, the receptors became saturated with a 1.5 millitussle magnetic field. The effect plateaued with intensities greater than 1.5 millitussle. This means, this is from Dr. Pollack's book now, his own words, this means that intensities above 1.5 millitussle produce no additional benefit. Just take that in for a minute. This is the study he is quoting in all of his podcasts. And you see that plateau, you see that he's just bringing it up all the time because it's the basis of his recommendations. Like you say, an old lady that's told to get a 4,000 gouts machine, he's quoting this study and his inverse square law to deliver 15 gouts based on the inverse, what's not the inverse square law, of course, but he's using his table to try to get 15 gouts at varying distances into the body, depending on the condition. Like for them, he'll tell you, you need a really high intensity because you've got to get all the way through the brain.

Andy Smith 35:46 
Yeah.

Bryant Meyers 35:46 
But it's not the inverse square law. And this study itself didn't use more than 1.5 millitesla. This is the irony of it.

The very study quotes, it was for the knees for articular cartilage regeneration, right? The articular cartilage is the cartilage on the, unlike the bone of the knee. So they found in this study that they could not only turn off inflammation, but regenerate cartilage over five hours a day for 90 days. Again, putting it in perspective, you need to stick with your PEMF treatments over time. True regeneration can take time. But the study itself, putting their device on the knee, they weren't following Dr. Pollock's table. They were just using 15 gauss at the surface. It's like he's twisting that study in a way that the study didn't even do. It's just, this is why he needs to be exposed now because it's just, it's beyond ludicrous what he's saying. And people aren't doing like what you and I are people that are really critical digging deep into, okay, what is he really saying here? Let's really read that study that he's referencing. Let's really look at his inverse score law tables and even see if they're even accurate because he's not a physicist, right? Yeah. It's just, it's beyond bad. I mean, and like I showed you with this loop, you can get 15 gauss with the 30 gauss, I mean, with only the only need here in this case, 30 gauss for a 10 inch coil.

Andy Smith 37:18 
And that's the frustration a lot of the time because as we've mentioned on this podcast, a lot of times before, the intensity of a device really does dictate the cost. And a lot of that is down to the technology that has to go into creating these high intensities. You know, it needs a much bigger driver, much more copper, much more coil. So it does drive the cost up. And that's a genuine, you know, that's a genuine flaw for for higher intensity devices. But the problem is a lot of the time people having these consultations that they're being told that they have to have these thousands, thousands of gauss device machines which go into the tens of thousands of dollars. And they really don't need them. It's it's really overkill for someone who is going to get, you know, in my opinion, your opinion, the same results, if not better results with something that is a lot cheaper, more, let's say cheaper, more cost effective for them and more effective in the in the more medium intensity range. You know, I'm a user of both and and we're at the moment developing a higher intensity device to accelerate. So we know that there is a market and there is a need for higher intensity devices, but it's in the right setting. You know, it's it's it's not given to people as the only option, which is happening a lot of the time. And we're trying to kind of demystify this. You mentioned inflammation, which was important as well, because inflammation is something that PEMF devices have shown to be so effective, like you said, and inflammation is, you know, one of the key drivers. So many things, pain, all sorts of conditions. Yeah. But interestingly, when I was reading through some of your documents, you're saying that there isn't actually any studies related to high intensity and inflammation yet.

Bryant Meyers 39:02 
Pawluk citations. I mean, remember, I haven't had a chance to go through every PEMF study, but I've gone through 750 of them. But see, you'd think Dr. Pawluk would try to find every high intensity study that he could to back up. I don't know. I don't know his motivations, but from all of his studies, there wasn't any.

In fact, the high intensity only had 17 conditions in total. And with medium intensity, again, based on Dr. Paulick's own citations, I found over the conditions that medium intensity addressed, including inflammation and a lot of regenerative things that you didn't see much regenerative studies from high intensity was more analgesia. That was the number one. Number two was muscle stimulation for especially urinary incontinence. Because again, remember those abdominal belts that make your muscles twitch to build your ab muscles? I mean, a high intensity PEMF is a muscle stimulator, but to me, you're almost getting to the point of it's almost like a type of shock therapy at that point when you're getting such high intensity to make your muscles twitch to strengthen your muscles. Yes, that's beneficial for urinary incontinence, right? Because it's an involuntary muscle and you can't really work that out with any exercise you have to... I mean, again, maybe you could do some things, but typically having that helps with urinary incontinence. Drug delivery is another thing with high intensity studies, but that's the electroporation effects of high intensity. High intensity makes the cells more porous. Now, medium intensity will as well, just not as exaggerated, but the double edged sword of doing that, when you make the cells that porous, remember the cells are very protective. They want to guard against viruses and toxins and they got these very intelligent channels that allow just certain things to come in, nutrients, oxygen, whatever. So when you open up the cells like that, yes, you can deliver maybe chemotherapy drugs a little better, medications better, but then you're also opening it up to other things that you don't want to go in the cells. That's, again, a very specialized application of PEMF because it's not making drug delivery because of its improving, its digestive, whatever. It's just making the cells more porous because of electroporation. And then we talked about all the brain studies with high intensity with psychiatry and some other. And then there's really beyond that, I found maybe one bone study, which wasn't a very good study, because it was three minutes a day with high intensity for the bones. And the studies on medium intensity for bones were way better. And there were over 17 of them just from Dr. Paul. And like, let's see, MS, Parkinson's, they did have a few of those, but medium intensity had all of those as well. That was really it. There were no other studies to back up high intensity. So research supports it for only a small range, certainly the penetration argument, which we just debunked. I mean, there's no justification for that.

Bryant Meyers 42:10 
In fact, I found an old video, Dr. Pollock, with the QRS and metathera, you can watch it in my older video. He debunks himself. He shows that he's even bragging with the QRS. Look, you get plenty of field way up here at two feet.

