Return to Non

Spinal cord injury is irreversible. Irreversibility is the classic teaching, irreversibility is what I was taught, and "irreversible" is what a neurologist or neurosurgeon will say when asked about spinal cord damage. SB didn't quite understand this rule, so she pushed hard and broke this rule. She taught us (as many of our patients do) that the "rules" limiting what can and cannot be done, at least with anatomic-biochemical medicine alone, do not necessarily apply when you combine magnetic molecular medicine with a highly motivated patient.

In the spring of 2001, SB fell 9 feet onto a cement surface. She hit back first, sustaining crush fractures to the T12-L1 vertebrae (the vertebrae provide bony protection to the spinal cord - she was injured in the low back, where the thoracic vertebrae give way to those in the lumbar region). One shattered vertebrae slid over an intact one, shearing and crushing the spinal cord at that level. Her 4/01 MRI was read as complete transection of the spinal cord. Titanium rods were placed to stabilize the vertebrae and promote bony re-union. SB was placed in traction, immobilizing her spine, aiming to prevent further shearing of the spine while the vertebrae healed (why the neck of an unconscious football player is immobilized before they lift him off the field). No efforts were made to regenerate or heal SB's spinal cord, as spinal cord regeneration is not felt to be possible. SB's vertebral bones did heal, she got up and out of bed, and into a wheel chair.

The level of spinal cord damage determines which organ systems or body regions will be affected, while the severity of damage determines the degree of limitation. One side of the cord may be less severely damaged than the other, such that while one's right leg may be totally paralyzed, there may be some feeling or residual function on the left - each injury will be different. Injury to the upper cervical spine may compromise voluntary and even involuntary control of the respiratory muscles, such that mechanical ventilation is required. Injury to the lower cervical spine, (e.g. Christopher Reeves) may spare the respiratory muscles but compromise nervous control to both the upper and lower extremities (quadriplegia). In SB's case, cord transection at the T12-L1 level would leave her with absent motor control of the lower extremities and numbness from the waist down (paraplegia), and loss of voluntary bladder and bowel control. SB sustained injury at the T12-L1 level. Her spinal cord must not have been fully transected, as she did regain some function of her thigh muscles, but she was numb from the waist down. Three months out form the injury, SB's doctors told that no further functional recovery was possible. Physical therapy was advised to strengthen the just-innervated thigh muscles and to improve upper extremity and torso strength, which she would need to get around in a wheel chair.

SB didn't listen closely to what her doctors told her, at least not the part about never getting better. First, she accepted her current limitation, got good with the wheelchair, adapted her car for arms only control, and got on with her life - after all, she was still a mother, still a wife, and she still had interests, and she wasn't going to let a not-so-little-thing like paraplegia stop her. Second, she began a vigorous rehab program, which she hasn't stopped (we worked SB's MME around this program). SB participates in water therapy two days a week and physical therapy three days a week. SB participates in physical therapy as you and I know it - weights, stretching, and exercise - but SB's physical therapist provides something more. SB's physical therapist is trained in Cranio-Sacral therapy. I don't know as much now as I'm eventually going to learn about Cranio-Sacral therapy, but it involves manipulation of one body region to increase the energy flow to another. This is similar to the concept of applying a negative magnetic field to the head to increase the body's magnetic energy reserve, allowing some of this energy to stimulate healing in a distant body region or organ. These concepts are difficult to understand and even more difficult to explain, but applying the concept obviously worked for SB. She improved, steadily regaining function, doing what her doctors told her could not happen. SB progressed to the point where, with a full leg and torso brace, using a walking crutch, she could ambulate 25 feet under her own power (this is Mind over Matter).

