"johnny" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:I have been researching medline's reports that I found through the website
magnetcure.commagnetcure.comOpen ↗ because a friend of mine has sworn that magnetic gadgetry works. Now
magnetic insoles I have heard about and are as old as the hills...I never gave much credit to it.
I did a Web search to read more and continue my conversation with him later.
What I found in the above laboratory reports was surprising...that there are hundreds of studies
on the efficacy of "active magnets" (electrically generated). I couldn't believe that this therapy
(called by all sorts of names like Extremely Low Frequency ELF, magneto-therapy, Pulsed magnetic
therapy, magnetic field therapy...etc.) has been clinically proven to treat various forms of pain,
migraine...help bone fractures heal faster...help erectile dysfunction...even hair loss???
If this therapy does indeed have such positive results, why aren't devices like Magnetan
(magnetcure.commagnetcure.comOpen ↗) or Nikken ("passive" regular magnet stuff) more commonly available or
talked about?
Oh Johnny, I'm afraid you have been terribly misled. Here is a recent JAMA abstract on the
insole subject:
jama.ama-assn.org1474Open ↗
Bill
Effect of Magnetic vs Sham-Magnetic Insoles on Plantar Heel Pain A Randomized Controlled Trial
Mark H. Winemiller, MD; Robert G. Billow, DO; Edward R. Laskowski, MD; W. Scott Harmsen, MS
JAMA. 2003;290:1474-1478.
Context Despite anecdotal reports, rigorous scientific evidence of the effectiveness of magnetic
insoles for the pain of plantar fasciitis is lacking.
Objective To determine whether magnetic insoles provide greater subjective improvement for treatment
of plantar heel pain compared with identical nonmagnetized insoles.
Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from
February 12, 2001, to November 9, 2001, of a volunteer sample of 101 adults with diagnoses of
plantar heel pain for at least 30 days from a multispecialty group practice clinic in Rochester,
Minn. Daily pain diaries were kept for 8 weeks.
Interventions Cushioned insoles, with either active bipolar magnets or sham magnets, which were worn
daily by the participants for 8 weeks.
Main Outcome Measures Reported average daily foot pain (by metered visual analog scale [VAS] and by
categorical response of change from baseline) at 4 and 8 weeks, and impact of insoles on employment
performance and enjoyment.
Results No significant between-group differences were found on any outcome variables studied when
comparing active vs sham magnets. Both the nonmagnetic and magnetic groups reported significant
improvements in morning foot pain intensity, with mean (SD) VAS scores improving from 6.9 (2.3) and
6.7 (2.0), respectively, at baseline to 3.9 (2.6) for each group at 8 weeks (P = .94). At 8 weeks,
33% of the nonmagnetic group and 35% of the magnetic group reported being all or mostly better (P =
.78). At baseline, foot pain interfered moderately with participants' employment enjoyment (mean
VAS, 4.2) and improved in both groups by 8 weeks (1.3 and 1.5, respectively; P = .68).
Conclusion Static bipolar magnets embedded in cushioned shoe insoles do not provide additional
benefit for subjective plantar heel pain reduction when compared with nonmagnetic insoles.
Author Affiliations: Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (Drs Winemiller and
Laskowski) and Section of Biostatistics (Mr Harmsen), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn; and Northwest
Orthopaedic Surgeons, Mount Vernon, Wash (Dr Billow).