Andy Smith 42:24 
Right yeah we saw that video I was interested yeah yeah.

Bryant Meyers 42:26 
So it's just, I don't know if he's even believing his own advice anymore. I don't know if there's some cognitive dissonance going on in his brain, but... Because he's seen that low intensity can penetrate firsthand, so I don't know.

Andy Smith 42:41 
But, um, and it's at the point in which you start questioning the motivations, you know, because if you've got a customer on the phone, you've got the ability to sell a system to them, do you sell a $2,000 system to them or do you sell a $15,000 system to them? Which one's going to make you the most money? It's, you know, this is where the gray lines are starting to appear and the cracks and, you know, whether this is the motivation or, you know, and it's, it's up to us to kind of differentiate between all the, all the benefits. Because, um, you know, like I say, it's good that we talked about some specific benefits of high intensity because I don't want people to listen to me listening to this episode, thinking that all we're doing here is trying to sway people away from high intensity. But we're just trying to debunk some of the claims that are out on the market and another one of those, um, you know, like I mentioned the, the Ford and the Ferrari or the Lamborghini earlier, you know, one's a lot more expensive. Um, a lot of people will say that high intensity heals faster. So it will get you to your destination quicker. Is that something you agree with?

Bryant Meyers 43:49 
Absolutely not and again, I'm going by research not just anecdotes because I mean Yes, high intensity, especially like the I mean the unit I have the pulse XL was a $40,000 device And that seems to be here in America the number one unit used in clinics, right for whatever reason It seems to be the most popular one for clinics And there are a lot of anecdotes, right? You could save testimonials anecdotal testimonials But then I can tell people, you know when I did work with a low intensity company I collected over 500 testimonials so I could I could show them. Okay, you have all these testimonials, but I can show you a bunch of testimonials In fact, I felt the ones with a low intensity were a lot more powerful when you took it the whole body of work of low intensity in testimonials Because I haven't I've only been worked with medium intensity for about a year now So besides anecdotes, I mean, you know, it's the research You know, it doesn't support it healing faster. In fact the medium intensity When you look at actual tissue regeneration, not like I mentioned just briefly All those high intensity studies that I mentioned that even dr. Pawluk himself cites Except for the bone one, but the bone one was not a great study. There were there were really no regenerative studies. So if anything I don't think high intensity is really all that great for regeneration and actual healing But if you have a clinic, you know when people are in chronic pain, it is good for analgesia because Again, and all those studies dr. Pawluk quoted the number one Study was for analgesia pain relief. So there are a lot of PEMF studies for analgesia that are high intensity and there certainly is for A non-invasive non-pharmaceutical approach to pain relief, right? but again, I've put it to the pepsi challenge using high intensity and even a medium and I Sometimes the high intensity does work a little better for pain But then sometimes I don't know how to explain it My medium intensity device works better than the high intensity for even pain But for research, I know and I can talk about again medium intensity. There's tissue regeneration studies on on bone There's so many studies on bone regeneration And it's really you really want medium intensity if you're looking for like osteoporosis non-union fractures broken bone High intensity is not the way to go. In fact, the physio sim study FDA approved studies Show that when you go higher the bone regeneration goes down and there's more and then the dienes study I've got a couple other studies on the bones that show that when you induce too much current the bone doesn't regenerate as well So if anything it heals you slower For most shoe and again i'm going by research. I'm not just i'm not going by anecdotes The nice thing about research is the good research is double blind like the physio sim studies were randomized controlled trial studies They were really well The studies were really well done To rule placebo effect anecdotes.

Bryant Meyers 46:45 
You've got placebo and you can you can get somebody Make their muscles twitch and tell them it's the best thing in the world And that maybe it's just all it is is a muscle stimulator and they can oh, wow I can feel it if they really believe it's healing them They can muster a high placebo and they can create a high level of healing That's the one with anecdotes is and again with low intensity medium. Everybody's got testimonials.

It seems right and hard to believe testimonials anymore, um, but But I mean I personally have seen PEMF change lives and I collected a lot of video testimonials because I felt the videos were more Convincing because written with ai now you can almost just write get ai to write testimonials for you So I tell people don't and you got to be careful Just a little side side note like with online reviews like reddit threads and online stuff You have to know that people are disguising themselves under fake Usernames that work for companies coming in saying that this brand is great. You can't believe reviews and testimonials so much anymore Either some are valid, but then a lot aren't so but but good research That should be the bedrock in the foundation of your investigation. That's why my buyer's guide has now over 400 research references Because anecdotes have like the limitations I just mentioned and then you know, people just exaggerate things on top of that Um, so that's the problem with you know, it's in in but but all these tissue regenerations seem and it's not just bone It's tendon ligament nerve skin Joints cartilage all these tissues medium intensity had especially the some of them. Sorry studies They really showed like really great effects on regenerated cartilage even disc regeneration You know which seen with the medium intensity that i've uh that i'm working with which is a similar intensity range to yours Someone grew a couple millimeters in their their spine and we had before and after x-rays to show it, right? So so for regeneration what you want is a medium intensity in my this is my advice now For home use to use every day and give yourself try to get a half an hour because again The masari study very well very give a good case for a half an hour To such a to a receptors for a half an hour Because when you shut off inflammation, you also turn on healing. It's like a teeter totter Because information is catabolic, right? So is if you're an inflamed inflamed state, it's hard for the body to regenerate As soon as you shut off inflammation the teeter totter Gets now into an an anabolism or an anabolic, uh building regenerating effect so so you definitely um You do get the fact that the medium intensity had had the anti-inflammatory studies goes with the the the regeneration as well But you know,

Bryant Meyers 49:38 
yeah, give it like three give it like three months like if you have a real some real damage You know, it takes your body time to heal but My experience has been that PEMF seems to to cut the healing time in half On on the average and in many cases it just heals better Then so not only does it cut the time in half and helps you heal faster, but it helps you heal better, too And I don't think high intensity Does does I mean again i'm going by research and my own experience too, but mainly by research that Show me I mean i'm still waiting.

