Thread by @RobertGaristo

@nprscience I have several problems with this @joepalca story, expressed in the form of Qs. Forgive me, the list is long:
1) Is the assertion that electric fields *cause* healing effects or are *caused by* them?
2) If the former (which seems to be the claim), what’s the evidence for this?

@nprscience @joepalca 3) What’s a plausible physical mechanism for this?
4) Is it in accord with known laws of physics & chemistry?
5) If so, has that mechanism been tested rigorously?

@nprscience @joepalca 6) How extensive were the clinical trials of the rat band-aid?
7) How was the control established?
8) What was the statistical significance of the results?
9) Where was it published?
10) Has anyone outside U of W reproduced the study?

@nprscience @joepalca 11) Why would an electric field in a band-aid have the same effect inside the body?
12) Ask 3-5 for this.

@nprscience @joepalca 13) Why would the electric field effect for healing (assuming all the above satisfied) have anything to do with male pattern baldness?
14) 3-5 again for this.

@nprscience @joepalca 15) Why was no one not working on the study or follow-ups consulted?
16) Why was no peer review vetting (where published) discussed?
17) Why do a story when no human trials have even been conducted? #InMice

@nprscience @joepalca Frankly, without compelling answers to these questions, I think that you should consider retracting the story.

There’s been a lot of misinformation about EM fields and biology over the years, so being careful with these connections is important.

@threadreaderapp please unroll.