The Science

_{Back in July 2022 we had a double page editorial published in the Mail on Sunday, extolling the benefits of the Arc4Health in the management of long-COVID. This editorial was largely based on anecdotal case studies but seemed to really resonate with their readership, and generated a huge response. In an attempt to quantify the effect of microcurrent therapy, we distributed the Modified COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Screening (C19-YRS) questionnaire, to some of our customers who purchased following the 2022 editorial. The C19-YRS is an independently validated questionnaire that was designed by academics at the University of Leeds. This was completed by 54 respondents before they received their Arc4Health and then again (by the same 54 respondents) 12 weeks later. This customer feedback enabled us to try and identify, and quantify, symptoms associated with long-COVID that respond best to microcurrent therapy.}

_{This questionnaire asked respondents to rate the severity of 31 symptoms associated with long-COVID, where 0 = No problem, 1 = Mild problem, 2 = Moderate problem and 3 = Severe problem. Excitingly, respondents reported a statistically significant reduction in the severity of fatigue (p < 0.001), breathlessness at rest (p < 0.01), altered smell (p < 0.05), and altered taste (p < 0.05). Interestingly, of the 31 symptoms associated with long-COVID, our results showed that fatigue was also the worst perceived symptom, with a weighted average of 2.35 out of 3 (i.e., on average across the 54 respondents, fatigue was reported to be between a moderate and severe problem). After 12 weeks, respondents reported a highly significant reduction in the perceived severity of fatigue!}

_{We hope these results will be of great significance to not only those suffering with long-COVID, but may be of further interest to those suffering with ME/chronic fatigue syndrome (affecting an estimated 250,000 people in the UK, and around 17 million people worldwide) and other conditions (i.e., menopause, MCAS, fibromyalgia, etc.,) where chronic fatigue is commonly reported. This is the first study that shows an appreciable reduction in the perceived severity of some long-COVID symptoms following the application of microcurrent therapy. This quantifiably supports the many case studies that we have received from long-COVID sufferers, who have reported great benefit from using the Arc4Health. We, in collaboration with academics at the University of Greenwich, are now in the process of beginning to get this written up and submitted for journal publication. We very much hope that this pilot data might be a precursor to a larger randomised clinical study.}

_{What makes our findings particularly compelling, is when interpreted in conjunction with the findings of research recently published by the University of East Anglia (Gokani et al., 2022). Here, researchers reported that of 362,771 survey responses, 10,431 respondents self-reported long-COVID, equating to an estimated 1.8 million people in the UK or 2.8% of the population. Their study identified the prevalence rates of 23 symptoms associated with long-COVID. Fatigue was the most common symptom affecting 50.3% of respondents, while shortness of breath (33.5%), loss of smell (31.4%), difficulty concentrating (25.2%), loss of taste (23.8%), muscle ache (23.8%), headaches (21.6%) and memory loss (20.1%) were other highly prevalent symptoms affecting over 20% of respondents.
Collectively, these two studies (Gokani et al., 2022; ARC pilot) show that not only is fatigue the most prevalent long-COVID symptom but also the worst perceived symptom, and that the application of microcurrent therapy (Arc4Health) can significantly reduce this perceived severity. Furthermore, of the additional seven symptoms with a prevalence rate amongst long-COVID sufferers of over 20%, the perceived severity of three of these was also significantly reduced following the application of microcurrent therapy.}

_{Microcurrent is a non-invasive and safe electrotherapy applied through a series of sub-sensory electrical currents (less than 1 mA), which are of a similar magnitude to the currents generated endogenously by the human body. This review focuses on examining the physiological mechanisms mediating the effects of microcurrent when combined with different exercise modalities (e.g. endurance and strength) in healthy physically active individuals. The reviewed literature suggests the following candidate mechanisms could be involved in enhancing the effects of exercise when combined with microcurrent: (i) increased adenosine triphosphate resynthesis, (ii) maintenance of intercellular calcium homeostasis that in turn optimises exercise-induced structural and morphological adaptations, (iii) eliciting a hormone-like effect, which increases catecholamine secretion that in turn enhances exercise-induced lipolysis and (iv) enhanced muscle protein synthesis. In healthy individuals, despite a lack of standardisation on how microcurrent is combined with exercise (e.g. whether the microcurrent is pulsed or continuous), there is evidence concerning its effects in promoting body fat reduction, skeletal muscle remodelling and growth as well as attenuating delayed-onset muscle soreness. The greatest hindrance to understanding the combined effects of microcurrent and exercise is the variability of the implemented protocols, which adds further challenges to identifying the mechanisms, optimal patterns of current(s) and methodology of application. Future studies should standardise microcurrent protocols by accurately describing the used current [e.g. intensity (μA), frequency (Hz), application time (minutes) and treatment duration (e.g. weeks)] for specific exercise outcomes, e.g. strength and power, endurance, and gaining muscle mass or reducing body fat.}

For full published paper please contact us.