I mean show me the studies that high intensity regenerates better And good luck i've looked I haven't seen many

Andy Smith 50:20 
So a couple of things I want to touch on in your answer there was one of which is that, you know, people can feel high intensity and they can't feel low intensity and that they tend to be in a lot more clinics. You said the pulse excel is, you know, is the kind of device of choice in a lot of professional settings in America. And I think that's important because, you know, a lot of people think that, you know, putting a value to a product as well, you know, if they if they've got $40,000 to spend, they want to spend it on that most expensive equipment, whether it's going to get them more results or the same results, they kind of just want to spend the money knowing that they're going to be one of these clinics with this high intensity device. It also down to the people can feel it, you know, they want to come, they want people to come in, they want them to be, you know, kicked hard by this PEMF device is going to jolt their muscles. And like you said, you know, even if it gives these guys a placebo effect when they leave, whichever way, as long as they leave happy, that's what these clinics want to do. So yeah, it's it's an important point to kind of summarize that you bought into there. And you know, it's a benefit of high intensity in terms of the feeling that you get from it. But like I say, whether it's getting us to the destination quicker or not is, you know, to be proved by science eventually.

Bryant Meyers 51:35 
The proof is on the side of more of a medium and so even you can say low intensity has a lot more regenerative studies and high Intensity and so again, I've I can't say I've looked at every PMS study But see dr. Pawlukbeing a high intensity promoter The fact that I went I mean, I literally went through all of his citations and all of his books contributing chapters ebooks I got I've got them all it took me three weeks and 750 and many and I removed the duplicates So it's actually a lot more than that because he cites a lot of the same studies over and over so after and There were very very few regenerative studies and all of what he was with referencing where he himself was referencing dozens of regenerative studies for medium intensity.

I mean does I mean so Yeah, you're right. Maybe there's still more investigation to be had but because we saw from that meta analysis only two to three percent Of the studies are high intensity Pretty sure dr. Pawluk's high intensity citations were a pretty good sample size of of what high intensity studies are out there because I'm Pretty sure he would be wanting to get as many of those as possible in his in his articles, right?

Andy Smith 52:45 
Yeah, I mean, the other thing I wanted to touch on the second thing in your previous answer was the reviews online, you know, being a brand owner myself, you know, we get approached by people from social media, affiliates, brands, ambassadors and all these sorts of things. And a lot of the time it's, you know, lace my hand with some with some money and I'll say whatever you want me to say. So there is a lot of that going on, you know, there's a lot of kind of multi-level sales, there's a lot of affiliate marketing, there's all these sorts of things, you know, and even worse, we're seeing it more so with these, you know, crystal Chinese gemstone mats because they've got, you know, I know I've had a look into it. You know, you can go on Alibaba, you can buy these things for $200 even less, you know, and you just throw your logo at them and they'll put their logo on it and away you go. You know, you've got a PEMF mat that does five different things very poorly, but they're selling them for eighteen thousand, eighteen hundred dollars. And, you know, the margin in those things is incredible, you know, no wonder these guys have got so much marketing budget and so many affiliates on their books and so many people singing their praises because, you know, they're lacing lots of palms for all the, you know, the margin they're being made and I know manufacturing my own device, how much it costs to actually put a good PEMF device together, you know, and to try and compete with these crystal gem mats is very difficult, but we're starting to lean against the, you know, they're not competition of ours, we need to, you know, we need to sell our mat for what it's worth, so, yeah. I mean, you and I.

Bryant Meyers 54:27 
You and I are two of the few people that are really exposing them on the larger scale, as far as larger YouTube channels. Even Dr. Pawluk just yesterday interviewed the owner of higher dose and is like, oh, this is a great alternative to lower intensity systems that costs a lot more. You buy these MLM systems, they're 6,000 and yours is only 1,000. He's encouraging her with the higher... I couldn't believe it. I'm like, are you kidding me? He's like, no, helping them. He's interviewing, like you do, a lot of different people. But in good ethics, I couldn't interview someone that was not a good product. Maybe I'm being judgmental, but I know in the case of the higher dose, because I've owned it, dissected it, tested it extensively. I don't want to say too much about it. It's better to say these crystal Chinese mats in general, because the easy identifier is, does it have crystals or gemstones? If the answer is yes, to my... Now, I've got 12 of them that's pretty much garbage from my testing. It's like, I don't say that lightly. I say that because there's nothing in those mats that's of really real any therapeutic value. In fact, it's opposite. You can measure electric field, dirty electricity. You can see that it's just 60 Hertz or in your case, 50 Hertz just getting turned on and off. There's no real signal generator. You just see 50 Hertz or 60 Hertz. When I first tested this, I couldn't believe it. I really thought I was going to see a 7.83 sine wave when I first got the first one that claimed to have a 7.83. But what did I see was 60 Hertz turned on and off about seven or eight times a second in a one window. I'm like, what in the world is going on here? I finally figured it out. I was like, oh my gosh, that's just 60 Hertz. They're just flipping on your outlet power on and off, like a switch, and putting it through a cheap coil and calling that PEMF.

Andy Smith 56:31 
Yeah, and I think the problem is they've got hold of this technology and they've tried to make it as cheap as possible. And unfortunately, as we know, dissecting these maps, it's not a cheap technology. It's not something that can just be thrown together. You know, we did an episode with Steve Bredette on here and we, you know, he mystery shopped a couple of these Chinese manufacturers and asked them a bunch of questions. And a lot of it, they couldn't answer, you know, they didn't know what the intensity was. They didn't even know what slew rate was. There was, you know, it was just, and they started asking us how to how to do the intensity testing and all these sorts of things. And you think, you know, you're making these in a mass mass product production line, selling thousands of people. And you don't even really know what it does. And again, the brand owners, you know, do I blame them for giving out cheap, nasty knockoff products? You know, not so much. It's just that they aren't doing the testing. They don't really know what they're selling.

