iMRS PEMF Discount: Save 20% to 35% off your first iMRS order

Contact us today to learn how you can save 20% to 35% off your first iMRS order.

The brand new iMRS-Series is the culmination of more than 15 years of experience in energy medicine and more than 3.5 billion in-home applications worldwide. With the innovation of the iMRS people have the opportunity to acces a wide range of additional options for the first time in history (iSLRS with two additional components of the light spectrum,  iGUIDE with a virtual catalog of preset programming and iMORE technology). 

Pulsed Electro Magnetic Field (PEMF) devices for home use have been on the market for nearly two decades. MediConsult®, the only company in the world with it´s own in-house research, engineering, development, and manufacturing divisions, is the world  leader in PEMF systems for home use.  The legendary MRS 2000 +  series of products have been on the market for over 15 years, With an estimated 400.000 daily users worldwide in 21 countries. 

iMRS Packages

Includes Control Unit, Power Plug, Owner’s Manual, Two (2) Applicators: Whole Body Mat and Pad, SD Card for basic home settings up to 200.

Includes Control Unit, Power Plug, Owner’s Manual, Three (3) Applicators: Whole Body Mat, Pad and Probe, SD Card for complete wellness settings up to 400.

Includes Control Unit, Power Plug, Owner’s Manual, Three (3) Applicators: Whole Body Mat, Pad and Probe, SD Card for complete wellness settings up to 400, and featuring:

  • iGUIDE: a database with almost 3500 pre-programmed variations for all applicators and all organ clock options
  • Adjustable timer for sessions lasting from 1 to 60 minutes

The iMRS is FDA regulated and is certified as a Class A Medical device in the EU.


CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE FREE PEMF DEVICE COMPARISON REPORT, and see why the imrs is the leading pemf device.

If you’re ready to purchase, you can order the top PEMF devices from Swiss Bionics now. Buy your PEMF iMRS units at this link for a 20% savings:


You’ll be supported by Stephen Knott who is available via E-Mail and by Phone at: +31 187844881 or at for the official device information.

You can also fill in our contact form:

Contact Us

You may contact us by filling in this form any time you need professional support or have any questions. You can also fill in the form to leave your comments or feedback.
Which topic best describes your question?*
When is the best time to contact you:
Type the characters you see here:

* Indicates required fields


Static vs. Electromagnetic Fields

How do Static Magnetic Fields and Electromagnetic Fields Differ?

A static field does not vary over time. A direct current (DC) is an electric current flowing in one direction only. In any battery-powered appliance the current flows from the battery to the appliance and then back to the battery. It will create a static magnetic field. The earth’s magnetic field is also a static field. So is the magnetic field around a refrigerator magnet, and around a bar magnet that can be visualized by observing the pattern that is formed when iron filings are sprinkled around it.

In contrast, time-varying electromagnetic fields are produced by alternating currents (AC). Alternating currents reverse their direction at regular intervals. In most European countries electricity changes direction with a frequency of 50 cycles per second or 50 Hertz. Equally, the associated electromagnetic field changes its orientation 50 times every second. North American electricity has a frequency of 60 Hertz.

Electromagnetic field therapy devices may use AC current or DC current as the source current from which to derive a time-varying, pulsating electromagnetic field.

Static magnets produce only one field strength and no frequency. Cells habituate to that field strength.

Dr. Walter Glück, a physician in Germany, has eloquently and humorously described the difference between static and dynamic, time varying pulsed electromagnetic signals. He likens the static magnetic signal to someone saying: “I love you, I love you, I love you, I love you” in a repeated, mechanistic, strictly monotone fashion with no voice inflections and no changes. Though “I love you” is a pleasant message, when it is droned over and over (and over!) in unchanging fashion, the recipient gets bored with it, and the message (or “signal”) completely loses its impact. Contrast this to the person who exclaims: “I love you!” in a variety of ways, with enthusiasm, passion, and ever-changing voice inflection. The message never gets old and never loses its power. These ever-changing “I love you” signals are the equivalents of the time varying, pulsating electromagnetic impulses generated by pulsating electromagnetic field therapy devices.