SB heard about MME from a friend who was my patient. She contacted Dr. Bonlie, studied the websites, and learned all she could about this technique. SB saw me in the office, and made it clear that she wanted to be our first patient. I didn't want SB to be our first patient. For reasons that will be explained below, I knew that SB would be technically difficult to treat, and that the odds of a positive treatment response were against her. When you bring a new treatment to town, you don't want to start off treating the most difficult patients. First, you know you aren't yet an expert (I didn't do my first coronary angiogram on a patient in cardiogenic shock), and you really want some early successes, to bolster your confidence and the confidence and morale of your staff (we're human too). This approach worked well with EECP seven years earlier, and was to be our approach with MME, but SB had different plans. She wanted to be treated and was persistent in this regard. One day she came to the office and parked her wheelchair in the waiting room, asking for a treatment start date, and I got the impression that she might not move until we gave her a start date (this is Mind over Doctor). It's hard to stop people who are this committed to getting better. SB began her MME program on 10/13, initially at four, and later at five to nine hours a day; currently SB has completed 440 hours, with 200 additional hours planned for later this winter. I'll present SB's progress to date in table form, and below that will discuss the key breakthroughs, SB's concomitant biochemical therapies, and what we know to date (and don't know) about MME in spinal cord regeneration.

MME Hours	Event
20	"Warmth" perceived over her left foot - involuntary left foot motion observed
25	Undulating involuntary motion from the waist down observed
37	Growth hormone therapy initiated
43	Two new muscle groups regained function
61	Felt an "itch" and scratched it
212	Increased strength and muscle control now obvious at physical therapy
240	Porcine growth factor therapy added to SB's program
270	The alcohol swab felt cool on the left
322	MME is now a pain in the butt
330	Now able to lift the left leg up with the knee bent - another muscle group
337	Felt the alcohol swab on the right
378	Functional breakthrough - walked three times her usual distance
435	Legs "move like crazy" following injections
Christmas vacation in California

20 - This sensation of warmth and involuntary motion involving SB's left foot told us that something was happening, but we didn't know what. It could be that sensory function was returning, but we understand that there is the phenomena of "phantom limb" sensation, when the brain "feels" something that is not really there. Also, involuntary motion could be do to spasm. In normal physiology, many neurons leaving the spinal cord are programmed to cause the muscles they innervate to contract. This signal to contract is tonically blocked by an inhibitory signal originating higher up in the spinal cord or in the brain, in "upper motor" neurons. Coordination of these opposing influences is what allows you to move your limbs in a fluid fashion, with your muscles contracting and relaxing in a slow but steady fashion. With spinal cord or brain injury, the upper inhibitory signal is lost, the neurons emanating from the cord below the point of damage continue to fire, now unopposed, and the result is muscle spasticity. At the 20 hour point, we didn't know whether we were observing motor re-innervation, or spasticity, sensory re-innervation, or phantom limb phenomena.

25 - Our technologist called me in to see SB. Her lower torso and both lower extremities were moving in an undulating fashion, My kids are swimmers, and my fist thought was that SB's motion looked like her body was carrying out the kick of a breast stroke swimmer. As the motion was back and forth, it could not be due to spasticity. On the other hand, it wasn't voluntary; SB had no control over it. It was incredibly regular, with her limbs moving slowly up and down, kind of like a sine wave diagram. You could sit there for five minutes watching this motion - it was mesmerizing, but we didn't know what it meant (as an improvement in sensation or voluntary muscle control seemed to follow these episodes of involuntary "sine wave" activity, we are hypothesizing that this involuntary undulating motion represents "nerves trying to find their way", trying out different pathways as they regenerate down the spinal canal).

37 - Why growth hormone? First let me explain No-go A, scar tissue, and why I was hesitant to treat SB in the first place.

Dr. Bonlie has achieved excellent results when utilizing MME to treat diabetic neuropathy. If you treat diabetic neuropathy patients long enough, it is unusual for them not to respond. In diabetic neuropathy we are dealing with little twig-like sensory nerves. Larger nerves also respond to MME with functional regeneration, and Dr. Bonlie has this well documented. A left bundle branch block conduction disturbance resolved in one of my patients, suggesting that we can effect nerve function within the heart. Larger nerves are more difficult to treat than are small ones. There are more pathways for the regenerating neurons to take within a large nerve; the situation is obviously more complex, and more healing must be carried out before a large nerve can recover its function. The spinal cord is the largest nerve in the body; it is the "cable" that carries the motor and sensory signals to your body from the neck down. If the spinal cord is cut, and if the nerves tried to regenerate, how could they find their way to their prior, specific destinations? How can the nerve governing heat sensation to the tip of your right 2nd toe find its proper pathway, and not crawl into the channel of the nerve governing motion of a small muscle behind the left knee? Well it can't, at least on its own, and Mother Nature knows this.

