Negative ions effect benefit on the body ?

In summary, this company is selling bracelets and necklaces that allegedly emit negative ions. There is little to no scientific evidence to support the claimed benefits of these products.
  • #1
lnsanity
34
0
Negative ions effect benefit on the body ?

I saw many claim on the internet by company selling bracelet, necklace and insole that emit negative ion using volcanic ash,tourmaline or a mixture of many mineral.

They claim negative ion research stating increase energy, deeper sleep, more focus, increased alertness, better balance, improved circulation, faster recovery, enhanced strength, better flexibility, improved response, stabilized blood pressure, reduced fatigue, boosted immune system, reduced stress, arthritis relief, faster muscle repair, aid in relaxation, greater well being.

Can someone point me out to any study on ions effect on the body ? I read that the ministry of health in Japan as officially approve those kind of bracelet for there therapeutic effect and personally I did some balance test and felt a huge difference in my balance and trust me I exercise every day and do balance training every other day so I am kind of very accomplished in that field to be able to distinguish any tricks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It's all rubbish. Anything that claims to be such a panacea is definitely crap, moreover ions both positive and negative are a regular feature of bodily biochemistry. As for the Ministry of Health in Japan that's just another depressing example of how politicians will do anything for votes; other examples include astrology being rated a science by the Indian government and the UK National Health Service paying for homeopathic remedies in some places.

If you want to look into this kind of thing just look at what results terms like "Negative Ion Therapy" get from peer-reviewed publication databases like google scholar and pubmed. There's a whole lot of research, literally millions of man-hours regarding ions in biology but nothing that points out the supposedly magic fact that negative ions can cure almost anything.
 
  • #3
Ryan_m_b said:
It's all rubbish. Anything that claims to be such a panacea is definitely crap, moreover ions both positive and negative are a regular feature of bodily biochemistry. As for the Ministry of Health in Japan that's just another depressing example of how politicians will do anything for votes; other examples include astrology being rated a science by the Indian government and the UK National Health Service paying for homeopathic remedies in some places.

If you want to look into this kind of thing just look at what results terms like "Negative Ion Therapy" get from peer-reviewed publication databases like google scholar and pubmed. There's a whole lot of research, literally millions of man-hours regarding ions in biology but nothing that points out the supposedly magic fact that negative ions can cure almost anything.
Not to mention it's a bracelet or necklace.
 
  • #5
Evo said:
Not to mention it's a bracelet or necklace.

Indeed! To add to that ions are simply any charged atom and they have hugely different effects depending on what they are and where in the body they are placed. Cobalt ions for instance activate the hypoxia pathway as do strontium but mercury, sodium or iron definitely wouldn't do the same. Typical depressing snake-oil using technical sounding words to sell absolute rubbish to sick people or people who care for their health. It should be illegal and the penalty should be severe.
 
  • #6
Ryan_m_b said:
Indeed! To add to that ions are simply any charged atom and they have hugely different effects depending on what they are and where in the body they are placed. Cobalt ions for instance activate the hypoxia pathway as do strontium but mercury, sodium or iron definitely wouldn't do the same. Typical depressing snake-oil using technical sounding words to sell absolute rubbish to sick people or people who care for their health. It should be illegal and the penalty should be severe.

I've already reported one company to the FTC for false advertising, I recommend others do the same. I don't have too much hope that they'll do anything, but they DID shut down the Q-Ray bracelet scam a few years back.

Here's a link if you want to submit a complaint: https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

And for inspiration, here's a link to the FTC smackdown of Q-Ray:

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/01/qray.shtm

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has upheld a district court ruling requiring marketers of the “Q-Ray Ionized Bracelet” to give up almost $16 million in net profits as part of a maximum $87 million they must pay in refunds to consumers.
 
  • #7
Wrong country I'm afraid, I'm British. There are bodies to complain to, I just wish that there was a stronger incentive to enforce the law. Where I live there are several Chinese and Herbal medicine shops nearby. They advertise to be able to cure pretty much everything but there's very little law enforcement. Unless someone gets hurt it's left alone.
 
