NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons. 

NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons. 

NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons. 

This paper from 1993 presents data from clinicians using a program very similar to be program pioneered by Grace Halloran PhD. Leland Michael,O.D. came to California to learn what Grace was doing and it was from her that he learned about the use of microcurrent stimulation. The only unit available in 1993 was the Electro-Acuscope, and that was the unit used in this study. The MicroStim 100 unit was a portable unit derived from the Electro-Acuscope and it is the latest version of this unit that we are using today.

If you're like most people considering the Better Eye Health Program you want to know if the techniques work and if they'll work for you. They work, but only if you do them. We've tried to put up as many studies as we can find that describe the results that we and other practitioners have had. The studies all show that these techniques work and that they are safe.

What this study shows:
15 of the 25 people in this study showed improved vision using only supplements and electrical stimulation. To put this in perspective, the vast body of scientific research that has been published about macular degeneration shows that if you do only supplements, or if you do nothing, you can at best slow the progression of the disease but you never see improvements. It makes findings like the ones shown in this paper even more remarkable.

NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons. 

This paper from 1998 presents data from clinicians using a program very similar to the program pioneered by Grace Halloran PhD. This study follows and continues another study we present elsewhere from 1993 by Dr. Michael and Dr. Allen. In this study, there was some refinement of the supplement protocol, and people were treated with either the Electro-Acuscope or the MicroStim 400 professional unit. The MicroStim 100 unit was a portable unit derived from the Electro-Acuscope and the MicroStim 400, and it is the latest version of this unit that we are using today.

If you're like most people considering the Better Eye Health Program you want to know if the techniques work and if they'll work for you. They work, but only if you do them. We've tried to put up as many studies as we can find that describe the results that we and other practitioners have had. The studies all show that these techniques work and that they are safe.

What this study shows:
A total of 46 people were included in this study, and most showed improved vision using only supplements and electrical stimulation. Modern programs like the Better Eye Health Program see about 90% of people showing improvement, but to get this kind of result there are numerous different therapies used. To put this in perspective, the vast body of scientific research that has been published about macular degeneration shows that if you do only supplements, you can at best slow the progression of the disease but you never see improvements. It makes findings like the ones shown in this paper even more remarkable.

NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons. 

In this 2015 study published in the journal Clinical Ophthalmology we see a small study with 15 people with both wet and dry macular degeneration. If you are considering a program utilizing microcurrent stimulation you will be pleased with the results shown in this study. Only microcurrent stimulation was used in this study and treatments were only done once a week. Still, some improvement in vision was seen, mostly in those in those study participants with dry macular degeneration.

We were using a frequency specific microcurrent stimulator. In the few studies published using frequency specific microcurrent stimulation, the results have been worse or at best the same as those using the MicroStim 100 or the earlier MicroStim 400 professional unit. You will pay a great deal more for a frequency specific unit but will not see better results than you can expect with a MicroStim 100 series.

What did the study show:
More people showed improvement then decline over the course of the study. Modern models for treatment programs that include microcurrent stimulation also include various other therapies to improve outcomes. With these more robust programs a higher percentage of people show improvement and very few people actually showed decline, justifying the additional effort beyond treatment with microcurrent stimulation alone.

NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons. 

NOTE: Click on the image of the article to open it in another window where you can read it online. Some files may not be available for download for copyright reasons.