If you cut a superficial sensory nerve (e.g. removing leg veins for coronary artery bypass surgery), it will grow back; it might take 6 months, as nerves grow slowly, but it has only one path to follow, and it can follow this path, and the nerve can regenerate and function will be restored. If the nerves of the spinal cord attempt to regenerate, only chaos could ensue. The neurons could not find their way back into their proper channels; rather they would take a circuitous route, essentially chasing their tail, and the result would be a neuroma, a benign (but potentially painful) collection of dysfunctional nerves, or a situation of "phantom limb" phenomena, where the brain is experiencing constant pain from a body region that is no longer innervated. Mother Nature doesn't want this to happen so she takes steps to prevent it. Within weeks of the original injury, scar tissue begins to form up within the damaged spinal cord, elaborating a protein called No-go A. No-go A (and there may be other proteins like this) inhibits the regeneration of nerve fibers. No-go A production remains high for 15 years after a spinal cord injury, and then falls off (why levels drop at 15 years is not known). No-go A is felt to be the reason, or more likely one of the reasons, why damaged spinal nerves cannot regenerate. My understanding is that the pharmaceutical industry is looking for agents that could block No-go A; right now these agents are not available.

In theory, MME for spinal cord regeneration would work best if applied early, within weeks of the injury, before scar tissue has had a chance to form up and release No-go A. In practice, patients don't make it into MME within this "window of opportunity". MME remains a secret; there are only seven centers in the US, and our results haven't made it to the evening news - neither patients nor their doctors know that MME exists. By the time a patient with spinal cord injury or their family find out about MME, either by word of mouth or via the internet, the window has closed. Dr. Bonlie has had the opportunity to treat a patient with spinal cord injury soon after the injury, with excellent results. Dr. Bonlie and the other MME practitioners have helped a number of spinal cord patients 15 years or more out from their injury, after No-go A levels have declined, but results in patients between 2 months and 15 years post-injury have been spotty to discouraging. SB was within this "window of pessimism".

I explained to SB and her husband the problem of No-go A interference, and remember bringing up the concept of deferring MME until the pharmaceutical industry came up with a No-go A blocker, but SB wanted to get better now. To counter No-go A, Dr. Bonlie advises the administration of growth hormone, either by injection, or as a homeopathic sublingual spray, or even both, concomitant to each MME session.

Growth hormone, as the name implies, makes you grow. My son grew 6" during his Junior year of high school (three new pairs of shoes were required - he'd wear them for 4 months and then they wouldn't fit), due to a burst of growth hormone. Growth hormone causes our cells to divide and proliferate. Once we reach our adult stature, growth hormone continues to stimulate cell division, but at a lower rate. At this point, we can think of growth hormone more as "cell replacement hormone", generating new cells at a rate sufficient to replace cells lost due to obsolescence and ageing. Growth hormone levels are low during the day, when we are carrying out the activities of life, and peak between midnight and 2 AM, when our bodies engage in rest and repair. Exogenous growth hormone, typically administered by subcutaneous injection, enhances this process.

Kids with stunted growth, due either to an endocrine problem or kidney disease, benefit from growth hormone therapy. It's expensive, but high-dose growth hormone has been shown to be of value in heart failure due to cardiomyopathy. Dr. Bonlie feels, and his experience bears it out, that exogenous growth hormone increases the likelihood that the patient with spinal cord damage will respond favorably to MME. Think of growth hormone as "leveling the playing field" that No-go A has tilted against the patient. Long-term, high-dose exogenous growth hormone carries some risk, and is always utilized under medical supervision. In MME, we are using smaller doses, and growth hormone is administered only concomitant to MME, not long-term, and we see you every day, so risk here is minimal. With this in mind, growth hormone therapy was added to SB's MME program.

43 - Out of the blue, SB was able to move her right leg to the side. She still could elevate her right leg only by lifting it with her hands. Previously, if she let go, her right leg would fall like a rock. Now, she could voluntarily delay its descent - basically two new muscle groups had been re-innervated - This is why we felt the prior, rhythmic undulation represented nerves "trying to find their way".

61 - SB experienced an "itch" sensation, over her left anterior pelvic region. She scratched it and the "itch" went away. This represents re-growth of the sensory nerves to the skin over this region So now we have evidence for regeneration of both sensory and motors nerves.