  • #8
Ryan_m_b said:
Wrong country I'm afraid, I'm British. There are bodies to complain to, I just wish that there was a stronger incentive to enforce the law. Where I live there are several Chinese and Herbal medicine shops nearby. They advertise to be able to cure pretty much everything but there's very little law enforcement. Unless someone gets hurt it's left alone.

Ah, I'm sorry. And it's a shame you can't even speak up for the actual science behind why the claims are crap, because the British libel laws suck. Just ask Simon Singh.
 
  • #9
Jack21222 said:
Ah, I'm sorry. And it's a shame you can't even speak up for the actual science behind why the claims are crap, because the British libel laws suck. Just ask Simon Singh.

Oh no you absolutely can. The law allows anyone to sue but unless they can prove in court that what was said is not true the case will fail, as in the case of Simon Singh (initially the claim of libel was upheld on the technicality that Singh implied that every chiropractor was deliberately dishonest [something he couldn't technically prove and the judge ruled was not phrased as opinion] but this weak ruling was overturned in the Court of Appeal as it rightly would be).

Regarding his case I actually rather enjoyed that, the fact that they sued him meant that every news channel and paper followed the story for weeks. This hugely boosted publicity of the issue way ahead of what Simon Singh would have got without it. It was a great example of the Streisand Effect offline.
 
  • #10
What do you fellows think of the following explanations from the forword of the new book "Energy Medicine East and West" with each paragraph written by different scientists. The whole thick book with over a hundred thousand paragraphs describes how this new science works. Sorry for quoting 3 paragraphs but in this times when the ministry of Japan believes in it. It needs the full scrunity of scientists like you. Just read the book for the rest of the explanation. But please comment if you think the following makes sense.

J. Oschman wrote:

It has now been demonstrated that electrons are indeed moving about within
the body. Barefoot contact with the earth, sometimes referred to as ‘earthing’,
allows mobile electrons from the surface of our planet – nature’s own antioxidants [19] – to enter our bodies and migrate to sites of inflammation. The process can often be felt as a warming or tingling in the legs by a person who has not been in contact with the Earth for a long time and who then stands barefoot on it. These feelings are caused by the dilation of blood vessels in the legs, and thinning of the blood brought about by the increase in negative charge on the surfaces of the blood cells and vascular walls. This negativity (the ‘zeta potential’) increases as electrons from the Earth enter the body through the feet or any other part of the body in contact with the Earth (Chevalier, et al submitted for publication, 2010). The process can also be monitored with medical infrared imaging, which reveals areas of inflammation because they are warmer than surrounding tissues. Parts of the body that have been inflamed for a long time, such as muscles or joints, will warm dramatically within minutes of conductive contact with the Earth [20]. It is only in recent times that our shoes, with their insulating soles made of plastic or rubber, and our contemporary homes and buildings have disconnected us from the earth. This seemingly harmless or even beneficial change in our lifestyle has had a dramatic impact on the incidence of chronic diseases associated with inflammation.

Earthing has now become the topic of careful study by more than a dozen scientists from the USA and Canada [21], and has recently been confirmed by an entirely independent group in Poland [22]. Chevalier and Mori [23], for example, have found that the bottoms of the feet are especially conductive at the region around the point known in the acupuncture literature as Kidney 1 (yongquan, KI-1), allowing electrons from the Earth to pass through the skin there. They are then distributed throughout the human body from this point, which connects to the Kidney and Bladder meridians and thence to all of the other meridians via the luo meridians that traverse the whole body and that spirally wrap the internal organs by coursing through their fascial envelopes [12] (and [9, p 142]). Electrons can thus be conducted from the Kidney meridian to a site of injury or inflammation anywhere in the body.

