The Use of Magnets, Magnetic Fields, and Copper Devices in a Veteran Population
Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is increasing in the US and throughout the world. The use of magnets, magnetic fields, and copper devices (MMFC) for health care are CAM therapies. Available information suggests significant consumer spending on MMFC therapy, but minimal information exists on usage patterns.
Methods: We created a brief questionnaire and distributed it to veteran patients at the Carl T. Hayden Veterans Affairs Medical Center infusion center in Phoenix, Arizona. The questionnaire categorized respondents by age groups, diagnostic groups by specialty (endocrinology, gastroenterology, hematology/oncology, neurology, rheumatology, and other), and whether MMFCs were being used and for what purpose. The questionnaire also asked whether the respondent would consider participating in a clinical study using MMFCs.
Results: Analyzing the 206 evaluable surveys, we found an overall use rate of about 1 in 4 respondents. The majority used copper devices, and the endocrinology group showed the highest percentage use. Many veterans reported that they would consider participating in MMFC clinical studies. For interest in clinical trial participation, the age groups with the highest response for magnets in clinical trials was 31 to 50 years (64%), and for magnetic fields 51 to 65 years (52%).
Conclusions: About 25% of surveyed veterans reported the use of MMFCs. Veterans reported that they are likely to participate in clinical studies using these CAM therapies.
Limitations
Patients with endocrinology diagnoses were the most likely to use MMFCs but were a very small percentage of the infusion center population, which could skew the data. The surveyed individuals may not have been representative of the overall patient population. Similarly, the patient population at CTHVAMC, which is primarily male and aged ≥ 66 years, may not be representative of other veteran and nonveteran patient populations.
Conclusions
MMFC devices are being used regularly by patients as a form of CAM therapy, but few studies researching the use of CAM therapy have generated data that are as specific as this study is about the use of these MMFC devices. Although there is considerable general public awareness of MMFC therapies and devices, we believe that there is a need to quantify the use of these devices. We further believe that our study is one of the first to look specifically at the use of MMFCs in a veteran population. We have found a considerable use of MMFCs in the veteran population studied, and we also showed that whether or not veterans are using these devices, they are willing to be part of research that uses the devices. Further studies would look at a more general veteran population, look more in depth at the way and for what purpose these devices are being used, and consider the development of clinical research studies that use MMFCs.