212 - SB was making slow but steady progress, but at this point things seemed to gel. SB's gain was now obvious and clear at physical therapy. Remember - the rule is that you are not going to recover function that you have not regained at the 3 month post-injury point - so much for rules!

240 - I know a lot about cardiovascular biology. I should, as my specialty has been the application of its principles to the care of individuals who can no longer be helped by our standard, anatomy altering techniques. I do not know a lot about neural biology. Fortunately, I am smart enough to know how little I know, and to seek out the thoughts of others who have knowledge and experience in this area. I belong to a number of complimentary medicine professional societies, and get to go to really interesting meetings (how I met Dr. Bonlie). I've also gotten to know some really innovative health care providers, so I called them up and picked their brains as to concomitant therapies for SB. Porcine growth factor therapy came back highly recommended. These are growth factors, growth hormone like agents, recovered from the tissues of pigs, that stimulate cell division within a specific organ or organ system. I don't want to offend anyone's sensibilities, but when it comes to cellular physiology, men are like pigs (women have always said that). These pig derived (porcine) growth factors seem to support the function of the corresponding organs in humans. They are manufactured in a sterile process and shipped frozen. The material is thawed out, and then taken sublingually, allowing for absorption into the blood stream. Colleagues who I respect and listen to describe good results with growth factor therapy, and it made sense for SB to take these growth factors, along with exogenous growth hormone, aiming to tilt the playing field further in her favor. SB had been making progress to this point, but it is my impression, as well as that of our staff and SB herself, that her improvement accelerated after growth factor therapy was added.

270 - SB had been receiving her growth hormone injections in her posterior hip. She couldn't feel them - she couldn't feel anything from the waist down. But today she felt the "coolness" of the alcohol swab on her skin - our response was - as you might imagine - "that's cool".

322 - SB was also receiving some intramuscular injections, injections that typically hurt a lot. With SB this wasn't an issue, as she was numb, totally anesthetic, from the waist down. I was called in to the MME room on this day and informed by SB, who had a big smile on her face, that the injections now hurt - more progress.

378 - Prior to MME, on the basis of will power and two years of physical therapy, water therapy, and Cranio-Sacral therapy, SB could ambulate, with a leg and torso brace, and with a walker. Now, with assistance, and with an ankle brace that stops below the knee, she is able to ambulate 25 feet, three times each physical therapy session - huge breakthrough.

435 - Following injections, SB's legs and pelvis demonstrate increased undulating motion. Again, we think this represents nerves trying to find their way back home.

440 - SB lost voluntary control of her bladder with her spinal cord injury. Every four hours, SB will catheterize herself; if not, her bladder will empty when it wants to, not a convenient situation. SB can now go longer before she has to catheter-drain her bladder, and that translates into a better night's sleep - another functional plus.

At this point SB is taking a break. She plans on spending the holidays with family in California, then she'll catch up on some projects that were placed on hold while she was focusing on repairing her spinal cord. MME will be resumed later this winter. SB has clearly improved with MME, and we see no theoretical or physical reason why this improvement will not continue. I have been practicing medicine for 18 years, and I've seen a lot of people get better when they weren't supposed to. Many of our original EECP patients are still pain free and hospital free, seven years out from being stuck with no options. But I've never seen anything like SB's improvement. Of course, maybe I've never worked with anyone with SB's willpower. Maybe Mind over Matter works!

ST was injured in a motor vehicle accident in 1969 - since then she has been plagued by lower extremity weakness and pain in the neck and low back regions. She toughed things out for years, working through the pain, so she could keep working in retail, but her impairments progressed and she sustained several falls, worsening the situation. The pain became intolerable in 2003 and her physicians advised surgery. ST's MRI demonstrated cervical and thoracic disc disease with herniation, but spinal stenosis at the L3-4-5 level was felt to be responsible for her most severe symptom complex, low back pain and leg weakness. Lumbar decompression surgery was carried out in 5/03 without apparent incident, but ST awoke from anesthesia with burning pain throughout her pelvis. Her surgeon couldn't explain this discomfort. A repeat MRI demonstrated adequate decompression of the lumbar spine; the cervical and thoracic disc problems couldn't explain pain in this area - but the pain wouldn't go away. ST saw a urologist, then a gynecologist, and then a physical therapist - but the pain wouldn't go away. ST obtained second opinions from two neurosurgeons. They couldn't explain her pelvic pain and advised against further surgery to this area. Osteopathic manipulation of the sacrum and coccyx (tail bone) would help a little, but then the pain would return. In ST's words, with surgery "she traded one pain for another". You can read ST's description of her pre-MME symptomatic status by clicking ST's Symptoms.