_{Post-exercise microcurrent based treatments have shown to optimise exercise-induced adaptations in athletes. We compared the effects of endurance training in combination with either, a microcurrent or a sham treatment, on endurance performance. Additionally, changes in body composition, post-exercise lactate kinetics and perceived delayed onset of muscle soreness (DOMS) were determined. Eighteen males (32.8 ± 6.3 years) completed an 8-week endurance training programme involving 5 to 6 workouts per week wearing a microcurrent (MIC, n=9) or a sham (SH, n=9) device for 3-h post-workout or in the morning during non-training days. Measurements were conducted at pre- and post-intervention. Compared to baseline, both groups increased (P < 0.01) maximal aerobic speed (MIC, pre = 17.6 ± 1.3 to post=18.3 ± 1.0; SH, pre=17.8 ± 1.5 to post = 18.3 ± 1.3 km.h−1) with no changes in V˙V˙O2peak. No interaction effect per group and time was observed (P=0.193). Although both groups increased (P < 0.05) trunk lean mass (MIC, pre=23.2 ± 2.7 to post=24.2 ± 2.0; SH, pre=23.4 ± 1.7 to post=24.3 ± 1.6 kg) only MIC decreased (pre=4.8 ± 1.5 to post=4.5 ± 1.5, p=0.029) lower body fat. At post-intervention, no main differences between groups were observed for lactate kinetics over the 5 min recovery period. Only MIC decreased (P<0.05) DOMS at 24-h and 48-h, showing a significant average lower DOMS score over 72-h after the completion of the exercise-induced muscle soreness protocol. In conclusion, a 3-h daily application of microcurrent over an 8-week endurance training programme produced no further benefits on performance in endurance-trained males. Nonetheless, the post-workout microcurrent application promoted more desirable changes in body composition and attenuated the perception of DOMS over 72-h post-exercise.}

For full published paper please contact us.

_{Microcurrent has been used to promote tissue healing after injury or to hasten muscle remodeling post exercise. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of resistance training in combination with either, microcurrent or sham treatment, on-body composition and muscular architecture. Additionally, changes in performance and perceived delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) were determined. Eighteen males (25.7 ± 7.6 years) completed an 8-week resistance training program involving 3 workouts per week (24 total sessions) wearing a microcurrent (MIC, n = 9) or a sham (SH, n = 9) device for 3-h post-workout or in the morning during non-training days. Measurements were conducted at pre and post intervention. Compared to baseline, both groups increased (p < 0.05) muscle thickness of the elbow flexors (MIC + 2.9 ± 1.4 mm; SH + 3.0 ± 2.4 mm), triceps brachialis (MIC + 4.3 ± 2.8 mm; SH + 2.7 ± 2.6 mm), vastus medialis (MIC + 1.5 ± 1.5 mm; SH + 0.9 ± 0.8 mm) and vastus lateralis (MIC + 6.8 ± 8.0 mm; SH + 3.2 ± 1.8 mm). Although both groups increased (p < 0.01) the pennation angle of vastus lateralis (MIC + 2.90° ± 0.95°; SH + 1.90° ± 1.35°, p < 0.01), the change measured in MIC was higher (p = 0.045) than that observed in SH. Furthermore, only MIC enlarged (p < 0.01) the pennation angle of brachialis (MIC + 1.93 ± 1.51). Both groups improved (p < 0.05) bench press strength and power but only MIC enhanced (p < 0.01) vertical jump height. At post intervention, only MIC decreased (p < 0.05) DOMS at 12-h, 24-h, and 48-h after performing an exercise-induced muscle soreness protocol. A 3-h daily use of microcurrent maximized muscular architectural changes and attenuated DOMS with no added significant benefits on body composition and performance.}

For full published paper please contact us.

_{Bioelectric medicine: unveiling the therapeutic potential of micro-current stimulation.
Lee, H., Cho, S., Kim, D., Lee, T. and Kim, H.S., 2024.
Biomedical Engineering Letters, 14(3), pp.367-392.}

_{Microcurrent as an adjunct therapy to accelerate chronic wound healing and reduce patient pain.
Nair, H.K., 2018.
Journal of Wound Care, 27(5), pp.296-306.}

_{Bioelectricity and microcurrent therapy for tissue healing–a narrative review.
Poltawski, L. and Watson, T., 2009.
Physical Therapy Reviews, 14(2), pp.104-114.}

_{A novel bioelectric device enhances wound healing: An equine case series
Varhus, J.D., 2014.
Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 34(3), pp.421-430.}

_{Electrical stimulation technologies for wound healing
Kloth, L.C., 2014.
Advances in wound care, 3(2), pp.81-90.}

_{Harnessing the electric spark of life to cure skin wounds
Martin-Granados, C. and McCaig, C.D., 2014.
Advances in wound care, 3(2), pp.127-138.}

_{The electrical response to injury: molecular mechanisms and wound healing
Reid, B. and Zhao, M., 2014.
Advances in wound care, 3(2), pp.184-201.}

<sub>Review of electrotherapy devices for use in veterinary medicine
Schils, s.J., 2009.
55th Annual Convention of the American Association of Equine Practitioners, Vol. 55, pp.68-73.

Bioelectricity and microcurrent therapy for tissue healing-a narrative review
Poltawski, L. and Watson, T., 2009.
Physical Therapy Reviews, 14(2), pp.104-114.</sub>

_{How Microcurrent Stimulation Produces ATP – One Mechanism
Bailey, S., 1999.
Dynamic Chiropractic, 17(18), p.6.}

Please Contact Us if you believe we have missed out a particularly fundamental publication and we will do our best to get it added to the list.