An example of the importance of the difference between static and electromagnetic fields can be illustrated by discussing ion transfer inside the body. Ion transfer inside the body is essentially driven by electrical charges at the cell membrane surface. If membrane electrical charge is adequate, the influence of a static magnetic field will promote the flow of nutrients through the membrane’s transport channels. However, if the cell membrane potential is low, as with illness, static magnets have much less influence.

Static magnets depend on the presence of motion to exert their biological effects. By contrast, time varying, pulsating electromagnetic fields literally supply their own motion, and therefore exert more consistent biological effects.

For more information on MRS / PEMF related therapies contact Stephen M. Knott, NTA Consultant, and Alternative Therapist in the fields of energy medicine. Contact him via telephone at +31187844881 or via email or fill in your contact details via the website. You can always join as a representative and have access to the latest enhanced PEMF devices from Swiss Bionic Solutions, Representative Stephen Knott’s page may be found at

PEMF Scientific Extracts

Below are selected some selected scientific abstracts addressing pulsating electromagnetic field therapy, electromagnetism, magneticresonance stimulation, electrosmog and dirty electricity are posted throughout the NTA site. As a member of the Nutritional Therapeutics Association you will have access to a wider amount of practical information. 

Overall Scientific papers on the viability of PEMF therapies.

Peer Reviewed MRS(PEMF) Studies

Therapeutic Uses of ElectroMagnetic Fields

Review of Therapeutic Uses of PEMF

 The effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields in the treatment of cervical osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial:

Sutbeyaz, Sezer and Koseoglu. The effect of pulsed electromagnetic fileds in the treatment of cervical osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial. Rheumatology International 2006; 26:320-324. Copy Available to NTA Members

Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in the management of knee OA:

Pfeiffer K. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in the management of knee osteoarthritis. Annals of Rheumatological Disorders 2001; 60:717. Copy Available to NTA Members

Biochemical and morphological study of human articular chondrocytes cultivated in the presence of pulsed signal therapy:

Fioravanti A, Nerucci F, Collodel G, et al. Biochemical and morphological study of human articular chondrocytes cultivated in the present of pulsed signal therapy. Annals of Rheumatological Disorders 2006; 61:1032-33. Copy Available to NTA Members

The effectiveness of pulsed electrical stimulation (E-PES) in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial:

Fary RE, Carroll GJ, Briff TG, et al. The effectiveness of pulsed electrical stimulation (E-PES) in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BioMed Central Musculoskeletal Disorders 2008; 9:18. Copy Available to NTA Members

Nanosecond pulsed electric fields cause melanomas to selfdestruct:

Nuccitelli R, Pliquett U, Chen X, et al. Nanosecond pulsed electric fields cause melanomas to self-destruct. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2006 (May 5); 343 (2): 351-360. Copy Available to NTA Members

free abstracts:

Electromagnetic interventions in musculoskeletal disorders

Bachl, N., G. Ruoff, et al. (2008). “Electromagnetic interventions in musculoskeletal disorders.” Clin Sports Med 27(1): 87-105, viii.

Electromagnetic interventions in general and those considering the musculoskeletal system in particular hold many obscurities. Several studies revealing positive effects of electromagnetic fields oppose those showing no beneficial effects. After a historical review and a discussion of basic details on electromagnetic signals, this article provides information on the effects of electromagnetic fields on a cellular level and gives an account of preclinical and clinical studies focused on electromagnetic interventions by means of weak pulsed electromagnetic fields on musculoskeletal disorders.