ST lived out of town but her primary physician learned of MME at a meeting and referred ST to us. Our thinking was that ST's pelvic symptoms were due to nerve root damage at the site of prior surgery, so initially we focused on her lumbar region. Please click ST's MME Experience for her description of the MME process and her results through 140 hours. After her pelvic symptoms began to improve, ST shifted the focus of the MME negative magnetic field to her thoracic and cervical region. This maneuver helped relieve pain due to disc disease in these regions, and it helped further with pain relief in her pelvic region (I can't explain why dealing with the cervical and thoracic spinal regions helped lessen pain in the distribution of nerves originating from the lumbar spine, but it did). ST received approximately 20 hours of MME to her cervical spine, 20 hours to her thoracic spine, and the rest to the lumbar spine. The typical patient requires 100 hours to each region affected by disc disease, and ST was anything but typical. Ideally we would have treated ST's lumbar region for 200 hours, then provided 100 hours each to the thoracic and cervical regions, but ST missed her family and she was needed back at work. I think that ST will improve further with additional MME, and our tentative plan is for ST to return to Toledo for more treatment when her schedule permits. I am delighted with her response to treatment. I've written to ST's insurer, requesting that they cover at least some of the cost of ST's MME treatments. After all, they've probably spent $100,000 for surgery that didn't work, second opinions, and physical therapy that worked only incompletely - why not pay ten cents on the dollar for a non-invasive, no risk therapy that gets the job done?

ST's insurer did not respond to my letter (which is why we physicians hate to write these letters - the insurance companies probably don't even read half of them - we'd much rather spend our time trying to help you). ST wanted more help, so she returned for an additional 200 hours of MME, and with this she achieved additional benefit (see ST's 2nd MME Experience). Symptoms due to post-operative nerve damage in the lumbrosacral region are in check, and it appears that her residual symptoms are related to stenosis of the cervical spine. ST will be evaluated by a new neurosurgeon regarding the advisability of a cervical spine decompression procedure. European studies have shown that post-operative magnetic field therapy speeds healing and improves patient outcome following spinal surgery. Our tentative plan is to treat ST with MME as she recovers from her procedure.

This 21 year old Engineering student sustained a crush injury to the vertebral column at the T-12 level in January '05. MK was helping to carry a 500 lb object. The object slipped and came down on MK's low back. The vertebral fracture was stabilized with a titanium rod, but extensive spinal damage had occurred. Early on, strength was absent from the waist down, save for flexion at MK's hips. Sensory function was severely impaired and voluntary bladder and bowel control were absent. MK worked hard in rehab, and regained a little more thigh control.

MK and his family learned about MME from another of our patients in the summer of '05. At that point, six months out from injury, spinal neuron regeneration with MME is difficult, related to the inhibitory effects of No-Go A. On the other hand, MK seemed to gaining function with ongoing physical therapy, so there was reason to believe that MME might help him. Our program wasn't set to start until September '05, so MK received his initial 200 hours at the Sterling Heights MME facility. MK didn't notice a change at first, but later on some sensory function returned (it takes time for regenerated nerves to grow). MK then received 197 hours of MME at our facility, with concomitant growth factor therapy, along with five sessions of Cranial Sacral Therapy.

Post-MME round two MK is doing better, and we anticipate that he will gain a little more over the next few months. Hot and cold sensation have returned over the front of MK's right leg, from the knee up, and on the left, from the mid-thigh up. Hip flexion is stronger, as is MK's ability to walk with bracing and assistance. Position sense over his thighs has improved, while bowel and bladder function have not been affected. Of interest, the scar over MK's back is less apparent; it has smoothed over. Overall, MK rates himself as 30 to 40% better. MK will keep up with Cranial Sacral Therapy (I think this is a definite complement to MME in patients with neurological impairments). Our "window of opportunity" is the first four weeks following a spinal injury, and then 15 or more years out from the event. Between four weeks and 15 years, the window is closed, but there does appear to be a crack in the window, as evidenced by MK's response to MME.