Bryant Meyers 57:25 
really don't know. I know some people that know some owners of these companies. I won't name them the company name, but they really, they were actually open to maybe even talk. He's like, you know, they might want to talk to you, Brack, because they really think they're promoting something that's good.

I think they don't even know what they don't know. They don't, I think they just saw everybody's promoting these and that it's reviewed very well. And you and I know it's all fake review sites that are in many cases by one company. I want, again, I can't name the name, but he's got like LLCs and he's got all these review sites set up, but he owns the review sites and it's just, it's just a scam promoting jump. Then you can see there's their number one, of course. I mean, of course they're number one because it's a person that's the company that owns the product is creating the review site.

Andy Smith 58:13 
That's the thing exactly and you can't believe these review sites and even the Reddit threads now, people are trying to find unbiased advice and you got people from all, especially the armies of affiliates from all these gemstone mats that are creating seemingly what looks like actual end user profiles. Oh yeah, I've used the so-and-so crystal mat I've gotten great results, but that's just an affiliate going in Reddit threads and putting all these comments everywhere and oh yeah, this is really good, this is really good. Yeah, exactly. So you can't, there's no, unfortunately, there's really no place on, even these Facebook groups now, people are coming in and it's just promotion. I mean, it's just, It's the way the world is these days. You can never go wrong with defaulting to actual clinical studies, to actual physics. Like, let's look at a slew rate. I mean, to me, it's like, this is how you transfer energy wirelessly. I mean, PEMF mats are wireless energy transfer. We have to understand a little bit of physics that you have to have a fast changing magnetic field to transfer the energy to your tissues and cells. This is not debatable. I mean, now what's debatable is when this energy goes into your body, what are the mechanisms of how the body transduces that energy? That isn't still fully known. Although we can see things like the A2A receptor transduction and other pathways that get triggered. It's still, but we know that the only way to get energy in is either through, well, you can do magnetic resonance, but as I explained, the higher the slew rate, the more frequencies you get on a spectrum analyzer. So by default, if you have a high slew rate, you got a lot of frequencies in the spectrum. So the device that I've been kind of affiliating with also, it's like zero to 20,000 Hertz on a fast Fourier transform. So beautiful spectrum of frequencies. And yours is probably a nice spectrum as well. If you do an FFT like on your, or like a spectrum analyzer, I bet you have a good spectrum as well, because if you have a fast changing signal, so you get the only two ways, this is the only two ways that you can transfer energy wirelessly with a magnetic field is slew rate or Faraday induction and resonance, magnetic resonance. And there's not any others. So that's why when you stick with science, it's like, okay, if slew rate's the way to do it, then maybe we should be looking for a higher slew rate because it does have not only research, but physics to support. I mean, it just makes sense that that's the case. And yeah.

Andy Smith 01:00:49 
And also, one thing I want to touch on on this episode is the application of of a PEMF device, because especially when it comes to the high intensity range, but now also some low intensity range devices, they only just have a localized applicator. And again, it kind of just comes into the PEMF bracket and they give the same benefits. And, you know, you're going to get whole body information reduction and all this sort of thing. Um, it's always been my recommendation that if you want a PEMF device, you start with a full body mat, you know, with whatever, you know, if you want a localized device to, to put it on an area and to intensify in that area. Great, but start with a full body mat. Is that the same notion that you have?

Bryant Meyers 01:01:35 
Oh, yeah, I've been saying that for 18 years. I mean, and again, this just comes from my holistic understanding because I was pre-med at Georgia Tech. I mean, I got a physics degree, but I had a double degree in biology. That's why I took a year off and did work study. That's why it took me so long to graduate.

But I did have another degree, I mean, pretty much another degree in biology pre-med. But the body, the human body, when you think about it, when you do a full body treatment, let's say you have sprained your ankle even, or even stub your toe, you need to get oxygen and nutrients and, well, from your digestive system, your heart, your lungs, down there, and from your immunity, the neutrophiles, the macrophages, they all have to migrate down to the injured area. That's a whole body phenomena. And then you've got the nervous system and the endocrine system sending all the signals and messages to trigger all the healing responses. This is a whole body phenomena. So even stubbing your toe is a whole body healing event, you know, certainly the brain is kind of the center of it all. And then when you really think about how the body's interconnected through the nervous system, the cardiovascular system, the blood vessels, the lymphatic system, the meridian, the primovascular meridian system, the connective tissue matrix, these webworks are these fractal branching trees, I call them. They connect your body from head to toe. And it makes, it's always made sense to me that you want to open up all those networks. That's a full body mat. You can't do that with a local applicator. I mean, you can do it a little bit, but, you know, when you think about it though, if PEMF increases nitric oxide, which helps not just with blood diet or blood flow, but helps with lymphatic flow and nitric oxide helps your tracheal, you know, your lungs, the airways to dilate too for airflow. So if, just take that as one example, if PEMF increases nitric oxide, which studies show it does, then don't you want to improve that flow of lymph blood and air throughout the whole body, not just one little area? I mean, now yes, you could say, well, it's going to stimulate nitric oxide down there and that could migrate to the whole body, but not nearly to the effect if you can do the whole body. It's like red light therapy. I have a red light therapy bed. I'm fortunate enough to have one. And, you know, I work with a company that makes red light therapy beds, someone on my other side, Passions, but I've used little red light pan, little pads and stuff. And there's nothing like a, I mean, it's just absolutely next level. I mean, I felt that just energetically, even a full, I had a full body. A bed is just next level. So in the same with PEMF, you know, I've used a lot of local applicator PEMF devices and it's like, you know, doesn't seem to do as much. I mean, if now I do think it's like a one, two punch, right? It's like you do the full body mat, like a half an hour. And this is Dr. Pollock. I agree with he actually, again, he references his Missouri study.

