Talk:Radionics

Reliable references
I will be improving this article. Here are some reliable sources that document the quackery of radionics:


 * American Medical Association. (1911). Nostrums and Quackery: Articles on the Nostrum Evil and Quackery. Press of American Medical Association. pp. 243-259 (This book is online, it contains information on mechanical fakes, such as the devices of Hercules Sanche)
 * Stewart Holbrook. (1959). The Golden Age of Quackery. Collier Books. pp. 129-131 (Short chapter on Abrams)
 * Eric Jameson. (1961). The Natural History of Quackery. Charles C. Thomas Publisher. pp. 210-214 (This book is online, it briefly mentions Abrams, Drown and Warr).
 * Bob McCoy. (2004). Radionics. In Quack!: Tales of Medical Fraud from the Museum of Questionable Medical Devices. Santa Monica Press. pp. 71-94 (In depth coverage of Albert Abrams)
 * Robert Lee Smith. (1969). Chapter 5: The Gadgeteers. In At Your Own Risk: the Case Against Chiropractic. Trident Press. (This book is online, coverage of Abrams and Drown)
 * Jonathan Swan. (2003). Quack Magic: The Dubious History of Health Fads and Cures. Ebury Press. pp. 185-188 (Contains a summary of the devices of Abrams, Ruth B. Drown and George de la Warr)

HealthyGirl (talk) 20:57, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Radionics and Electromagnetic Therapy are two seperate fields and the article confuses them as the same.
 * Radionics works with Informational Field (non-physical). Electromagnetic Therapy works on the physical. 14.200.131.252 (talk) 05:22, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Reference 23 is being used misleadingly from the actual refferences cited ″ Conclusions Current evidence from randomized trials is insufficient to conclude a benefit of PEMF or LIPUS bone growth stimulation in reducing the incidence of nonunions when used for treatment in acute fractures. HOWEVER, our systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that PEMF or LIPUS can be beneficial in the treatment of acute fractures regarding time to radiological and clinical union. PEMF and LIPUS significantly shorten time to radiological union for acute fractures undergoing non-operative treatment and acute fractures of the upper limb. Furthermore, PEMF or LIPUS bone growth stimulation accelerates the time to clinical union for acute diaphyseal fractures.″

The one who put this refference in this article cherry picked it ignoring the however and furthermore of the refference.

174.83.7.90 (talk) 13:05, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Reference 20 is also being used misleadingly ... from the reference itself ″Conclusion: Pulsed electromagnetic fields improve clinical scores and function in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and should be considered as adjuvant therapies in their management. ″

Pain management was included but not the sole focus of the study and the improved functionality was the legitimate scientific conclusion. It should not be refferenced as a radonics treatment unless the article is seriously suggesting that the journal of rehabilitative medicine promotes quakery.

174.83.7.90 (talk) 13:21, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why some of these sources are here anyway. This article's scope is altmed; mainstream usage would be at the Electrotherapy article. Alexbrn (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

psychrotronics radionics the same?
are they both ther dsame onto robby mort!64.134.238.214 (talk) 04:33, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Actually, this is really wrong, Radionics is NOT a branch of Electromagnetic Therapy! That is simply false! Radionics is a practice closer to "technological magic", where energies that are not conventionally detectable flow through wires or fibre optics and the like, and that these can be used to most often treat someone at a distance with just a "witness' for the person present at the machine.   Most radionics today is entirely unpowered!    Even when it was, it was not based of electromagnetics.   I don't expect this article to be fair in a skeptical and thought controlled society where the allowed truth comes from a hierarchy.   Not asking anyone to believe that Radionics works (I can feel such energies, but I have no opinion or experience with any efficacy radionics might have, and no this does not equal original research), but it is NOT based in EMT!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.60.237.48 (talk) 21:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I think we should merge Electromagnetic therapy (alternative medicine) into this page. I was not aware of this page, but in this edit a "see also" was added to the EMT page pointing here, and indeed, the American Cancer Society book on alt med (archived online version here) discusses contemporary alt med EMT devices as being in continuity with this stuff. WP and its readers will be enriched by having the full range of the history on one page. So that page should be merged here. Jytdog (talk) 01:06, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * A merger of these 2 pages would make sense as Radionics is really focused on a sub section of the electromagnetic spectrum - radio waves where as Electromagnetic therapy covers the entire spectrum--Nestek (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * This is a good idea. When I initially delved into the topic I was unaware that it was a subset of radionics. I think it'd be a lot cleaner and concise to merge. Rap Chart Mike (talk) 14:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Let us. Zezen (talk) 11:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, it has been done. Great. Zezen (talk) 11:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

FDA-approved TheraBionic treatment
advancements in RF radiation research show biological interactions beyond thermal effects. For example, the FDA-approved TheraBionic treatment, which employs RF radiation at power levels up to 1000 times lower than those emitted by cell phones, effectively treats inoperable liver cancer through non-thermal interactions at the cellular or molecular level. This includes resonance effects, disruption of cellular signaling, and potential modulation of the immune system. This challenges the traditional view that non-ionizing radiation is biologically inert except for its heating properties.

The U.S. military, particularly through initiatives like RadioBio by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), appears to be signaling a significant shift in its approach to the study of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and radiofrequency (RF) radiation.

The RadioBio Initiative by the U.S. Military marks a pivotal shift in our understanding of non-ionizing radiation, particularly radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Historically, the scientific consensus has been that non-ionizing radiation’s primary effect is thermal. However, emerging research, including the RadioBio Initiative, challenges this notion, suggesting non-thermal effects on biological systems. Changes in DNA methylation patterns and gene expression observed in cells exposed to RF radiation suggest potential epigenetic impacts. These findings occur at levels of radiation that do not produce significant heating, challenging the longstanding thermal-only paradigm. 35.140.28.63 (talk) 14:01, 18 December 2023 (UTC)