It seems odd that cells wouldn’t naturally move in the right directions with some purpose. Which makes me wonder if their purpose is just not understood and these faster healing wounds might have some yet unknown downside.
I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't significant cross-over with this[0] observation of plant-roots growing faster when exposed to low-voltage electricity.
> EPFL researchers have demonstrated the first pill-sized bioprinter that can be swallowed and guided within the gastrointestinal tract, where it directly deposits bio-ink over damaged tissues to support repair.
20 years ago when I was an undergrad I was studying the effect of electric fields on the chemical vapor deposition growth of (material du jour). Electricity turned what was a natural, random process, into one where we could direct the growth this way and that way. We didn't measure whether the growth rate was enhanced, but it's not surprising to me that a similar effect might show up all over the place to help speed along a natural process, because at the boundary, progressive chemical reactions isn't like stacking legos, it's like adding some, then taking a few away, then adding some more, and so on.
I recently went through 6 weeks of PT for injured tendons / tendinitis in my arms with 0 results.
The therapist suggested we try dry needling + electric stimulation for another 6 weeks. So we did that and I recovered 90% in the second 6 weeks of therapy.
There were side effects but they were minimal and completely gone now.
I was skeptical but sold on the benefits and relieved to have an effective therapy option to fall back on when it happens again as it does every couple years. Unfortunately, my insurance doesn’t pay for it.
Tendons take a long time to heal, much longer than skeletal muscle damage. I'm sure electric stimulation helped, but it could have just taken 12 weeks for the tendons to recover.
I had the same problem with my elbow, electrotherapy did not help. Turned out it was systemic inflammation in my body that was preventing it from healing. Change of diet fixed it.
I'm all in favour of extra therapeutic options. But what jumped out at me was that 1 in 11 people worldwide have some form of diabetes.
This is surely a relatively new state of affairs so wouldn't it be a rather good idea to prevent it at source so to say rather than cope with the negative effects?
The purpose of medicine is twofold: to prevent and to cure. We shouldn't stop making medicines and therapies, and only investigate prevention of diseases.
Not just skin, muscles also. It's standard therapy for some years already for partially torn muscles. As with my shoulder right now. Going to EMS therapy twice a week.
This seems to run counter to the anecdotal evidence that some say grounding has on healing. I assume grounding is discharging the body (if to be believed) whilst this article would have us believe we should add charge. I don’t have a dog in the race, it’s just interesting.
That sounds interesting. We keep on hearing stories in the news of many new discoveries being made every day. I wonder if the day will come when there exists an "affordable" technology to treat/correct malformed feet, fingers, toes, hands, by simply instructing the body's DNA to self-correct without the need for invasive surgery.
I see mention of the voltage of 200 mV/mm, though no mention if AC or DC, presume it is DC.
I have seen a few articles over the years on stimulating wound healing and did a little digging and found it goes back further than I appreciated:
1843: Carlo Matteucci (Italy) observes that wounded tissue generates a steady current — the first evidence of endogenous “healing current.”
Modern experimental era (1950s–1980s)
1950s–1960s: F. W. Smith and others at the Royal Free Hospital (London) and USSR researchers start applying DC microcurrents to chronic ulcers.
1960s–1970s: Robert O. Becker (NYU, later VA Medical Center) systematically studies wound and bone healing with DC and pulsed currents — showing accelerated healing and even partial limb regeneration in amphibians.
1972: Becker and Murray publish seminal paper: “Low intensity direct current stimulation of bone growth and wound healing.”
Late 1970s–1980s: Clinical trials on pressure ulcers and diabetic wounds using microamp DC show improved epithelialization.
Clinical device development (1990s–present)
1990s: FDA approvals for electrical bone-growth stimulators, later expanded to soft-tissue wound dressings.
2000s: Research into pulsed DC, AC, and capacitive coupling grows; low-frequency (1–200 Hz) electrotherapy devices enter wound-care practice.
2010s–2020s: Rise of microfluidic and bioelectronic dressings (like the Chalmers study, 2023), nanogenerators, and self-powered wound patches — merging electronics and biology.
Looking into the AC/DC aspects:
DC = best for directional healing and wound closure.
AC = best for tissue conditioning, circulation, and long-term comfort.
Combination or cycling gives the fastest and safest overall healing, especially for chronic or deep wounds. Also, prevent polarisation irritation over prolonged usage.