Bryant Meyers 01:04:35 
So he also recommends a half an hour. So I think that's a good, it's just, he's recommending high intensity instead of media, but half an hour full body and then use the local applicator. And there's really no eye limit.

I mean, again, look at the study with inflammation and regenerating cartilage. They were doing five hours a day for 90 days. Now the slew rate on that device is about three and a half Tesla second. I figured out it wasn't like a, a, a, a superlative or great slew rate, but it was, you know, decent, I guess you could say that's modest. So my, my guess is if it was a better slew rate, my, but you wouldn't maybe have to do five hours a day. So I'm not saying to do five hours a day with local applicators, but, but the really, if you, if I'm, if I hurt myself, I mean, and I'm just relaxing or reading a book or watching a movie or something, I'll, I might do several hours a day with a local applicators. Um, I don't skip my full body mat session to open everything up. Yeah. Right. So I think that's the best one, two punch because the benefit of doing local application for long periods of time is that I found with the full body mats, you can trigger too much of a healing crisis. Cause when you open up everything for too long of a period of time, it can just be too much, right? Where the local applicators, you're just focusing on a spot. And then you can do that for several hours. Typically no problem. No herxheimer, no detox reaction, not that healing crisis is a bad thing. I mean, just saying it's, it's, it's, it's just a lot to have your full body. Like to do several hours a day on a full body mat where several hours a day of local applicator is no problem. Yeah. But a half hour is a really good to me, a good goal to try to do a half hour full body every day, even, even versus 15 minutes twice a day. I would say just do a half hour once a day.

Andy Smith 01:06:26 
And I've seen these like large coil devices coming out onto the market now like a big coil that you hold against your body and it's not necessarily a high intensity device so it's it's kind of like low intensity big coil that you kind of claim less is more use less turns but more current. What's your thoughts on these kind of big coil products without without the math.

Bryant Meyers 01:06:49 
I had a magnosphere, I rented it for a couple months, it was six inch diameter coils, huge. I set a chair between two huge coils and it was using pico tesla intensities, which is a trillion tuba test, very, very low. They had some good anecdotal testimonials, but I felt it was very, very subtle, right? I think, again, to me, the lower intensity I do think can heal. It just heals a little bit slower maybe than medium. A lower intensity, even for healing, I would take over high intensity based on studies I've seen. Because again, lower intensity still has more studies than high intensity for healing. But larger coils, it does become more difficult to get a higher slew rate the larger the coil. Now, there are some ways to kind of, you could say, little hacks that you can do several coil type of design in large coils to lower the inductance and to lower the resistance so you can get a higher slew rate. But typically, with larger coils most of the time, you're gonna run into a lot of inductance. Then you get hot spots where the coil is and then a cold spot in the middle. That's the other problem with large coils. Unless, again, unless you do it right, you have to, there really is a way to create larger coils to give a pretty uniform feel. But it's kind of a tricky engineering hack that you gotta get into. But typically, I don't know which ones you're referring to, because you're not talking about the amp coil or some of the element or the- Yes.

Andy Smith 01:08:36 
more similar to Amco and Helio products. Those are like, yes, they're not like huge, but they're.

Bryant Meyers 01:08:42 
If there's many windings and they're just, they're definitely not, they claim to be full body treatment and yes, you can make the case that magnetic fields, yes, they're like these, you know, electromagnetic fields do have an infinite range, but you got to understand, you know, it's not the inverse square law, but with the Bius of Art law, the intensities do drop off. But the main flux that you're getting is through the center of the coil, perpendicular into the body. And then the field, it's like the energy flows are like a torus around the coil, it's like a toroidal flow, right? Like same as a bar magnet, you know, like, so, but I still think you really want to get a full body mat, but then you do want good local applicators to really work, to really drill in on those injured areas so you can work, because that will help you to heal that injured area faster. It's to do the longer sessions. Sometimes people just don't do, they say, oh, it's PEMF's not working for me. It's like, how long you've been using it two weeks? It's like, well, you know, you have an injury. You need to get on more, but not at least a 90 day mindset and putting in the time. If you're just sitting there watching TV, just put your PEMF local applicator on your knee or whatever it is. It's not hard. You're just, you know, the loop, you just put the loop like, or your little thing, you just velcro it around your knee. I mean, it's not, you might as well, I mean, if you're in, if I'm in pain, if I've injured myself, I'm sometimes, I've done up to four to five hours in a day with PEMF. So, I mean, you know, when I had a car accident, my hand was all blown up like this. I probably was doing five or six or seven hours a day with PEMF.

Andy Smith 01:10:20 
And I think that's important, you know, we're saying like localized devices you can use for longer periods of time, you know, especially if it's battery operated, you strap it on and leave it there and you know, it's it's it's working its magic with the heart with the full body map, you know, you don't necessarily need to use it for quite such a long period. And obviously, we don't want to encourage people to be sitting there for hours and all that sort of thing, you know, you want to be want to be getting up and moving.

Bryant Meyers 01:10:43 
Oh, you're right. Of course. Yeah. I mean, it goes the same just saying if you're, if you're, if you're just sitting there watching a movie anyway, I mean, you can, you know, or reading a book. I mean, again, if I have an injury, I can even be on the computer doing stuff. And if it's, if it's my knee or whatever the injured areas, I can just put that on there. And I mean, again, you know, Robert Dennis, you know, makes a good case for that as well is that using a medium or lower intensity for longer periods of time, he's found helps to regenerate better and, you know, then this high intensity for short period of time approach doesn't. Yeah. Like you said, in a clinic, high intensity, I think that is what you said is a good point for a good application, high intensity in a clinic, because people want to feel something. And if you them excited about PEMF, even if they don't really know what they're, what's going on. But then the end of the day, you need to educate them that they should be going home with a medium intensity device, ideally use every day. So that to me, the guts, the guts, the guts. The goal of a clinic is that they, people come in and use PEMF and get excited about it. Maybe you help their pain, give them some analgesie with high intensity, because it will do that. But then educate them that they need to invest in a, in their own mat to use every day. Yeah. Yeah.

