It's a bit hard to know if the screening and enrolment was all done at one time, or if it was a process.I don't think this is what happened, as they started with 33 participants and 3 dropped out.
Especially the decrease on the SF-36 Emotional Well-Being and PROMIS fatigue in controls is quite remarkable.Of the 2 significant Mood and Quality of Life Outcomes, the controls had a larger negative change than the improvement in the active group. A treatment being efficacious because the controls got worse doesn't seem like the basis of a quality treatment.
Here’s Hannah Davis, an expert in “bias in data sets” hyping the study
Hannah E. Davis - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
“New paper shows an MMT (Microtesla Magnetic Therapy) device improves memory, verbal learning, processing speed, and more in #LongCovid patients with objective cognitive impairments.Some of the most hope I've felt in forever - thank you so much @PutrinoLab and team for this!!!!”
Thus, I think the conclusion makes it sound too much like they found an intervention that works:
Preliminary findings suggest sustained clinically meaningful improvements in multiple cognitive domains and mood following treatment.
triple-blind, placebo-controlled microtesla magnetic therapy (MMT) is safe, feasible and effective in reducing cognitive impairment in people with #LongCOVID.
Putrino clarification:
I want to thank everyone for the interest in this work that we completed in a #LongCOVID cohort...
Let’s say the magical device actually emits 27.12mHz is this actually something you want around your eyes as they are mostly fluid and would heat up potentially. Secondly can this even penetrate though skull, sounds like this stops in fatty layers. Is this really something you should be doing everyday:
Shortwave Diathermy | Therapeutic Modalities, 4e | F.A. Davis AT Collection | McGraw Hill Medical
https://fadavisat.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=2659§ionid=218372884#218372895
Protection of Workers Exposed to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: A Perspective on Open Questions in the Context of the New ICNIRP 2020 Guidelines - PMC
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9215329/
I’m not convinced with the study designed so poorly any safety has been done. Anyone know if this thing has ANY additional testing? Maybe it actually a good thing it’s a null result. Who knows what this thing is actually producing
I'm not a physicist and limited in knowledge but according to Putrino the strength of the magnet is 1/100,000th of the strength of magnet used in TMS (which is roughly 1-3 Tesla) and it generates a continous field rather than an oscialliting or pulsed one (as for TMS). That means the magnetic field of the device would be comparable to that of earth's own magnetic field or just holding a phone, radio next to your face or sitting by your fridge.Let’s say the magical device actually emits 27.12mHz is this actually something you want around your eyes as they are mostly fluid and would heat up potentially. Secondly can this even penetrate though skull, sounds like this stops in fatty layers. Is this really something you should be doing everyday:
Shortwave Diathermy | Therapeutic Modalities, 4e | F.A. Davis AT Collection | McGraw Hill Medical
https://fadavisat.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=2659§ionid=218372884#218372895
Protection of Workers Exposed to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: A Perspective on Open Questions in the Context of the New ICNIRP 2020 Guidelines - PMC
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9215329/
I’m not convinced with the study designed so poorly any safety has been done. Anyone know if this thing has ANY additional testing? Maybe it actually a good thing it’s a null result. Who knows what this thing is actually producing
Ah yes gotcha. Yeah would have to see some power it’s emitting. Honestly probably not worth the effort of figuring this out, but yeah at that power range quoted it’s less than the earths magnetic field hahaI'm not a physicist and limited in knowledge but according to Putrino the strength of the magnet is 1/100,000th of the strength of magnet used in TMS (which is roughly 1-3 Tesla) and it generates a continous field rather than an oscialliting or pulsed one (as for TMS). That means the magnetic field of the device would be comparable to that of earth's own magnetic field or just holding a phone, radio next to your face or sitting by your fridge.
Thanks for sharing. I don't have twitter, so I can see only the first message, the one marked as "1/" starting with:
Would you or someone else mind copy-pasting or screenshoting the rest?
Thank you very much!![]()
Thread by @PutrinoLab on Thread Reader App
@PutrinoLab: I want to thank everyone for the interest in this work that we completed in a #LongCOVID cohort with this novel device. I always appreciate feedback and want to thank folks for holding me accountable...…threadreaderapp.com
Here is the full thread.
Most importantly: enthusiasm should not ever trump rigor
For those who don't jive with the Ex-Twitter:just a post on Putrino that says he had published this book. You can draw whatever conclusion from this..
(Also, WTAF is this)
Isn't most of BPS research done like that?Especially the decrease on the SF-36 Emotional Well-Being and PROMIS fatigue in controls is quite remarkable.
The most fascinating effect to me is how little placebo-like effects some clinicans are able to produce for example compared to the Norwegians and many other clinicans in the field when it comes to the placebo-group improvements that we've seen. Is it that some people are uncompassionate and uncovinvicing that they can't generate small Hawthorne effects or why is that?
@dave30th when was the last time a major BPS researcher published a study with such apparent methodological flaws and then reported efficacy and went onto the internet to boast about efficacy, possible FDA approval and speculated about mechanisms for which only negative evidence exists?
Regarding that X comment, I don’t get the vibe that Putrino is a financial grifter.(Also, WTAF is this)