The electronic properties of the living matrix allow electrons from the earth, or from electron ‘reservoirs’ in the body (the ground substance), to protect healthy tissue from damage by reactive oxygen species (ROS, sometimes referred to as ‘free radicals’) that can occur as a result of normal metabolism, injury, or exposure to toxins or pollutants. When charged with electrons from the earth, the ground substance can thus keep the body in a state of inflammatory preparedness. This is a whole system condition that enables the immune system to respond quickly to injury by secretion of ROS into an injured area while preventing damage to nearby healthy tissues that have not been injured. In this concept, a healthy conductive matrix around a site of injury, and the entire meridian system, have active roles in the healing process by limiting the spread of damage.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
riezer said:
What do you fellows think of the following explanations from the forword of the new book "Energy Medicine East and West" with each paragraph written by different scientists. The whole thick book with over a hundred thousand paragraphs describes how this new science works. Sorry for quoting 3 paragraphs but in this times when the ministry of Japan believes in it. It needs the full scrunity of scientists like you. Just read the book for the rest of the explanation. But please comment if you think the following makes sense.

J. Oschman wrote:

I really don't have time to go through all of this but everything in that quote is complete bunk. For example when it mentions that electrons flow freely in the body (of course, we have electrochemical reactions inside us and we've known that for decades), it mentions that catch-all of pseudo-science antioxides and it suggests that contact with the Earth speeds up recovery.

Anyone can write a book and say it's written by scientists. Hell, the discovery institute do that all the time. To be science however it has to be founded on data. It needs peer-reviewed, published data from well designed experimentation.

I would advise reading Ben Goldacres "Bad Science" of just going to his website. He covers and debunks a whole range of issues and talks about the important difference between science and people just writing science sounding words.
 
  • #12
Ryan_m_b said:
I really don't have time to go through all of this but everything in that quote is complete bunk. For example when it mentions that electrons flow freely in the body (of course, we have electrochemical reactions inside us and we've known that for decades), it mentions that catch-all of pseudo-science antioxides and it suggests that contact with the Earth speeds up recovery.

Anyone can write a book and say it's written by scientists. Hell, the discovery institute do that all the time. To be science however it has to be founded on data. It needs peer-reviewed, published data from well designed experimentation.

I would advise reading Ben Goldacres "Bad Science" of just going to his website. He covers and debunks a whole range of issues and talks about the important difference between science and people just writing science sounding words.

It has to do with this mysterious thing called Qi. The book attempts to tackle it but the authors admit they still don't know what really is it because it may be 22th century physics so they have to go into all sorts of speculations ranging from some of the authors thinking it is really oxidative respiration to some thinking it may be Bohm quantum potential. Some authors think they are just negative ions and this is the reason for this thread question because some theorize it thus.

You may state the obvious that qi may just be nothing. Well. If you study the literature and have personal hands-on of it. You will realize that it is some kind of conscious energy that is not yet described in our current physics. Qi is related to sentience and consciousness. Qi is related to new field called conscious field and since the dawn of civilization people deal and handle it in all sorts of ways. There is a chapter in the book which speculates qi may be simply an aspect or energy aspect of Bohm Implicate Order. And Etc. Ponder on all this.

"In every culture and in every medical tradition before ours, healing was accomplished by moving energy" - Nobel Prize Laureate Albert Szent-Györgyi
 
  • #13
riezer said:
It has to do with this mysterious thing called Qi...

There's a reason pseudo-science has the preffix, it's because it has not one shred of repeatable evidence, conflicts with what we already know and has little internal consistency. Trust me, you would do better to read a book like Bad Science so that in future you can separate pseudo-science from real science.

When confronted with any claim there are two things that should be asked first: What is it and how do you know it exists? If they can definite it consistently and concisely (i.e. not vague terms like "energy" and "consciousness") and provide you with reproducible, objective data that's been published peer-reviewed then great, if not it's most likely rubbish. Especially if they start adding phrases like "this is 22nd century physics" (that doesn't mean anything unless they have a time machine) or "ancient cultures have known about this" (then why can't millions of man hours of dedicated research find any indication of it?) or "science is constricting and dogmatic, you have to open your mind" (rubbish, science is the pursuit of truth through empirical reasoning and can be applied to anything) etc etc etc.