Andy Smith 01:11:56 
And something we haven't really talked about before on the podcast and something I wanted to talk to you about because we mentioned it in your notes and in your research and something we found when we were developing CELLER8was that we had the ability to change the polarity from North to South and we were trying to figure out which one was better, whether North was better, South was better, or if there was a certain kind of, you know, if there was a right way around it. But what we actually found is that there was a bipolar or a unipolar approach, which is effectively switching it from North to South quite frequently, was actually getting a better result to the cells and to energising the cells a bit quicker. Again, is that something you found with the research you've been doing?

Bryant Meyers 01:12:52 
Well, I mean, that's again, it comes from Robert Dennis's research with the NASA study and I mean, because he and he I like how he explains it, because if you have it has to do with kind of the signals of the square, it's always going in the same direction. And if it's unipolar, it's it's going to be an oscilloscope, it's going to always be above the X axis or right or or and but it's it's sort of like the way Robert Dennis explains is that you you don't want to over overcharge. And you want particular areas. So it's sort of like when you when you go, let's say 10 square ways this way, then 10 square ways on the then it'll be upside down to make it a bipolar where it's all balanced. It kind of is a net zero kind of. So you're not overstimulating any one area sort of like and even like the pacemakers, you know, the currents, they make them more bipolar because they find that the that they wear out more. But it's all if it's always going in the same direction, it'll it'll it can cause little burns on the tissue number one and it just continue. It'll just wear out the system. So by by backtracking, it's like you're you're flowing the ions in one direction, creating energy, then then you're going you're turning around going the other way. So that way you're not overstimulating any one area. It's kind of like you're creating a net zero. It's everything gets balanced out. Well, it's just I guess the word is balanced here. It's a more balanced way of doing a good square way. So and I talked about this in my buyer's guide, mainly from some of Robert Dennis's like research and motivations. And it makes sense to me. I mean, because again, you have engineering sort of like a proof in engineering with pacemakers, why the bipolar is a better, more balanced way to do it. And so, so, yeah, I do think and again, you can you can either go one up and one down or you could do five up and then five down that still balances. So it's sort of like, you know, in calculus, you're integrate when you integrate the whole thing, it should come out to zero because the amount of negative is equal to the amount of positive. So just, yeah, sorry, just just.

Andy Smith 01:14:58 
kind of wrap up this episode a little bit because we, you know, we, we, we're really here to talk about intensity and that sort of thing. So, yeah. Where would you say our situations where you would, you know, cause we've, we've debunked a lot of the myths in the high intensity range. Where would you say high intensity is best suited? So, you know, is there a situation that someone has spoken to you and you think actually, you know what, not low, not medium, but high intensity is best for you. When, when would you say that?

Bryant Meyers 01:15:27 
Sure. A person for home use really never for me. Now, if it's a clinic, it's different because this is what I've come to find is that when you have a lower medium intensity in a clinic, people are impatient. They come into a clinic, they want to feel something. It's almost like they go away unsatisfied if they don't feel something.

Now, unfortunately, like with some things, you definitely feel like if you get a massage, you feel that. If you go in a sauna, you certainly feel a sauna. Red light's a little more subtle, but you certainly feel some of the warmth from it. PEMF is just more subtle. To put it in perspective, some of the healing transduction pathways and signaling pathways take up to four hours after a session to start triggering. A lot of the healing isn't even happening when you're on the mat necessarily. I mean, some is, but it's got like a domino effect that ripples into the future. Because people want instant gratification, it's just the nature of, I mean, here in America, for sure, I can speak for America. Everybody wants fast results. They want to feel something now.

High intensity gives people a taste of, yes, this is doing something and it is very good at analgesia. Again, over 100 million Americans are in chronic pain. High intensity in a clinic, or a pain clinic especially, would be a good place for high intensity because it does help to numb the pain. But then again, if I'm going to be a responsible educator for these clinics, I'm going to be like, you should have a couple shelves stacked of medium intensity devices and be trying to get people, send them home with a medium intensity so they can, as quickly as possible, start to do the real healing. Again, of course, as we talked about, high intensity has a place in psychiatry and RTMS, but that's a very, most clinics aren't going to have an RTMS system. Again, most clinics here in America have like, say, the pulse XL. Now, I will say the high intensity is very invigorating. So I guess that's another, if you're just a multimillionaire and you can buy everything. But I don't know if I would use it every day, but it is, you do get kind of a little bit of an energy rush. I mean, it is very energizing. I mean, I'm not going to say it's like a five, I give the five hour energy example sometimes versus multivitamin. It is kind of like that. I mean, because it's very stimulating, but so let's see, where's another application? Well, again, certainly pelvic floor and that's like the QRS. The QRS has like this pelvic floor stimulator and some of those urinary incontinence studies. So any type of clinic that is dealing with that, I mean, I think that's a great application for high intensity.

Drug electroporation, again, drug delivery.

Andy Smith 01:18:29 
exactly my application for for high intensity because you know being someone who's developed a medium intensity device and now kind of in the middle of developing a higher intensity device, I'm my basic use is using medium intensity or low intensity every day, that's kind of my basic go-to product and then I'll maybe reach for a high intensity once a week, you know, to kind of give me that boost, give me just something that, you know, the combination of the two therapies but like you say, I wouldn't really ever turn to a high intensity device daily, I just think it's too much energy. No, it's too much to do.