FR fell 25 feet from a deer stand in late '98, sustaining an L1 vertebral fracture with 70% cord compression. A T12-L2 decompression procedure was carried out. The initial prognosis was excellent, with a 99% chance for a full functional recovery. FR did regain a great deal of function. Now 35 years old, FR can work a full day and he enjoys life, but residual damage from his accident persists. In response to pelvic or abdominal discomfort, or to physical activity, FR's toes will draw up in a "clawfoot" pattern. Bladder and bowel function are sluggish. Sphincter control is intact, but FR has to catheter drain his bladder and his bowels move only every two days.

FR received 200 hours of MME to his lower spine over 20 days, with concomitant growth factor therapy. He noted no change in his neurological status. No functions returned. Neither FR or myself felt that FR had gained a thing from MME. If and when a research group comes out with a No-Go A blocker, then we could try MME again. FR's case reinforces the rule that it is tough to regenerate spinal neurons between 4 weeks and 15 years following the patient's injury.

In 7/06, then 18 year-old RC fell from a moving truck, sustaining spinal trauma between T3 and T5, with avulsion of the nerve roots of the brachial plexus (the nerves to the left upper extremity were basically ripped away from the spinal cord). Urgent surgery stabilized RC's spinal column, but function below the level of injury did not return. A CT scan carried out in 8/06 demonstrated some residual bony compression of the spinal column. MRI in 9/06 demonstrated fluid collection at the site of the brachial plexus evulsion. It was felt that all the damage that could be done had been done, and further surgery was not felt to be appropriate. RC had no control of his lower extremities, trunk, bowels, or bladder, and no sense of sensation from the nipple line down. The nerves of the brachial plexus could not be surgically restored. RC could wiggle his elbow medially and laterally (side-to-side) a little, but he could not lift his arm at all.

RC received 304 hours of MME to his thoracic spine and left brachial plexus in 1-2/07. As adjunctive therapy RC we utilized injectable growth hormone, oral Stem Enhance (stimulates release of uncommitted stem cells from the bone marrow) and sublingual porcine growth factors. While in Toledo RC kept up with aquatic therapy at a local facility.

Nothing happened. RC's aquatic therapist felt that RC had gained some voluntary function of one toe, but in retrospect this was probable due to a muscle spasm. We weren't expecting a major improvement for RC, as he was 6 months out from the injury when he began MME, but we were expecting some improvement. A CT scan was thus carried out in 5/07. This study showed persistent deviation of the spinal column; artifact from the screws and plates precluded an assessment of the spinal cord itself. I brought up the idea of further corrective surgery with RC's personal physician in Manitoba, but the feeling was that the damage done was irreversible (this is the standard teaching - something that we hope to change when we get better with MME and the use of adjunctive therapies), and that the risks of surgery would outweigh the potential benefits.

We kept in phone contact with RC and his family. By 5/07, some sensory ability of RC's left arm has returned - he could feel the plethysmograph clip (oxygen sensor placed on a finger) during a routine medical visit. He could now move his left arm at the level of the shoulder. In 6/07, RC regained the ability to move his forearm forward. One year out from MME, in 1/08, RC can raise his left arm to the level of his mouth. He can't use his hand to grasp objects, as finger motor function has not returned, but progress is obviously occurring. Spinal cord motor function has not improved, but now he has some cutaneous sensation below the nipple line.

RC is planning on returning to Toledo for further MME. I'm not sure is we are going to be able to restore function of his spinal cord, but I am optimistic that with further time (it may take up to a year for a long nerve cell to regenerate along its entire length) and more MME, that function of RC's left arm will improve. With this round of MME will will also utilize Magna Charge (pulsed magnetic field) therapy and red/violet soft laser (felt to facilitate cell-to-cell communication).

AMRI of NW Ohio provides MME treatment under the guidelines of an Investigational Review Board, consistent with FDA regulations.

Please note that MME treatment is considered to be experimental by the FDA. Although many patients have improved, no guarantee of success is implied.