# Young Forever - Eternal Life Device? Or am I just Crazy?

## Recommended Posts

well i dont care what anyone says, i KNOW that the rings of eternal life work

i'v been wearing one for the past month and, in the entire time that i have been wearing them, i HAVE NOT ONCE DIED!

proof. i rest my case. etc.

##### Share on other sites

And God was British,every sane person knows that.Jeez the bible is even written in ENGLISH!! i rest my case.

##### Share on other sites
According to Alex Chiu' date=' based on testimonies, facts, and proofs, people are believed to be able to [b']stay physically young forever [/b] by using his new inventions "The Eternal Life Rings"

[/url]

I wonder does he ever get sued in the court, for mis-selling for instance?

##### Share on other sites

(Sorry if I mention something already mentioned, but I haven't read all the posts...)

I don't think it was ever meant as a scam, and if you read the info on these so called Eternal Life Rings it's more to do with improving your wellbeing through the use of magnets, (which is a scientific fact, so needs no debating) making you feel better generally, ergo prolonging your life (in theory.)

(Apologies if someone has already said all this!)

##### Share on other sites
which is a scientific fact

Oh? Got any sources?

##### Share on other sites
these so called Eternal Life Rings it's more to do with improving your wellbeing through the use of magnets, (which is a scientific fact, so needs no debating) making you feel better generally, ergo prolonging your life (in theory.)

Sounds more like the placebo effect than anything else.

##### Share on other sites
I don't think it was ever meant as a scam, and if you read the info on these so called Eternal Life Rings it's more to do with improving your wellbeing through the use of magnets, (which is a scientific fact, so needs no debating) making you feel better generally, ergo prolonging your life (in theory.)

1. The website no longer exists. That may indicate it was a scam.

2. There is considerable literature on the effect of electromagnetic fields on human health. However, all these are generated by electrical currents, not magnets. Even so, the data is contradictory. I suggest you do a PubMed search on the subject. I'm afraid your "scientific fact" isn't.

When we get to magnets themselves, new data is suggesting that magnetic fields might even be harmful, not beneficial.

For instance:

Magnetic field exposure and neurodegenerative diseases--recent epidemiological studies.Hug K, Röösli M, Rapp R.

Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Basel, Switzerland. kerstin.hug@unibas.ch

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the results of recent studies not yet included in a 2003 report of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) on occupational exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields as potential risk factor for neurodegenerative diseases. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in the online databases of PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, DIMDI and COCHRANE, as well as in specialised databases and journals. Eight studies published between January 2000 and July 2005 were included in the review. RESULTS: The findings of these studies contribute to the evidence of an association between occupational magnetic field exposure and the risk of dementia. Regarding amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the recent results confirm earlier observations of an association with electric and electronic work and welding. Its relationship with magnetic field exposure remains unsolved. There are only few findings pointing towards an association between magnetic field exposure and Parkinson's disease. CONCLUSIONS: The epidemiological evidence for an association between occupational exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields and the risk of dementia has increased during the last five years. The impact of potential confounders should be evaluated in further studies.

##### Share on other sites

2. There is considerable literature on the effect of electromagnetic fields on human health. However, all these are generated by electrical currents, not magnets. Even so, the data is contradictory. I suggest you do a PubMed search on the subject. I'm afraid your "scientific fact" isn't.

I don't mean to be overly bitchy but.. uhm.. what literature?

Last time I checked there was no proof at all about electromagnets affecting the human body (other than the effect of them on metals *on* the body or in the body (like hip replacements, etc)).

Actually.. in the latest "Skeptics Guide to the Universe" they were talking about a research in rat paws... the electromagnets worked, somwhat, on the paws, but since rat paws are so tiny, and the effect was relatively small, it doesn't have almost any bearings on a human body.

So when you say there is literature, I'd love to read it. It's quite an interesting subject.

~moo

##### Share on other sites

Ps has anyone heard of magnetism being used to help broken bones mend?

I think I was something about giving the bone a grain induced by the magnetic field...or is that just bogus as well?

Ive never heard of Magnets being used, but low current electricity has been done and it apparently works.

I think its for the sort of break where there is an actual Gap between the 2 ends of the bone.

##### Share on other sites

Magnetic fields are used quite regularly in medicine... but noone thinks they help heal... MRI scanners and the like all use magnetic fields....

##### Share on other sites

Wait there's a difference betwee "used" and "heal" ..

MRI is a *mapping* technique. It's not a healing technique. Techincally, actually, the effect it has on the body is marginal. It has an effect on metallic objects, which is why you strip all of them off before going inside the machine, but there is no effect on the body itself from the machine that I know of in any peer reviewed research.

BTW... even if the MRI machine does affect the body marginally, that doesn't mean "electromagnetic stones" (infinitesimally smaller in comparison) affect the body as well.

Last thing - The claim in the OP was that electromagnets affect the body in a way of healing or 'extending' life. MRI is a technique to use electromagnetic fields to map the body; saying that it's affecting is similar to saying that geographic satellites are affecting the earth... we *use* the electromagnetic technology with context of 'body', but that doesn't mean we use it for the purpose mentioned in the OP.

I have never seen any proof or substantial effect demonstrated in an experiment that shows any effect from electromagnetic fields on a human body.

~moo

##### Share on other sites

Even more so, if you compare a random group that has used an MRI machine to a random group that hasn't, you will find that the group that used the MRI machine is likelier to have a serious ailment and also likelier to die sooner. I wonder what the magnet lovers will say about that

##### Share on other sites

mooeypoo I say that no one thinks they heal.... it was an example of how we use magnetic fields on humans so if they did heal we surely would have seen an effect on people who have MRI scanners....

##### Share on other sites

Yeah, I was refering more to the connection to the OP, which *does* claim it's healing (understatement..