One last thing to ask yourself; When confronted with any medical claim, especially one that claims to cure so many varied conditions, ask why it is that this medicine hasn't been tested, proved, patented, improved and solved. If you can't answer that without resorting to a conspiracy theory that's another indication that what you are dealing with is nonsense.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
riezer said:
"In every culture and in every medical tradition before ours, healing was accomplished by moving energy" - Nobel Prize Laureate Albert Szent-Györgyi

I'd be interested in seeing the rest of that quote. That sounds like something I'd say as a preface... followed up with "But now, we have tools that ACTUALLY work." I've been googling for 10 minutes, and I can't find any context for that quote.

The problem with quote mining is you can take words out of context, and flip them to mean the exact opposite of what the author was saying. And even if the person WAS trying to promote "energy healing," the fact that he won a Nobel prize is meaningless. It doesn't matter who makes a guess in science, the only thing that matters is if that guess conforms to the data.

There is absolutely zero credible evidence about energy healing. None.
 
  • #15
Ryan_m_b said:
There's a reason pseudo-science has the preffix, it's because it has not one shred of repeatable evidence, conflicts with what we already know and has little internal consistency. Trust me, you would do better to read a book like Bad Science so that in future you can separate pseudo-science from real science.

When confronted with any claim there are two things that should be asked first: What is it and how do you know it exists? If they can definite it consistently and concisely (i.e. not vague terms like "energy" and "consciousness") and provide you with reproducible, objective data that's been published peer-reviewed then great, if not it's most likely rubbish. Especially if they start adding phrases like "this is 22nd century physics" (that doesn't mean anything unless they have a time machine) or "ancient cultures have known about this" (then why can't millions of man hours of dedicated research find any indication of it?) or "science is constricting and dogmatic, you have to open your mind" (rubbish, science is the pursuit of truth through empirical reasoning and can be applied to anything) etc etc etc.

One last thing to ask yourself; When confronted with any medical claim, especially one that claims to cure so many varied conditions, ask why it is that this medicine hasn't been tested, proved, patented, improved and solved. If you can't answer that without resorting to a conspiracy theory that's another indication that what you are dealing with is nonsense.

To follow forum rules.. I know one must only have discussion where we discuss what their predictions are and what science says.

Ok. So what are the predictions of "qi" and what does science says about it.

Qi predicts that when we feel emotion or have any feelings. We are dealing with "conscious energy".
Here Qi doesn't claim to explain curing cancer or other diseases. It only deals with the qualia of being alive and the corresponding health connections. And Qi claim that when you are full of life and vibrant.. your Qi is optimal which causes the immune system to be optimal and everyone knows that nothing beat the immune system in fighting diseases. The immune system is our most powerful ally

What does science say about Qi.

Well. Science doesn't deal with emotions or feelings or qualia or subjective experience. So it doesn't have anything to say about it, other than saying Qi is pseudo-science.

Science put Qi, Bohm Implicate Order, and other stuff they don't want to deal in the sidelines and trash.

Now experimental support. Does Qi have any experimental support? Many.. but unfortunately not peer reviewed (because no official scientists want to have anything to do with it)... although many underground groups in China, France, Europe, etc. are studying it fully.

This is what is Qi and what are its predictions and what science says about it.
 
  • #16
riezer said:
To follow forum rules.. I know one must only have discussion where we discuss what their predictions are and what science says.

Ok. So what are the predictions of "qi" and what does science says about it.

Qi predicts that when we feel emotion or have any feelings. We are dealing with "conscious energy".

That's not a prediction. It's trivial to predict things after the fact. What future predictions does Qi make? And are the claims falsifiable? (That is to say, is there ANY possible outcome in which you would say "wow, Qi doesn't predict that, maybe Qi is wrong.) If there is no such possible outcome, there's no sense in even talking to you.


What does science say about Qi.

Well. Science doesn't deal with emotions or feelings or qualia or subjective experience.

YES IT DOES. Holy crap, have you never heard of neurobiology before? Or psychology? There are ENTIRE FIELDS of science dedicated to the study of emotions.


So it doesn't have anything to say about it, other than saying Qi is pseudo-science.

Science put Qi, Bohm Implicate Order, and other stuff they don't want to deal in the sidelines and trash.

