Advertisement

Electromagnetic Fields Shrink Tumors

New research shows that low-intensity fields can inhibit cancer cell proliferation.

By | January 11, 2012

image: Electromagnetic Fields Shrink Tumors Very high magnification micrograph of fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinomaWikimedia Commons, Nephron

Very high magnification micrograph of fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma WIKIMEDIA COMMONS, NEPHRON

Researchers have demonstrated that small doses of electromagnetism can shrink liver and breast cancer cells without harming surrounding tissues, according to a report published recently in the British Journal of Cancer.

An international team, led by University of Alabama at Birmingham oncologist Boris Pasche, has shown that low-intensity electromagnetic fields can slow the proliferation of and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cells, which are involved with a deadly form of liver cancer, and breast cancer cells. The researchers used radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that were about 27 megahertz—100 to 1,000 times weaker than the fields generated by cell phones. "This is a truly novel technique," Pasche told The Guardian. "It is innocuous, can be tolerated for long periods of time, and could be used in combination with other therapies."

The new study follows up on clinical work the team published last year reporting the results of a trial done in HCC patients. In August, Pasche and his colleagues published a British Journal of Cancer paper showing that they could slow tumor growth in some HCC patients by treating them with low-level electromagnetic fields on a regular basis. In total, 41 patients received the treatments, which involved holding a spoon-shape antenna connected to a battery-powered electromagnetic field generator in their mouths for one hour, three times a day. After 6 months of treatment, tumor growth in 14 of those patients had stabilized, and none experienced negative side effects.

Pasche told The Guardian that the US Food and Drug Administration had granted permission for him to carry out more trials on larger groups of patients.

Advertisement
Keystone Symposia
Keystone Symposia

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You

You

Processing...
Processing...

Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo

Comments

Avatar of: Stuart Saunders

Stuart Saunders

Posts: 8

January 11, 2012

"The researchers used radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that were about 27 megahertz—100 to 1,000 times weaker than the fields generated by cell phones."
This appears to imply that a 27 MHz field is 100 to 1,000 times weaker than a cell phone. Not true - could also be 100 to 1,000 times stronger. Or any other strength.WHY WHY WHY don't journos have the orig. researcher proof their reports?

Avatar of: TheSciAdmin

TheSciAdmin

Posts: 56

January 11, 2012

Hi Stuart,

And thanks so much for reading. I think you're referring to the very good point that the "strength" or "intensity" of an electromagnetic field really depends on it's proximity to a reference point, such as a person's head. The researchers who conducted this study used an electromagnetic field field generator that bathed cancer cells in a 27.12 MHz field in vitro and at a proximity that approximated that used in the clinical trial of liver cancer patients. The frequency of cell phones, which are typically held in contact with the user's head, ranges between 800 and 2200 MHz, give or take. In the clinical trial, they used a 27.12 MHz field emanating from an antenna placed in the patients' mouths.

Thanks again for reading,

Bob Grant
The Scientist

Avatar of: kenwil

kenwil

Posts: 5

January 11, 2012

It all sounds like magic. Medicine or "Alternative Medicine"?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 11, 2012

"The researchers used radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that were about 27 megahertz—100 to 1,000 times weaker than the fields generated by cell phones."
This appears to imply that a 27 MHz field is 100 to 1,000 times weaker than a cell phone. Not true - could also be 100 to 1,000 times stronger. Or any other strength.WHY WHY WHY don't journos have the orig. researcher proof their reports?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 11, 2012

Hi Stuart,

And thanks so much for reading. I think you're referring to the very good point that the "strength" or "intensity" of an electromagnetic field really depends on it's proximity to a reference point, such as a person's head. The researchers who conducted this study used an electromagnetic field field generator that bathed cancer cells in a 27.12 MHz field in vitro and at a proximity that approximated that used in the clinical trial of liver cancer patients. The frequency of cell phones, which are typically held in contact with the user's head, ranges between 800 and 2200 MHz, give or take. In the clinical trial, they used a 27.12 MHz field emanating from an antenna placed in the patients' mouths.

Thanks again for reading,

Bob Grant
The Scientist

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 11, 2012

It all sounds like magic. Medicine or "Alternative Medicine"?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 11, 2012

"The researchers used radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that were about 27 megahertz—100 to 1,000 times weaker than the fields generated by cell phones."
This appears to imply that a 27 MHz field is 100 to 1,000 times weaker than a cell phone. Not true - could also be 100 to 1,000 times stronger. Or any other strength.WHY WHY WHY don't journos have the orig. researcher proof their reports?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 11, 2012

Hi Stuart,

And thanks so much for reading. I think you're referring to the very good point that the "strength" or "intensity" of an electromagnetic field really depends on it's proximity to a reference point, such as a person's head. The researchers who conducted this study used an electromagnetic field field generator that bathed cancer cells in a 27.12 MHz field in vitro and at a proximity that approximated that used in the clinical trial of liver cancer patients. The frequency of cell phones, which are typically held in contact with the user's head, ranges between 800 and 2200 MHz, give or take. In the clinical trial, they used a 27.12 MHz field emanating from an antenna placed in the patients' mouths.

Thanks again for reading,

Bob Grant
The Scientist

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 11, 2012

It all sounds like magic. Medicine or "Alternative Medicine"?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 12, 2012

Does the electromagnetic field influence the growth of fetus?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

January 12, 2012

Does the electromagnetic field influence the growth of fetus?

Avatar of: ZhaomingTang

ZhaomingTang

Posts: 1

January 12, 2012

Does the electromagnetic field influence the growth of fetus?

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube
Advertisement

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
The Scientist
The Scientist
Advertisement
The Scientist
The Scientist