I just thought it was worth clarifying for anyone who does think electromagnets work... there are LOTS of people who do, the proof is its terribly discouraging success.... people might not be as stupid as to think there's a "eternal life" device, but healing ability? lots of people believe that and lots of companies make tons of money over it...

So yeah.. I didn't think *you* were making that 'error' i just thought it was worth making the distinction.

~moo

##### Share on other sites

Thanks, I was worried for a moment! lol

##### Share on other sites
I don't mean to be overly bitchy but.. uhm.. what literature?

Last time I checked there was no proof at all about electromagnets affecting the human body (other than the effect of them on metals *on* the body or in the body (like hip replacements, etc)).

I said "electromagnetic fields". You do your literature search on PubMed, not SkepticsGuide. PubMed is where the medical literature is.

Most of the research is on electrical currents and bone. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18040774?ordinalpos=6&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

##### Share on other sites
I said "electromagnetic fields". You do your literature search on PubMed, not SkepticsGuide. PubMed is where the medical literature is.

Most of the research is on electrical currents and bone. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18040774?ordinalpos=6&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

Your cynicism is great but I didn't mean SkepticsGuide literature.. Though I do double check my findings, I also take my sources with respect to their agenda.

I must say, though, that Skeptical-minded "agendas" resources are ranked higher in my book than commercial-minded agendas. Regardless, PubMed is neither, and is ranked higher than both.

And lastly, here's the quote from PubMed (lucaspa's link):

The excitation probability of substrate molecules involved in the production of growth factors influencing the division of chondrocytes in the growth layer of bone under the influence of pulsed electromagnetic fields is studied theoretically in a quantum mechanical model calculation. In this model matrix elements and anti-bonding energy levels are assumed known and the dynamics of the interaction with pulsed electromagnetic fields is derived. The derivation makes it clear that continuous pulsing or large driving currents can overwhelm local diffusive transport to the growth plane resulting in a loss of its enhancement properties. Optimal locations within a pair of Helmholtz coils for enhancement of bone growth are also investigated and found to be close to the coils. The work presented here is believed to be the first derivation in a model calculation of a physical basis for the effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on bone growth and fusion.

This is a *study*, in theoretical applications.

I .. have to say I am not sure I see any kind of proof that there actually is any effect on the bones; they are conducting an experiment based on the effect electromagnets do have on molecules.

From the resources I have read (no, not just "SkepticsGuide" ), that's the entire "problem" -- that though electromagnets have an effect on molecules, their overall effect on the human body is negligeable.

But thanks for the resource, I will follow up on this.

~moo

##### Share on other sites

Those "Ever Young" things are a con.

My uncle just got sent to jail for selling them. He travelled the country with a carnival selling his "Ever Young" pills to anyone who would buy them.

Any good effect is from the "Placebo Effect", as the prosecution was able to show that the pills contained nothing but sugar and some herbs and could have no beneficial medical effect at all.

The judge was going to let Uncle Jim off with a fine until a check of the records showed he had 84 previous convictions dating back to 1673.

##### Share on other sites
The judge was going to let Uncle Jim off with a fine until a check of the records showed he had 84 previous convictions dating back to 1673.
Patience finds it's greatest rewards in punch-lines like this one. Priceless.

##### Share on other sites
This is a *study*, in theoretical applications. ... But thanks for the resource, I will follow up on this.

No, you won't. Because right next to the article is a section called "Related Articles" that provide some of the experiments. Here's just one:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9355215?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1

"CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the reproducibility of a rabbit fusion model, and the ability of a pulsed electromagnetic field to induce a statistically significant increase in stiffness, area under the load-displacement curve, and load to failure of the fusion mass. This investigation provides a basis for continued evaluation of biologic enhancement of spinal arthrodesis with the use of a pulsed electromagnetic field."

What you need to do is search "electromagnetic, field, bone" and then hit the tab "Limits". Check "human" and "clinical trial". You end up with 25 references. ONE of them is at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15986086?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

If you do "electromagnetic, field" with the same limits, you get 239 papers. Many of these have to do with environmental exposure to magnetic fields, but there are several clinical studies on pulse electromagnetic fields. One looks at spinal fusion with PEMF: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12131732?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1

If you really want to look at the data, you can't just look at ONE paper and dismiss it as "theoretical" while passing on the large number of clinical and animal studies.

##### Share on other sites
No, you won't. Because right next to the article is a section called "Related Articles" that provide some of the experiments. Here's just one:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9355215?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1

"CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the reproducibility of a rabbit fusion model, and the ability of a pulsed electromagnetic field to induce a statistically significant increase in stiffness, area under the load-displacement curve, and load to failure of the fusion mass. This investigation provides a basis for continued evaluation of biologic enhancement of spinal arthrodesis with the use of a pulsed electromagnetic field."

What you need to do is search "electromagnetic, field, bone" and then hit the tab "Limits". Check "human" and "clinical trial". You end up with 25 references. ONE of them is at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15986086?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

If you do "electromagnetic, field" with the same limits, you get 239 papers. Many of these have to do with environmental exposure to magnetic fields, but there are several clinical studies on pulse electromagnetic fields. One looks at spinal fusion with PEMF: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12131732?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1

If you really want to look at the data, you can't just look at ONE paper and dismiss it as "theoretical" while passing on the large number of clinical and animal studies.

wow, okay, first off, back up. I didn't mean any disrespect. My "thanks for the data" was an actual thank-you for the data. My remark that this is a theoretical data was an observation about this SPECIFIC paper, and my note that I will follow up on it was a true statement that when I have a bit more time I will look up more data.

I am sometimes cynical, but not always.. I'll try to be more specific in my non-intention-to-be-cynical in the future... sorry.

~moo

## Create an account

Register a new account