There's a reason for that. Scientists don't want to deal with that because they offer no mechanism, make no predictions, and have no evidence.

Now experimental support. Does Qi have any experimental support? Many.. but unfortunately not peer reviewed (because no official scientists want to have anything to do with it)... although many underground groups in China, France, Europe, etc. are studying it fully.

This is what is Qi and what are its predictions and what science says about it.

Oh, it's those darn closed-minded scientists and their conspiracy to keep Qi out of the scientific literature. Right.

The nice thing about science is that even if a scientist thinks a hypothesis is completely wrong, if the evidence keeps piling up in its favor, he or she will pretty much have to come around and acknowledge it. Science is FULL of situations where an implausible hypothesis has come to be accepted.

Your hand-wavy mystic stuff doesn't reach that threshold.
 
  • #17
riezer said:
To follow forum rules.. I know one must only have discussion where we discuss what their predictions are and what science says.

Ok. So what are the predictions of "qi" and what does science says about it.

Qi predicts that when we feel emotion or have any feelings. We are dealing with "conscious energy".
Here Qi doesn't claim to explain curing cancer or other diseases. It only deals with the qualia of being alive and the corresponding health connections. And Qi claim that when you are full of life and vibrant.. your Qi is optimal which causes the immune system to be optimal and everyone knows that nothing beat the immune system in fighting diseases. The immune system is our most powerful ally

What does science say about Qi.

Well. Science doesn't deal with emotions or feelings or qualia or subjective experience. So it doesn't have anything to say about it, other than saying Qi is pseudo-science.

Science put Qi, Bohm Implicate Order, and other stuff they don't want to deal in the sidelines and trash.

Now experimental support. Does Qi have any experimental support? Many.. but unfortunately not peer reviewed (because no official scientists want to have anything to do with it)... although many underground groups in China, France, Europe, etc. are studying it fully.

This is what is Qi and what are its predictions and what science says about it.

Ok so where is any evidence for this? It's one thing to say that Qi is responsible for X, Y and Z but how do you know? What is the definition of "Qi". At the moment all I've ever been presented with is very vague descriptions that is "energy" or "life force". In reality it just sounds like old fashioned ideas relating to spirits but with new technobabble attached.

Science does deal with emotions, feelings and even qualia. Those are covered by fields like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviorism" [Broken] is obviously a huge field so we have a lot of knowledge there. The reason science has little to say on things like Qi (other than they are bunk) is that they make predictions that when tested are shown to be false. We have a wealth of knowledge regarding the proper functioning of the immune system but not once have we found anything to suggest that some sort of ethereal conscious energy is involved. Don't you think it's strange that out of the millions of man hours of research in the fields of biology and medicine that we've never once found anything that looks like this? But we've always found that chemistry is ultimately responsible?

I don't mean to come off as rude here but have you actually read up on any of this stuff? You're coming across as someone who has only ever read a book on Qi and is regurgitating it. Why don't you go and read a science book on a subject when you hear that Qi is responsible. Instead of believing that Qi exists and is responsible for health why not buy a book on immunology, or a book on nutrition (written by a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietitian" [Broken]) or a book on psychology, neuroscience and consciousness? You'll find that real life is infinitely more complex and fascinating than "magic does it".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18
riezer:

You might want to read this article by Karl Popper about what a scientific claim is, and then you can tell me how you think Qi qualifies:

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html

Read the whole thing, but here is an important part:

# It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory — if we look for confirmations.

# Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question, we should have expected an event which was incompatible with the theory — an event which would have refuted the theory.

# Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.

# A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice.

# Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability: some theories are more testable, more exposed to refutation, than others; they take, as it were, greater risks.

# Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. (I now speak in such cases of "corroborating evidence.")

# Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers — for example by introducing ad hoc some auxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theory ad hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. Such a procedure is always possible, but it rescues the theory from refutation only at the price of destroying, or at least lowering, its scientific status. (I later described such a rescuing operation as a "conventionalist twist" or a "conventionalist stratagem.")
 
