Biomagnetism/Lyme magnetic protocol

Hello. I have been treating with the LMP for nearly 3 years. I was so overloaded/toxic when I began, it was the only therapy that was paced slowly enough that I could tolerate. Given this, I was not on any other antimicrobial therapy such as antibiotics or herbals and I’m still not. So I believe your practitioner when he or she comments that the combination of therapies may be overwhelming your system.

I have learned through my experience not to underestimate the magnets. the LMP is a powerful one.

I hope you have as much success with it as I have.

a lyme friend once herxed two weeks from a german homeopathic nosode .so who knows ? i rushed many protocols at the same time , when i did 4 protocols on the same day for a week i literally plotzed . after falling i literally crawled to the couch til i could detox it out ...

I read an article about a Practitioner in New Hampshire that uses magnets. I'm in CT. Are there other practitioners nearby?

Have you all heard about any results with it? As in, what lead you to want to do it?

This woman healed using the magnetic therapy

https://youtu.be/0upUJz7R6bY

I have no interest in debating the effectiveness of therapies whether it be LMP, bee venom therapy, rife therapy, etc. but I encourage anyone here to talk to a practitioner and or patients who have healed rather than paying attention to skeptics who have done neither.

At the request of my practitioner, I cannot divulge her name. Her waiting list is 6 months long and she receives patients from referrals only. But J.R. In Woodstock, V.t. is a great place to start.

Blessings

I’m sorry for anyone who has been chronically I’ll and then given the brush off after only 10 sessions. Many here will state they have been utilizing their therapy of choice for a considerably longer duration of time. I am sorry this was your experience. I believe the expertise, knowledge and experience of the practitioner should be carefully considered. This goes for any therapy utilized.

paulieinct said...
The article I read (can't remember where) talked about the woman practitioner's practice. Sounded encouraging. In theory, the magnets disrupt biofilm communities so magnets are placed in locations where biofilm is likely to be found. The disruption causes microbes to become mobile so the body's immune system can kill them.

There is some real science around high power ALTERNATING magnetic fields from powerful electromagnets interacting with biological systems - maybe disrupting biofilms and possibly even inhibiting growth of bacteria -

BUT, that's not what is being discussed here - what is discussed here is the use of STATIC magnetic fields - this is not the same thing at all - so none of the science from alternating magnetic fields applies - since with permanent magnets the fields are not alternating.

lay people will often not understand the distinction - and this is exactly the sort of deliberate conflation that is so often used by bogus practitioners to sell their products /services.

Also, In lyme and coinfections biofilms are found in all tissues in all locations in the body - so, even if there were some substance to magnets as a treatment, i find it hard to see how it is credible to place the magnets in certain locations only to treat the patient .....

as a result i am highly sceptical

Garzie, You and anyone else here is entitled to whatever you believe about a certain therapy. But I truly don’t understand the strong judgment toward therapies you have never tried.

MargaritaLyme said...
Garzie, You and anyone else here is entitled to whatever you believe about a certain therapy. But I truly don’t understand the strong judgment toward therapies you have never tried.

I expressed scepticism – not judgement either way

Scepticism means I remain to be convinced of the benefit of such a treatment

I would suggest that, in the context of a world where conventional medicine has failed the chronically ill and an alternative medicine industry has sprung up to take advantage of that void.
And where many of the practitioners in that industry are offering baseless “therapies” to the desperate, needy and ill-informed - then I think healthy scepticism is the correct approach.

In this case - unless someone can direct me to it – I do not believe there is any factual basis to believe it is an effective treatment.

In addition, the kind of explanations given for its mechanism of action are such obvious pseudoscience it raises a red flag to be extra sceptical.

Regarding – having not tried it
Contrary to popular belief – “trying something” is not the acid test for what works and what does not.

These illnesses are characterised by symptoms that come and go - worsening and improving again, very often for reasons we do not understand.

Some people get better over time regardless of treatment - some people get worse.

Couple this with the power of the placebo effect - which has been demonstrated to be more powerful than many medical interventions in numerous medical trials - and is particularly powerful when the patient wants to believe in the treatment, and even more so if the patient is surrounded by others who have similar beliefs - then it becomes clear just how deceptive anecdotal accounts can be.

In addition – we are generally in the position of having to choose a treatment and pay for it up front – BEFORE having tried it - and many people come here looking for advice and ideas for treatments to try. Many are desperate and easily swayed by anecdotal accounts.

For that reason, I feel obliged to voice concerns where there are practitioners making a living from treatments that have no scientific basis, or a questionable scientific basis for efficacy - to at least highlight these points so others may be more informed in their choices more rounded in their decision making and less likely to be taken advantage of by the industry that preys on the weak and the vulnerable.