Pulsed magnetic field therapy for osteoarthritis of the knee

Nicolakis P, Kollmitzer J, Crevenna R, Bittner C, Erdogmus CB, Nicolakis J. Pulsed magnetic field therapy for osteoarthritis of the knee–a double-blind sham-controlled trial. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2002 Aug 30;114(15-16):678-84.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: Pulsed magnetic field therapy is frequently used to treat the symptoms of osteoarthritis, although its efficacy has not been proven. We conducted a randomized, double-blind comparison of pulsed magnetic field and sham therapy in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee. Patients were assigned to receive 84 sessions, each with a duration of 30 minutes, of either pulsed magnetic field or sham treatment. Patients administered the treatment on their own at home, twice a day for six weeks. RESULTS: According to a sample size estimation, 36 consecutive patients were enrolled. 34 patients completed the study, two of whom had to be excluded from the statistical analysis, as they had not applied the PMF sufficiently. Thus, 15 verum and 17 sham-treated patients were enrolled in the statistical analysis. After six weeks of treatment the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index was reduced in the pulsed magnetic field-group from 84.1 (+/- 45.1) to 49.7 (+/- 31.6), and from 73.7 (+/- 43.3) to 66.9 (+/- 52.9) in the sham-treated group (p = 0.03). The following secondary parameters improved in the pulsed magnetic field group more than they did in the sham group: gait speed at fast walking [+6.0 meters per minute (1.6 to 10.4) vs. -3.2 (-8.5 to 2.2)], stride length at fast walking [+6.9 cm (0.2 to 13.7) vs. -2.9 (-8.8 to 2.9)], and acceleration time in the isokinetic dynamometry strength tests [-7.0% (-15.2 to 1.3) vs. 10.1% (-0.3 to 20.6)]. CONCLUSION: In patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee, PMF treatment can reduce impairment in activities of daily life and improve knee function.

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic fileds compared with placebo in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee.
Data sources: A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Reister.
Methods: Randomized, controlled trials reporting on the blinded comparison of pulsed electromagnetic fields with placebo were included. Validity was tested according to the Jada Scale. Studies were pooled using fixed-effects and random-effects models after exclusion of publication bias and assessment of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses and meta-regression were performed to test the stability of our findings.
Results: Nine studies, including 483 patients, were pooled. No significant difference could be shown for pain (weighted mean difference 0.2 patients; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.4 to 0.8) or stiffness (weighted mean difference 0.3; 95% CI: -0.3 to 0.9). There was a significant effect on activities of daily living (weighted mean difference 0.8; 95% CI 0.2—1.4, p = 0.014) and socres (standardized mean difference 0.4; 95% CI: 0.05—0.8, p=0.029). We saw only statistically insignificant differences between studies with different treatment protocols.
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. There is still equipoise of evidence for an effect on pain in the current literature.

Interference of Programmed Electromagnetic Stimulation

Marianne Gwechenberger, Friedrich Rauscha,1 Gunter Stix, Gernot Schmid and Jeanette Strametz-Juranek. Interference of Programmed Electromagnetic Stimulation with Pacemakers and Automatic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators. Bioelectromagnetics 2006; 27:365-377.

A commercially available magnetic therapy system, designed for clinical application as well as for private use without medical supervision, was examined with respect to its potential for causing electromagnetic interference with implantable pacemakers (PMs) and automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillators (AICDs). A sample of 15 PMs and 5 AICDs were experimentally investigated. Each of the implants was realistically positioned in a homogeneous, electrically passive torso phantom and exposed to the magnetic fields of the system’s applicators (whole body mat, cushion, and bar applicator). The detection thresholds of the implants were programmed to maximum sensitivity and both unipolar as well as bipolar electrode configurations were considered. The evaluation of possible interferences was derived from the internal event storages and pacing statistics recorded by the implants during exposure. Any ‘‘heart activity’’ recorded by the implants during exposure was interpreted as a potential interference, because the implant obviously misinterpreted the external interference signal as a physiological signal. Only cases without any recorded ‘‘heart activity’’ and with nominal pacing rates (as expected from the program parameter settings) of the implants were rated as ‘‘interference-free.’’ Exposure to the whole body mat (peak magnetic induction up to 265 mT) did not show an influence on PMs and AICD in any case. The cushion applicator at the highest field intensity (peak magnetic induction up to 360 mT) led to atrial sensing defects in four PM models with unipolar electrode configuration. Under bipolar electrode configuration no disturbances occurred. The bar applicator led to sensing problems and consecutively reduced pacing rates in alltested PM models under unipolar electrode configuration and maximum field intensity (peak magnetic induction up to 980 mT). Bipolar electrode configuration resolved the problem. The investigated AICDs did not show malfunctions under any investigated condition. In conclusion, the examined PEMF therapy system did not interfere with the investigated implantable cardiac devices with bipolar electrode configuration. However, unipolar electrode configuration in pacemakers seems to be potentially hazardous during application of the examined PEMF therapy system. Bioelectromagnetics 27:365–377, 2006. ! 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Insights Into Electromagnetic Interaction Mechanisms