  • #19
Jack21222 said:
riezer:

You might want to read this article by Karl Popper about what a scientific claim is, and then you can tell me how you think Qi qualifies:

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html

Read the whole thing, but here is an important part:

I do love that text. Here's my favourite bit, especially the last line;
Karl Popper said:
Astrology did not pass the test. Astrologers were greatly impressed, and misled, by what they believed to be confirming evidence — so much so that they were quite unimpressed by any unfavorable evidence. Moreover, by making their interpretations and prophesies sufficiently vague they were able to explain away anything that might have been a refutation of the theory had the theory and the prophesies been more precise. In order to escape falsification they destroyed the testability of their theory. It is a typical soothsayer's trick to predict things so vaguely that the predictions can hardly fail: that they become irrefutable.
 
  • #20
Jack21222 said:
That's not a prediction. It's trivial to predict things after the fact. What future predictions does Qi make? And are the claims falsifiable? (That is to say, is there ANY possible outcome in which you would say "wow, Qi doesn't predict that, maybe Qi is wrong.) If there is no such possible outcome, there's no sense in even talking to you.




YES IT DOES. Holy crap, have you never heard of neurobiology before? Or psychology? There are ENTIRE FIELDS of science dedicated to the study of emotions.




There's a reason for that. Scientists don't want to deal with that because they offer no mechanism, make no predictions, and have no evidence.



Oh, it's those darn closed-minded scientists and their conspiracy to keep Qi out of the scientific literature. Right.

The nice thing about science is that even if a scientist thinks a hypothesis is completely wrong, if the evidence keeps piling up in its favor, he or she will pretty much have to come around and acknowledge it. Science is FULL of situations where an implausible hypothesis has come to be accepted.

Your hand-wavy mystic stuff doesn't reach that threshold.

<applause>
 
  • #21
lnsanity said:
Negative ions effect benefit on the body ?

I saw many claim on the internet by company selling bracelet, necklace and insole that emit negative ion using volcanic ash,tourmaline or a mixture of many mineral.

They claim negative ion research stating increase energy, deeper sleep, more focus, increased alertness, better balance, improved circulation, faster recovery, enhanced strength, better flexibility, improved response, stabilized blood pressure, reduced fatigue, boosted immune system, reduced stress, arthritis relief, faster muscle repair, aid in relaxation, greater well being.

Can someone point me out to any study on ions effect on the body ? I read that the ministry of health in Japan as officially approve those kind of bracelet for there therapeutic effect and personally I did some balance test and felt a huge difference in my balance and trust me I exercise every day and do balance training every other day so I am kind of very accomplished in that field to be able to distinguish any tricks.

Negative ions may have a beneficial effect on health* (not sure however if that has been established beyond doubt), and for that purpose one can buy ionizers for in-house and office use. However, that should not be confused with bracelets and necklaces, which do not "emit negative ions"! :biggrin:

*see for example http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/negative-ions-create-positive-vibes
(I hope that webmd isn't considered a crank site!)
 
  • #22
harrylin said:
Negative ions may have a beneficial effect on health* (not sure however if that has been established beyond doubt), and for that purpose one can buy ionizers for in-house and office use. However, that should not be confused with bracelets and necklaces, which do not "emit negative ions"! :biggrin:

*see for example http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/negative-ions-create-positive-vibes
(I hope that webmd isn't considered a crank site!)

It hasn't been established beyond doubt. The key line from the article you quoted is here:

...do they really work as well as antidepressants? Can they also relieve allergies by filtering out dust mites and dander?

It's too early to tell for sure, experts tell WebMD...

Bolding mine.
 
  • #23
Jack21222 said:
It hasn't been established beyond doubt. The key line from the article you quoted is here:
Bolding mine.
I know, that info dates from 2002. Cheers.
 
  • #24
harrylin said:
Negative ions may have a beneficial effect on health* (not sure however if that has been established beyond doubt), and for that purpose one can buy ionizers for in-house and office use. However, that should not be confused with bracelets and necklaces, which do not "emit negative ions"! :biggrin:

*see for example http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/negative-ions-create-positive-vibes
(I hope that webmd isn't considered a crank site!)

