(Natural News) Researchers from Northwestern University in Chicago conducted a pilot study that tested the effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation for the prevention of age-related memory decline. The results, published in an online issue of Neurology on April 17, 2019, suggest that memory can be enhanced temporarily using magnetic fields. The magnetic fields purportedly stimulate nerve cells in the brain, boosting brain activity in the hippocampal-cortical network. This part of the brain helps create, store, and retrieve memories.
The device used in this study contains an electromagnetic coil. The researchers held the coil adjacent to a participant’s scalp. Short bursts of magnetic energy course through the participant’s scalp to target specific regions of their brain. Study author Joel L. Voss, Ph.D. said, “With stimulation, we were able to essentially excite the areas of the brain that are involved in memory formation in older adults, improving their ability to recall items as well as younger adults.
Immediately after magnetic stimulation, elder adults memorize as well as 25 year-olds.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-09-15-magnetic-stimulation-of-the-brain-prevent-memory-decline.html?fbclid=IwAR0rTEZ4IsXyOWvYWZzg1RlyOi54eUjy4zKnhD21Mbcl2DPWj2cSRQ7rAMkFifteen people with an average age of seventy-two participated in the study and were asked to complete memory tasks. These adults showed signs of age-related memory loss, but could still think clearly. They did not show signs of Alzheimer’s or dementia. Another group of adults with an average age of twenty-five performed the same memory task as the elder adults. In the first week, the elder adults submitted to transcranial magnetic stimulation once a day for five days in a row. In the second week, the elder adults underwent a fake treatment. Under the fake treatment, they submitted to the electromagnetic coil but did not receive a significant dose of magnetic energy. The elder participants did not know when they were receiving a real treatment or a fake one.
In my nearly two decades as a member of Issseem (International Society for the Study of Subtle Energies and Energy Medicine), I’ve learned that when people use the phrase “science of subtle energy” (SSE), they are generally referring to one or more of the following lines of evidence:•direct personal experiences of healing, out-of-body experiences (OBEs), auras, pre-monitions, meditative experiences, and so on—also described in a huge body of popular literature and shared in many forums (like this one)•the teachings of such non-Western healing and spiritual practices as acupuncture, qigong, and yoga, as well as shamanism and alchemy
•the frequent use of the terms “science” and “subtle energy” (or related terms) in the many materials “channeled” over the past several hundred years from various not-in-the-body sources
•a growing number of studies that appear to show the effects of energies not otherwise measurable—overviews of such studies have been published by NCCAM (National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine) and others (e.g., The Scientific Basis of Integrative Medicine by Leonard Wisneski and Lucy Anderson)
•a large array of devices (e.g., electrodermal screening, bioresonance therapies, electro-photonic imaging) used in alternative health practices around the world, some of which were used in the studies cited above and all of which remain controversial
•a variety of “New Physics” theories that feature subtle energy and are widely regarded as plausible, including the work of Stanford scientist William Tiller, biophysicist Beverly Rubik, and former Princeton University physicist Claude Swanson.Given the above, why does mainstream science seem so dead set against even thenotion of subtle energy? Four reasons readily come to mind:
•There is no agreed-upon scientific definition of subtle energy, and hence no reliable meth-odo logy for detecting or measuring the energies so defined.
•There is no broadly accepted scientific theory of such energies.
•The very notion of subtle energy originates in pre-scientific esoteric traditions, which havebeen systematically marginalized by the scientific enterprise for more than a century.
•The notion is thus considered far too subjective, or worse, a point of religious belief, or worse yet, a mere superstition
In repeated and controlled experiments, the frequencies, known as oscillating pulsed electric field (OPEF) technology, killed an average of 25% to 40% of leukemia cells, going as high as 60% in some cases. Furthermore, the intervention even slowed cancer cell growth rates up to 65%. It was a double whammy.
The team also found success attacking ovarian cancer cells. Most recently, they tested the treatment against the deadly super bug MRSA, an organism that is resistant to many common antibiotics. Thousands of people die every year from MRSA, Holland explains, and the drugs normally used against the pathogen are known to have toxic side effects. Incredibly, the frequency therapy eliminated antibiotic resistance, and researchers were able to introduce a small amount of antibiotic to kill the bug.
Holland hopes that one day the treatment will override the toxic conventional treatments currently available for patients. At the end of his speech, he describes his vision for the future of cancer clinics:
I believe the future of children’s cancer hospitals will be a different place. They will be a place where children gather and make new friends, they probably wont even know they are sick. They’ll draw pictures, colour in their books, and play with their toys, all the while unaware that above them, a beautiful, blue plasma light is emanating healing, pulsing fields, shattering their cancer, painlessly, and non-toxically, one cell at a time. Thank you.