REBA GOODMAN AND MARTIN BLANK. Insights Into Electromagnetic Interaction Mechanisms. JOURNAL OF CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY 192:16–22 (2002)

Low frequency (<300 Hz) electromagnetic (EM) fields induce biological changes that include effects ranging from increased enzyme reaction rates to increased transcript levels for specific genes. The induction of stress gene HSP70 expression by exposure to EM fields provides insight into how EM fields interact with cells and tissues. Insights into the mechanism(s) are also provided by examination of the interaction of EM fields with moving charges and their influence on enzyme reaction rates in cell-free systems. Biological studies with in vitro model systems have focused, in general, on the nature of the signal transduction pathways involved in response to EM fields. It is likely, however, that EM fields also interact directly with electrons in DNA to stimulate biosynthesis. Identification of an EM field-sensitive DNA sequence in the heat shock 70 (HSP70) promoter, points to the application of EM fields in two biomedical applications: cytoprotection and gene therapy. EM field induction of the stress protein hsp70 may also provide a useful biomarker for establishing a science-based safety standard for the design of cell phones and their transmission towers. J. Cell. Physiol. 192: 16–22, 2002. 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

New Mechanisms of Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields

A. L. Buchachenkoaa, D. A. Kuznetsovb, and V. L. Berdinskya. New Mechanisms of Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields
a, Institute of Problems of Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Chernogolovka, Moscow Region, 142432 Russia
Semenov Institute of Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. Kosygina 4, Moscow, 119991 Russia

Abstract—ATP production in mitochondria depends on the nuclear spin and magnetic moment of Mg2+ ion in creatine kinase and ATPase. Consequently, the enzymatic synthesis of ATP is an ion-radical process and depends on the external magnetic field and microwave fields that control the spin states of ion-radical pairs and influence the ATP synthesis. The chemical mechanism of ATP synthesis and the origin of biological effects of electromagnetic (microwave) fields are discussed.
Key words: phosphorylation, ATP, creatine kinase, electromagnetic fields, spin chemistry

Historical evidence that electrification caused the 20th century

Milham S. Historical evidence that electrification caused the 20th century epidemic of “diseases of civilization”. Med Hypotheses 2010 Mar; 74(3):615-6.

The slow spread of residential electrification in the US is the first half of the 20th century from urban to rural areas resulted by 1940 in two large populations; urban populations, with nearly complete electrification and rural populations exposed to varying levels of electrification depending on the progress of electrification in their state. It took until 1956 for US farms to reach urban and rural non-farm electrification levels. Both populations were covered by the US vital registration system. US vital statistics tabulations and census records for 1920-1960, and historical US vital statistics documents were examined. Residential electrification data were available in the US census of population for 1930, 1940 and 1950. Crude urban and rural death rates were calculated, and death rates by state were correlated with electrification rates by state for urban and rural areas for 1940 white resident deaths. Urban death rates were much higher than rural rates for cardiovascular diseases, malignant diseases, diabetes and suicide in 1940. Rural death rates were significantly correlated with the level of residential electric service by state for most causes examined. I hypothesize that the 20th century epidemic of the so called diseases of civilization including cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes and suicide was caused by electrification not by lifestyle. A large proportion of these diseases may therefore be preventable.

The Earth’s Magnetic Field and Schumann Resonances

The Earth’s Magnetic Field

The cause of the Earth’s magnetic field can be explained by the dynamo theory. The liquid outer core, comprised largely of molten iron, moves through the electromagnetic field of the Sun, and this generates electric currents in the outer core. These current, in turn, generate another magnetic field. The Earth’s magnetic fields extend infinitely, though they are weaker further from their source.

