As magnetic therapy grows in popularity, more and more theories spring up as to how magnets improve health; improved blood circulation, the blocking of pain receptors and an interaction with the body's natural "biofield" have all received varying degrees of scientific substantiation. Yet by far the most popular theory extolled by some magnetic therapy advocates is that of magnets reacting with the iron in the blood to relieve pain and increase oxygen or nutrients to an affected area. For example, Tracey Allison Planinz writes in her article "How Magnetic Therapy Works" says that "when placed on the skin the magnetic fields attract the iron in the blood and increase circulation to that area of the body". Through this logic, iron in the blood (or haemoglobin) is attracted or repelled from the site of pain. Unfortunately, this remains a claim that is scientifically implausible.
As many opponents to magnetic therapy readily argue, iron in the blood is in such low a concentration (only four iron atoms are allocated to each hemoglobin molecule) and are thus separated by far to great a distance to react to the influence of a magnet. They highlight that even an extremely strong magnet would have no effect when placed next to a strong magnet. Moreover, if iron in the blood was pulled towards a magnet, then a MRI scan would be potentially fatal.
This theory is used at large as an example of the scientific "horsechestnut" endemic of alternative therapy at large. Over the next few blogs, we'll highlight the peer-reviewed studies, blind studies that indicate a more real effect on blood flow and circulation that magnets have on the body.