Bryant Meyers 01:19:04 
every day. And I use that every day for three months. I mean, but I do, of all the high intensities I've tried, this is my favorite. All the ones I've tried, pulse XL is my favorite. But I just know too much about it. I mean, I take my, you know, I can take these RF meters or my tri-field meter, you know, or my cornet. I don't just do one test, I'll do multiple tests just to make sure it's... And all the high intensity units are, there's a lot of high frequencies in all of them that I've tested. So again, they're short bursts, yes. But you know, and that's why if you do it once a week, it's not like you're not getting that much dirty electricity because it's just for a short period of time, you know. But if you do this every day as, you know, what's his name, a well-known electro-smog researcher, he talks about the cumulative effects of electro-smog. It's just like, it's almost, which is a little counterintuitive, you wouldn't think that's the case. But it is like mercury. I mean, if you eat the wrong kind of fish over a long period of time, you can get mercury toxicity because it builds up slowly, right? Well, electro-smog also is cumulative. And there's a study to show this cumulative effect of electro-smog. So again, this is another reason why I wouldn't do it every day.

But in general, I don't think that it's dangerous. I mean, maybe in the past, I might have been a little stronger in those words. And I think some of the MRI studies show that you need to get to a cardiac stimulation. You're going to feel nerve pain well before that. So I guess the good news is, and I tell people when you use high intensity, if you're feeling nerve pain or any discomfort, turn it down. And this is not a no pain, no gain thing. Because the cardiac stimulation, or the nerve pain and the discomfort precedes cardiac stimulation. So you don't, especially if you have hard issues, you definitely want to listen to your body. So if you feel discomfort, which is usually from the neuralgia, the nerve pain more than it is the vesticulation, the muscle twitching, what you're feeling is more the nerve. And I did this with the Pulse XL. I was trying to follow their protocol, gradually turning it up. And I did see I could tolerate more and more as time went on. But you don't want to feel that discomfort. I think some clinicians try to push it a little too hard. They try to turn up the intensity on people more than they should be.

Andy Smith 01:21:40 
Almost becomes a competition sometimes isn't it, especially with the user.

Bryant Meyers 01:21:44 
After you get, because there's again, because there's very little research and even Robert Dennis who kind of agrees with what I say about high intensity because I've read his whole forum, he says that yes, maybe if more, because he said if somebody paid me several million dollars, yeah, maybe I could spend several years to study high intensity in more detail. But the research is just lacking right now.

So going by the anecdotes, I would say the most important tip for clinicians is just don't push people. Just let, you have to get feedback with high intensity, which is not the same with medium intensity because rarely, I mean, yes, you do get a herxheimer reaction with some people with a lower, with a medium or a low intensity, but usually it's not as much of an issue. With high intensity, you can feel the discomfort right away. Yeah, yeah. And you just wanna back off and not push that. But I think it's still safe, you know, it's rare that there's gonna be any problems probably with most, unless you have a heart issue, that's the one case I don't think I would recommend high intensity. Cause again, the heart's the most electrical organ in the body. You know, even Dr. McCullough's wife had an episode using high intensity with like an AFib episode.

Andy Smith 01:23:01 
Yeah, so something should be.

Bryant Meyers 01:23:02 
It can happen, it can happen. So you wanna, but usually it doesn't. I mean, I've talked to a lot of clinic owners and it does seem most people are okay as long as you don't go too high.

Andy Smith 01:23:13 
No, just before I wrap this episode up, I just want to give maybe a bit of credit and also maybe also a bit of a call out. You know, we've we have spoken about Dr. Pawlukin this episode. You know, we've talked about his inverse square law and how, you know, we're not necessarily agreeing completely with it. You know, my my beginnings and my startings with PEMF therapy, I used to PEMF device and then, you know, because anybody that looks into PEMF, they're more than likely to come across Dr. Pollock. He is a leading name in the field of PEMF therapy. He's got his books, like you say, best bestsellers in the PEMF industry. And he did come over from the USA to the UK to actually meet me in person and give me some training originally, which I did kind of, you know, did think that was a quite an honorable thing for him to do. And over the years, you know, that was about 14 years ago now. But so we've we've, you know, we've had a relationship by the time and and we even had his table on our new med website at some point, you know, and because a lot of my training came from his books and all this sort of thing. But, you know, it wasn't really until I started questioning a lot of the intensity and all this sort of thing that I kind of started seeing the cracks appearing in our relationship, but mainly when we released our own product, you know, was I and, you know, I was quite excited to tell Dr. Pollock, you know, we've got our own product now. Maybe you want to be a representative for it in the US. And it was almost like overnight the conversation ended with us and a bit of a strange, you know, because we were buying products through him, selling it in the UK and, you know, it's it's maybe it's there's no financial incentive there now for us to continue this relationship. But, you know, whatever his motivations are, we and one thing in terms of the call out, what I'd like to do is say, you know, Dr. Pawluk, if you are listening to this episode or if any of your team are, we'd love to have you on to show your side of this story. As I say, we are very diverse on this podcast. We do offer, you know, we do get all the industry leaders on and it would be great to get him on. So, you know, we have actually invited him on twice and haven't had a response. So maybe this will be the the the point.