The strength of the field at the Earth’s surface ranges from less than 30 microTeslas (μT ) in an area including most of South America and South Africa to over 60 μT in regions near the magnetic north and south poles in northern Canada, Siberia, and parts of southern Australia.

Electric currents induced in the ionosophere also generate magnetic fields. These fields are always generated near where the atmosphere is closest to the Sun, causing daily alterations which can deflect surface magnetic fields by as much as one degree. Typical daily variations of field strength are about 25 nanoteslas (nT), with variations over a few seconds of typically around 1 nT. Furthermore, many hundreds of lightning strikes occurring globally in the ionosphere each minute of the day generate magnetic fields.

From a global perspective the Earth is covered by a permanent lightning storm. The electromagnetic impulse from a flash of lightning in the tropics is transferred around the Earth’s circumference at the speed of light, creating electromagnetic resonance. At the beginning of the 1950’s the physicist Winfried Otto Schumann discovered that the space between the Earth’s surface and the conductive atmosphere (ionosphere) functioned as a waveguide (or spherical capacitor). (Schumann 1954b/23) This is because the ionosphere is capable of trapping electromagnetic waves. The many hundreds of lightning strikes that occur globally in this cavity create electromagnetic resonances with a fundamental frequency of 7.83 Hz. According to König this resonance frequency of the Earth is extremely stable. A recent study proved once again that the human body absorbs, detects and responds to extremely low frequency environmental electromagnetic signals in the Schumann resonance frequency range.

Further resonance modes occur at 6.5 Hz intervals due to the Earth’s spherical geometry. These resonance modes (overtones) are detected in the background radio noise of the Earth’s energetic field as separate peaks around 14.3, 20.8, 27.3 and 33.8 Hz. Furthermore, these overtones seem to be essential for our bodies.

If our bodies are blocked from natural exposure to these natural waves (e.g., due to living and working in buildings constructed with concrete, steel and metal alloys, driving in cars on paved roads, and by the electro-pollution of ultra-high frequency radiations from cell phones, microwave ovens, wireless phone and computer networks, and radar/satellite signals, etc.) we are more susceptible to illness, loss of cell membrane integrity, compromised immunity, and depression. Recorded dips in the Earth’s Schumann resonances have had strong correlation to heart attacks, car accidents, and a general increase in the death rate.

In 1950 Winfried Otto Schumann discovered that space to between the Earth’s surface and the conductive atmosphere, known as the “ionosphere,” functions as a waveguide (or a spherical capacitor). The ionosphere is capable of trapping electromagnetic waves. The many hundreds of lightning strikes that occur globally in this cavity create electromagnetic resonances with a fundamental frequency of 7.83 Hz.

The Schumann resonances (SR) are a set of spectrum peaks in the extremely low frequency ( ELF) portion of the Earth’s electromagnetic field spectrum. Schumann resonances are global electromagnetic resonances, excited by lightning discharges in the cavity formed by the Earth surface and the ionosphere. This global electromagnetic resonance phenomenon is named after physicist Winfried Otto Schumann who predicted it mathematically in 1952. Schumann resonances occur because the space between the surface of the Earth and the conductive ionosphere acts as a closed waveguide. The limited dimensions of the Earth cause this waveguide to act as a resonant cavity for electromagnetic wayves in the ELF band. The cavity is naturally excited by electric currents in lightning. Schumann resonances are the principal background in the electromagnetic spectrum between 3–69 Hz, and appear as distinct peaks at extremely low frequencies (ELF) around 7.83, 14.3, 20.8, 27.3 and 33.8 Hz.

In the normal mode description of Schumann resonances, the fundamental mode is a standing wave in the Earth-ionosphere cavity with a wavelenth equal to the circumference of the Earth. This lowest-frequency (and highest- intensity) mode of the Schumann resonance occurs at a frequency of approximately 7.83 Hz, but this frequency can vary slightly from a variety of factors, such as solar-induced perturbations to the ionosphere, which comprises the upper wall of the closed cavity. The higher resonance modes are spaced at approximately 6.5 Hz intervals, a characteristic attributed to the atmosphere’s spherical geometry. The peaks exhibit a spectral width of approximately 20% on account of the damping of the respective modes in the dissipative cavity. The eighth overtone lies at approximately 59.9 Hz.