Certainly does feel like a technology that has been sleeping in the wind, and a future first aid tool. Of note, electronically, such a device could also aid in cleaning the wound by killing bacteria, which may be one reason that healing is improved.
Anecdata, but putting it out there because HN comments have solved many medical problems of mine that doctors couldn't:
I had a wound that wouldn't close and the thing that eventually got it to close was topical collagen powder - packed directly into the wound. This is something that the literature is quite positive on, but large Western hospitals mostly don't do for some reason. On oral collagen, the literature seems a bit more mixed but still generally positive. Collagen is something that used to make up a much larger part of our diet, so at the very least I don't think there's much risk in trying - and perhaps there are other benefits.
28 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 44.5 ms ] threadHow is it now? Has this been extended to real use outside of research?
[0]https://www.nature.com/articles/d44151-023-00162-5
> EPFL researchers have demonstrated the first pill-sized bioprinter that can be swallowed and guided within the gastrointestinal tract, where it directly deposits bio-ink over damaged tissues to support repair.
https://actu.epfl.ch/news/a-pill-that-prints-2/
https://www.harpercollins.com/products/the-body-electric-rob...
I recently went through 6 weeks of PT for injured tendons / tendinitis in my arms with 0 results.
The therapist suggested we try dry needling + electric stimulation for another 6 weeks. So we did that and I recovered 90% in the second 6 weeks of therapy.
There were side effects but they were minimal and completely gone now.
It looked a little like this except on my arms:
https://youtube.com/shorts/pTEPMgDdy2A?si=MSx7YnmUbApsigWe
I was skeptical but sold on the benefits and relieved to have an effective therapy option to fall back on when it happens again as it does every couple years. Unfortunately, my insurance doesn’t pay for it.
This is surely a relatively new state of affairs so wouldn't it be a rather good idea to prevent it at source so to say rather than cope with the negative effects?
The purpose of medicine is twofold: to prevent and to cure. We shouldn't stop making medicines and therapies, and only investigate prevention of diseases.
https://youtu.be/iHVGe--xDDA?si=Rl4xRqNzxiuY0Zom
20 min ted talk - https://youtu.be/XheAMrS8Q1c
3 hr lex fridman episode - https://youtu.be/p3lsYlod5OU
I have seen a few articles over the years on stimulating wound healing and did a little digging and found it goes back further than I appreciated:
1843: Carlo Matteucci (Italy) observes that wounded tissue generates a steady current — the first evidence of endogenous “healing current.”
Modern experimental era (1950s–1980s)
1950s–1960s: F. W. Smith and others at the Royal Free Hospital (London) and USSR researchers start applying DC microcurrents to chronic ulcers.
1960s–1970s: Robert O. Becker (NYU, later VA Medical Center) systematically studies wound and bone healing with DC and pulsed currents — showing accelerated healing and even partial limb regeneration in amphibians.
1972: Becker and Murray publish seminal paper: “Low intensity direct current stimulation of bone growth and wound healing.”
Late 1970s–1980s: Clinical trials on pressure ulcers and diabetic wounds using microamp DC show improved epithelialization.
Clinical device development (1990s–present)
1990s: FDA approvals for electrical bone-growth stimulators, later expanded to soft-tissue wound dressings.
2000s: Research into pulsed DC, AC, and capacitive coupling grows; low-frequency (1–200 Hz) electrotherapy devices enter wound-care practice.
2010s–2020s: Rise of microfluidic and bioelectronic dressings (like the Chalmers study, 2023), nanogenerators, and self-powered wound patches — merging electronics and biology.
Looking into the AC/DC aspects: DC = best for directional healing and wound closure. AC = best for tissue conditioning, circulation, and long-term comfort.
Combination or cycling gives the fastest and safest overall healing, especially for chronic or deep wounds. Also, prevent polarisation irritation over prolonged usage.
Certainly does feel like a technology that has been sleeping in the wind, and a future first aid tool. Of note, electronically, such a device could also aid in cleaning the wound by killing bacteria, which may be one reason that healing is improved.
I had a wound that wouldn't close and the thing that eventually got it to close was topical collagen powder - packed directly into the wound. This is something that the literature is quite positive on, but large Western hospitals mostly don't do for some reason. On oral collagen, the literature seems a bit more mixed but still generally positive. Collagen is something that used to make up a much larger part of our diet, so at the very least I don't think there's much risk in trying - and perhaps there are other benefits.