If, after reading these concerns as well as positive anecdotes, people still wish to proceed with these fringe therapies - then that is absolutely their prerogative.

But I do not feel I would be performing my role as a member of a support forum if I did not highlight such issues and recommend people try the treatments that have worked best for most people first, rather than start from the bottom and work up, as some people seem more disposed to do.

i.e. it makes sense for most people to start with the treatments that do have scientific basis and help most people most often - and only explore unregulated fringe therapies after they have exhausted these.

My questioning and scepticism are exactly that – questioning the facts.

No offence or criticism is intended towards anyone who holds different views to me.

All views are welcome – but likewise, this is a discussion forum, so, for it to be more than an echo chamber of what people already believe, views that question the facts and point to inconsistencies, as well as those that agree with what others choose to believe, should all be equally welcome.

In fact, it could be argued that those views which question existing beliefs - if expressed respectfully - may hold the greatest value.

The art of respectful debate between individuals of differing beliefs is in rapid decline in our society at large. This forum is in general one of the places that does pretty good job of maintaining it

Long may that continue!
All the best to you in your journey towards better health
G

MargaritaLyme said...
I disagree that individuals lack the ability to constructively debate unless this is an example..

i'm not sure i am understanding your point here Margarita?

MargaritaLyme said...
...I also fail to see where explaining away effects of one treatment as placebo effect couldn’t easily be said about all Lyme treatments.

Actually, i pointed to more than the placebo effect as reasons for scepticism

but, regarding not being able to see why one couldn't explain away all Lyme treatments as placebo:

A pragmatic approach would be to look at all the evidence for such treatments and how consistent it is

So, if we were to take antibiotic-based treatments as an example

• There is a huge amount of basic biology research revealing the similarities and differences between borrelia and other well studied bacteria that share some of the same genes and metabolism, which help us understand which drugs might be effective against them and why

• And then there are cell culture in-vitro trails showing these drugs to be active against Lyme and associated infections in-vitro

• There are then animal trials also showing efficacy of abx in other mammals which support that these drugs may be useful in humans

• There are then a number of large-scale clinical trials of human lyme patients showing efficacy of abx
So, looking at the scientific literature alone - there is a large, consistent and multi-layered body of scientific knowledge supporting the effectiveness of various antibiotics against borrelia - each layer consistent with the layer below it.

As well as being compelling in their own right, when these lines of evidence are consistent with each other like this, it gives greater confidence that the effectiveness in humans is real – not placebo.

Then, in addition to the scientific trials, we also have the published work of many LLMD’s who are medically trained, have each treated thousands of patients and and support the use of antibiotics in treatment of lyme disease.
And, in addition to that we have the anecdotal accounts from various sources – such as the members here - and on other lyme forums

In contrast, the evidence supporting “magnet therapy” appears to rely solely on this last type of anecdotal report. And even here the numbers that report positive results are small.

The members here reading such small numbers of N=1 anecdotal reports have no way of knowing if, for example:
• These people would have improved anyway,
• or if the reported improvements were due to placebo effects
• or the people reporting them were doing other therapies at the same time that they neglected to mention,
• or for example a person even took 3 months of antibiotics, or some other treatment prior to trying magnets
such is the difficulty with anecdotal reports.

and supporting evidence, from basic biology, to cell culture trials, to animal trials, to human trials is entirely lacking.

That is not to say that antibiotics are a perfect treatment. We know they are not. The same scientific body of knowledge shows that bacterial persistence after abx is a real phenomenon, and is now uncovering the mechanisms by which this happens.

I just use abx as an example to show the difference between something where there is a great deal of consistent evidence supporting - and something where none of that exists and yet practitioners make a living from it nonetheless.

Anyone interested in a balanced evaluation of their options for treating Lyme disease really ought to be able see that there certainly is a real objective difference between these treatment options in terms of evidence.

to place all Lyme treatments on a kind of level pegging, based on the fact that one hears anecdotal accounts of success and failure on all of them is missing a big part of the picture.

Pragmatically - most humans will be most likely to be helped most by the things that have helped the most other humans.

So, I would urge people reading this to take a pragmatic approach – weigh all the evidence – work from the top down and resist the urge to dive into fringe therapies on the basis of anecdotal reports alone - or charismatic practitioners or the things you react to positively emotionally – in fact be cautious of the things you would like to be true, as that is often simply not how the world is.

again, all the best!

Post Edited (Garzie) : 1/1/2023 3:10:38 PM (GMT-8)

Because of all the bickering I take it that nobody knows the answer to my question that I posted?