The Earth’s magnetic field strength was measured by Carl Friedrich Gauss in 1835 and has been repeatedly measured since then, showing a relative decay of about 10% over the last 150 years.

Animals including birds and turtles can detect the Earth’s magnetic field, and use the field to navigate during migration. Cows align their bodies north-south in response to the magnetic field; this response is confused by the magnetic fields surrounding high voltage power lines.

More information

Frequency of EM Fields

Frequency of EM Fields


Static magnets produce only one field strength and no frequency. Cells “habituate to static magnetic fields. This is because cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) becomes depleted when living cells are exposed to static magnetic fields.

cAMP depletion does not occur when cells are exposed to time-varying electromagnetic fields (such at pulsating electromagnetic fields). Therefore, “frequency matters!” Pulsed fields have the potential for significantly greater health benefit due to the retention of important secondary messenger functions at the cell membrane. These secondary messengers carry important signals about the local environment from the cell membrane to the cell’s nucleus.

Hence, experimental evidence from a variety of sources (including drug, hormonal, and electrical) suggests that periodic, rather than continuous, stimulation is a part of nature’s basic order.

The frequency of electromagnetic waves passing through the human body is of great importance. Some frequencies are harmful, while others are beneficial. The bulk of experimental evidence supports the hypothesis that there are windows and the thresholds for many biological effects of magnetic field exposure.

For example, the electromagnetic field spectrum includes pulsating electromagnetic fields in the extremely low frequency range, from 0 to 300 Hz. The Earth’s magnetic field, which is natural, harmless, safe, and actually necessary for the health and survival of all life on our planet, is also in this range. Radio frequencies utilized by television, FM radio, cell phones and microwave ovens, are in the electromagnetic spectrum from 100 kHz to 300 GHz. Higher frequency electromagnetic radiation includes infrared, the visible light spectrum, ultraviolet light, x-rays, and gamma rays. Most people are familiar with the known and detrimental effects of overdoses of x-rays and ultraviolet light, if not radioactive materials, on human health.

So when discussing electromagnetism, it is essential to define our terms and realized that not all frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum are harmful. And in fact, some of these frequencies are part of our natural environment, and essential for health and for sustained life on this planet. Werner Heisenberg, Nobel Prize laureate and a founding father of modern quantum physics, stated: “Electromagnetism is the elemental energy upon which all of life in organisms depend.” If that is the case, by proclaiming all electromagnetic frequencies to be harmful and toxic to the human being we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

At a bare minimum, known frequencies that match the Earth’s natural electromagnetic fields can be regarded as safe for the human body. Currently the US Government has approved many devices for use in medicine and in the home that utilize frequencies far in excess of the Earth’s electromagnetic field. Examples would include the MRI scanner, the microwave oven, and compact fluorescent light bulbs. One of the important functions of this website is to educate our community to be able to differentiate between harmful and beneficial forms of electromagnetism.

More information:

Myth: Mechanisms of Pulsating EMFs are Unknown

There is an erroneous, but generally held, view that the mechanisms of action of pulsating electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) are not understood. Hundreds of PEMF effects documented in the laboratory are directly pertinent in the clinical settings for which this technology is now used worldwide. In fact, as much is known about PEMF the effects at the biological level as is known about the mechanisms of many drugs. For example, there is strong mechanistic and clinical evidence to support the efficacy of PEMFs as a therapeutic agent for osteochondritis dissecans, osteogenesis imperfecta, and chronic, refractory tendinitis. PEMFs have a detailed, long-term record of safety, backed by clinical, animal, and tissue culture studies over a 40 year interval. Despite this record, a perception of risk by uninformed physicians, scientists, consumers and lawyers who use the term electromagnetic fields generically can impede clinical progress.For example, postmenopausal and senile osteoporosis affects most of the skeleton, including the spine and hips. Weakening of the bone often leads to life-threatening fractures in the elderly. The use of PMS could save billions of dollars per year if osteoporosis, nonunion fractures and osteonecrosis hits were treated with PEMFs.