That article looks completely bogus to me. I haven't read it properly or fact checked it (I'm very jet-lagged right now and barely know what country I'm in) but statements like "people report lighter moods on the beach where more negative ions are found" are monumentally stupid. These types of statements are given to students so they can learn fallacies of causation and correlation!
 
  • #25
Ryan_m_b said:
That article looks completely bogus to me. I haven't read it properly or fact checked it (I'm very jet-lagged right now and barely know what country I'm in) but statements like "people report lighter moods on the beach where more negative ions are found" are monumentally stupid. These types of statements are given to students so they can learn fallacies of causation and correlation!

It looks like the average journalism quality to me. :wink: What matters is of course the cited references, which interested people may want to look up (Google Scholar may be required!).
 
  • #26
Nevermind all the principles behind negative ions on the body after I can see it has been thoroughly analyzed, but have any of you actually tried one of the "negative ion" accessoiries like a bracelet or something?
 
  • #27
Jsears said:
Nevermind all the principles behind negative ions on the body after I can see it has been thoroughly analyzed, but have any of you actually tried one of the "negative ion" accessoiries like a bracelet or something?

Negative ion bracelets use just the same pseudo-science. Some of them suggest that the ions seep into the body and heal pretty much everything (see the rest of this thread to see why that's a load of rubbish) and others suggest some kind of magic effect just by wearing it. Also rubbish.
 
  • #28
Jsears said:
Nevermind all the principles behind negative ions on the body after I can see it has been thoroughly analyzed, but have any of you actually tried one of the "negative ion" accessoiries like a bracelet or something?

A bracelet does not emit negative ions - assuming that it's not radioactive; that would be a very bad idea. :wink:
 
  • #29
Jsears said:
Nevermind all the principles behind negative ions on the body after I can see it has been thoroughly analyzed, but have any of you actually tried one of the "negative ion" accessoiries like a bracelet or something?

I haven't, but I don't see how that would be useful. I just don't have the 30 bucks to throw away, I'm broke.
 
  • #30
Jsears said:
Nevermind all the principles behind negative ions on the body after I can see it has been thoroughly analyzed, but have any of you actually tried one of the "negative ion" accessoiries like a bracelet or something?

You have zero posts and you registered today. That means that you registered an account for the sole purpose of asking this question. The only reason some one would do that is if they had performed a search (perhaps on Google) which returned this discussion as a primary result and felt the need to comment.

Further, given that the content of you post was to cast doubt on the, otherwise rational, discussion by asking for anecdotal evidence (a profoundly unscientific request), I can deduce that you're not interested in the actual functioning of the device, but rather the perceived functioning of the device.

"Nevermind the science, how do you feel?" is the mantra of the pseudo-scientist operating in the medical field. This same pseudo-scientist has popped into a forum with thousands of threads to post on a single topic.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4pMwghPe_XM_Nc89oLYRx9nXjzjdT7OAsuEipJlNpXyy4L2kMOxlRsMGq.jpg


You, sir, sell negative ion bracelets.


(Image source: http://videos.al.com/2009/05/index.html)
 
  • #31
FlexGunship said:
[..] given that the content of you post was to cast doubt on the, otherwise rational, discussion by asking for anecdotal evidence (a profoundly unscientific request), I can deduce that you're not interested in the actual functioning of the device, but rather the perceived functioning of the device.

[..]

While agreeing with most of your post, I differ on one point: the question "have any of you actually tried one" could mean "did you actually test one". And that is of course a very scientific request, as in the end the scientific verdict must be based on experiments.

My reply was indirectly referring to experimental results, which I generalised: from experience we know that such items do not emit ions.
 
Last edited:
  • #32
harrylin said:
My reply was indirectly referring to experimental results, which I generalised: from experience we know that such times do not emit ions.

I find it interesting (and telling) that doing any kind of pubmed/webofsci/google scholar search brings back thousands upon thousands of results for the study of negative ions in biological and medical research. None of which is as simple as "negative ions improve health". Instead you get nicely realistic results like "the effects of cobalt ions on endothelial cells in developing vasculature".

