sdc100 wrote:Real medical devices would publish their specs. For example, even simple thermometers and scales will tell you their accuracy within a percentage. As far as I can tell, no specs are available to the user in terms of what frequencies and amplitudes are used, and the tolerances used to establish accuracy.
The Woot page says it's 60Hz.
As for the amplitude... unless you have multiple units and hence want to be able to set them all the same, why does it matter? This unit is clearly a "turn up the setting until you're comfortable" sort of deal, so I don't see any reason it needs to be calibrated to any particular standard... or even precisely calibrated to an arbitrary one.
(I.e... if I take home two different brands of TVs, I don't care if their volumes are completely different at the "25" settings... and even with two identical make & model TVs, if "25" on one is 10% different from the other, so what?)
I guess I figure that as long as a product is reasonably safe, there's nothing wrong with it not being certified/calibrated/whatever for some applications -- just tell the user to play around with the settings until they get what they like, and call it good.
Furthermore, the basis of its claims (as evidenced by the Amazon description) has nothing to do with how TENS is applied. For example, what is WAIST vs SOLE? I don't know of any scientific basis for their programs.
See above. Just try'em out and see if you like'em or not -- they might as well have called them "duck," "tiger," and "ostrich." :-)
As for the FDA statement, you've mischaracterized it. Those guidelines are published for IRBs and trained medical professionals. IN other words, the listed equipment is low risk when USED BY TRAINED PROFESSIONALS. It does not apply to casual home users.
Sure, that's why I suggested people see a doctor or similar first: I have to believe that the "professional training" needed to properly use a TENS device can be provided in one office visit. If that's not possible, these days there's enough information on the Internet that a diligent researcher can likely become sufficiently educated in their use to effectively apply them.
(In general I think the term "professional" is largely meaningless today. I usually take it to be the original dictionary definition -- simply someone who's being paid to provide goods or services; while that implies that they're likely to be highly skilled, there's absolutely zero guarantee of that (and most "professionals" go out of their way to make sure they're not liable if it turns out they *aren't* proficient).
I don't mean the above to apply that most doctors aren't good -- certainly most are -- just that the difference between "trained medical professional" and "casual home user" isn't nearly as big as some might like you to believe.