Bryant Meyers 01:25:23 
Yeah, because I did also have a relationship with him back in the day because when he before, I don't know if it was around 2013 or... I don't know what year it was, but he was much more pro low intensity. I mean, he's always sold a range of products, right? But he was very much pro QRS, he was pro IMRS, he visited, you know, the Swiss by on or at the time Medi-Consult, like manufacturing the Rob group. And there's even a video clip of him singing praises for how well it was made and stuff like that. So, and of course, he was the person that did all the consultations for QRS. In fact, when I bought a QRS in 2003, guess who I got a free consultation from? So, I first talked to Dr. Paul in 2003, just a half hour consultation, but then I did meet him in person because he came to one of Medi-Consult at the time or Swiss Bionics like conferences and he was a keynote speaker. So, I got to sit down with him, talk to him and he would refer some, because he, it's funny, he was like in, because at the time it was ML, it was like a matrix system and he was like in my downline, right? So, he would refer, not very many, but maybe one or two IMRS sales a month back to me. But then there was a, then all of a sudden on like QRS and his videos on these lower intensity, he says, he just changed the description of the videos. I no longer recommend this unit. Like it was just like that. So, that's when the relationship just kind of soured and it's like, I don't know what motivated him to go to this whole high intensity road. But before that, he was very pro. In fact, I liked some of his older videos. I like some of his old stuff. I learned a lot from him. So, still think, I mean, I still think, I mean, because again, most of the studies he references are medium and low intensity. That's why I think it's a good book. So, there's only, in this book, there's only five pages of bad science, right? Most of the book is pretty good, except again, for the recommendation section, where his second book though, half of it, and again, the first half is pretty good. It's like a history of PEMF, EMF versus PEMF. But then the whole second half is all recommendations and it's every single recommendation is based on the inverse square law and this Missouri study, like I explained earlier. So, that's why I think it's important. And this is right now is the number one selling book on PEMF. Mine is like number two, but his is the top seller most of the time. But because people are buying this book, they need to understand that half of the recommendations aren't based on reality. I mean, it's not the inverse square law and the very study he's referencing didn't follow any type of drop off anyway. But if you really read the second half of his book, there's over 30 recommendations that are just wrong. So, I would love if he could come on your show and I'd like to hear his answer to this because I'm sure he's going to have a response, but it would be nice to get a conversation going. There was a podcast that was trying to get both me and Dr. Pawlukon the same show and I agreed and Dr. Pawluk didn't.

Andy Smith 01:28:43 
Yeah, and I think maybe that's why it doesn't want to come on this one, because we've got some conflicting arguments. But like I say, you know, we're open to we're open to both sides of the story.

We want to know. And we're not saying that high intensity is bad. We're just saying that it's not the only option for for everybody at which I think is.

Bryant Meyers 01:28:59 
it's not that high intensity is bad, it's that using the inverse square law plus the study as a justification to recommend high intensity for all these different conditions, that's just wrong. It's not even, I don't even know how you can debate that because I know his tables are based on a quarter inch radius or a quarter's diameter sphere, which you get in itself absurd, right? And so, and again, he's a doctor, he's not a physicist. And you know what he's going from the inverse square law in a medical textbook, they have a section on radiation biology. And it turns out that for radiation, like, you know, radiation for cancer, for example, treatments, that they show the inverse square law from the radiation device as an inverse square drop-off. But in those cases, you can approximate it as a point source, because that's the radiation is coming from up here all the way down and it's just a small. So it actually, the inverse square law works for that type of application. But PEMF coils, you're laying directly on them and they're large coils, they're certainly not point sources, right? So again, that's the issue is that it's not that we, like you're saying that there's no place for high intensity, it's just that, you know, recommending high intensity based on the reasons Dr. Pawluk does is just wrong. And it's easy. So I think hopefully maybe he'll see the light one day and then say, oh, you know, I, I, I, I'm going to take my book off the market. I'm going to republish it with the correct equation. You know, I'm, maybe I still recommend high intensity, which is fine, but, you know, have a good reason to recommend.

Andy Smith 01:30:33 
They do it, yeah.

Bryant Meyers 01:30:34 
Anyway, yeah, that's my two sons.

Andy Smith 01:30:37 
Anyway, we could I'd said it's on the last one we could there's so many more subjects we can talk about so we might have To get you back for a part three Yeah, but

Bryant Meyers 01:30:45 
I'm sure you can come on anytime, honestly. I just want to come on.

In this case, I wanted to come on because I just spent like three weeks going through all these studies and all the things that I wanted to share, which is to me, I haven't heard in the PEMF industry, all these things getting talked about. To me, they're really exciting, big insights into not just intensity, but just like what are the best PEMF type of intensity, slew rates, whatever to use for different types of conditions.

Andy Smith 01:31:19 
And if anyone wants to take a deep dive like we did for this episode where can they find that webpage with your buyer's guide and also if they want to talk to you how can they do that.

Bryant Meyers 01:31:29 
Yeah, so just go to bryantmyers.com, just my name, B-R-Y-A-N-T-M-E-Y-E-R-S dot com. I'm transitioning kind of, it's not a fancy website right now, it's just kind of where I'm, and you'll see my phone number. You can call me for a free consultation, 9419280124. I mean, no obligation to buy anything. I offer free consultations, because I'm passionate about getting people in the right direction. And you know, and even if people don't buy from me, if I find they're getting a good device, I'm okay. But what makes me sad is when people, you know, buy these crystal mats, for example, or it's because I know they're not getting a good first exposure to PEMF. So that's why I do these free consultations, so that people can be steered in the right direction. And I always give people, I say, before you press buy now, just call and hear me out. Yeah, yeah. You know, any PEMF device, because you're probably gonna wanna hear what I have to say. And so it's my passion. So I do offer the free consultations, and my buyer's guide right now is, you can just read it online. If you do like you did and download it, it is about 200 pages. But I did create an abridged version. Well, you'll see on the brightmars.com, there isn't a shortened, if you don't wanna read that full version, if that's too much for you, just read the abridged version. And so I did that specifically, because it was too much for too many. For most people, that was just too much. But I'd rather be over the top and be as accurate as possible than to generalize too much, and not to get into the details, but.

Andy Smith 01:32:57 
100%. Okay, for our listeners, thanks so much for listening to today's episode. Again, if you enjoyed it, please subscribe and leave us a five-star review on your favourite stream of platforms. Really going to help us bring more great guests like Brian Myers to share their knowledge with you. So thanks again, Brian, for your time.

Bryant Meyers 01:33:14 
Oh, it's been my pleasure, it's been fun. Yeah, all right, Andy. Cheers. All right, take care, cheers.