In fact the only study I've found on bracelets is Effect of “Ionized” Wrist Bracelets on Musculoskeletal Pain: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial by Robert L. Bratton, MD, Daniel P. Montero et al 2002. An interesting yet predictable study that shows that negative ion bracelets were placebos only.
 
  • #33
Ryan_m_b said:
I find it interesting (and telling) that doing any kind of pubmed/webofsci/google scholar search brings back thousands upon thousands of results for the study of negative ions in biological and medical research. None of which is as simple as "negative ions improve health". Instead you get nicely realistic results like "the effects of cobalt ions on endothelial cells in developing vasculature".

In fact the only study I've found on bracelets is Effect of “Ionized” Wrist Bracelets on Musculoskeletal Pain: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial by Robert L. Bratton, MD, Daniel P. Montero et al 2002. An interesting yet predictable study that shows that negative ion bracelets were placebos only.

Great find! :smile:

Note: you can find the document by copying the above reference in Google; Ryan did you not provide the link because you think that Mayo Clinic is a doubtful website? Then I also won't give it!
 
  • #34
harrylin said:
Great find! :smile:

Note: you can find the document by copying the above reference in Google; Ryan did you not provide the link because you think that Mayo Cliinic is a doubtful website? Then I also won't give it!

Thankyou :smile: I found the link by going through http://scholar.google.co.uk/" [Broken] and typing in various combinations of search terms such as;
  • Negative ions AND health
  • Negative ion therapy
  • Negative ion bracelets
I also used pubmed and webofsci (the latter of which I think you have to be a member to use) but they only turned back specific papers about specific ions in specific biological processes. I don't have any problem with the mayoclinic, partly because I've never heard of them but they are peer-reviewed which is a good indication. The paper has to stand on it's own merits obviously and whilst I haven't thoroughly scrutinized it the quick read I gave it showed it to be of good methodology (although I would have made my graphs clearer and had another control group receiving standard treatment if I were doing it).

Interestingly however I just did a google scholar search again this time with patents included and now there is more information on bracelets however only in the form of people lodging patents for different kinds and saying things like "the release of negative ions will improve X, Y, Z health issues".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
Here is the study.

http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/77/11/1164.full.pdf [Broken]

The study was conducted between 2000-2001. It won the Florida Academy of Family Physicians first-place award for research in October. Mayo Clinic Proceedings is a peer-reviewed and indexed general internal medicine journal, published for more than 75 years by Mayo Foundation, with a circulation of 130,000 nationally and internationally

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/11/021112075531.htm

It was linked to from the Skepdic article, but the link was broken.

http://www.skepdic.com/qray.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What are negative ions and how do they affect the body?

Negative ions are molecules with an extra electron, and they are found in nature in places like waterfalls, beaches, and forests. When we breathe in negative ions, they interact with our bodies and produce biochemical reactions that have various benefits.

2. What are the potential benefits of negative ions on the body?

Negative ions have been linked to numerous health benefits, including improved mood, reduced stress and anxiety, increased energy levels, and improved sleep quality. They may also help boost the immune system and improve overall well-being.

3. How do negative ions improve air quality?

Negative ions have been shown to attach to and neutralize harmful particles in the air, such as pollutants, allergens, and bacteria. This can help to purify the air and improve its overall quality, making it easier to breathe and reducing the risk of respiratory issues.

4. Can negative ions help with respiratory conditions?

There is some evidence that negative ions may have a positive effect on respiratory conditions, such as asthma and allergies. They may help to reduce inflammation and improve lung function, making it easier for individuals with these conditions to breathe.

5. How can negative ions be incorporated into daily life for maximum benefit?

Negative ions can be found in nature, but they can also be generated through certain devices, such as air purifiers and ionizers. Spending time in nature, near bodies of water, or using these devices in indoor spaces can help to increase exposure to negative ions and reap their potential benefits on the body.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
23K
  • General Discussion
Replies
28
Views
9K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
38K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top