I googled "blood electrification" and the only remotely staid reference I found was here on Wikipedia. There's almost nothing on it except the fatal phrase: "no controlled studies." That means there were never any experiments done where half the patients received the electrical treatment (plus standard treatment, since it would be unethical to deprive them of it) and half received only standard treatment. Furthermore, to be valid, the experimenter has to be unaware of which patients are in which group, i.e. it has to be a "double-blind" experiment. The reason for this is because people's capacity to fool themselves, and that includes scientists doing experiments, is infinite.
The lack of controlled studies is why no "respectable" scientist pays any attention. I find it less than confidence inspiring that lots of people, Dr. Beck included, are selling the equipment to carry out the treatment, but nobody can drum up the several thousand dollars needed for a controlled study. This is not a good sign.
As for the theory behind it, that viruses, bacteria or parasites could be selectively destroyed by given frequencies of sound, light, by voltages, and so on, that's entirely possible. I haven't heard of any work like that, but it doesn't sound impossible. (Lasers are being used experimentally to target tumors to which monoclonal antibodies have ferried specific destructive compounds that the laser then activates.) The biggest problem is that living organisms are similar in so many ways that finding selective killers is very difficult. I would expect an electrical current that could kill viruses would also kill lots of essential blood components. One weak enough to leave the blood undamaged would have no effect on a virus.
I'd love to be proven wrong on that, so I wish Beck and Co. would hurry up and get some actual proof. |
