Electrodermal testing (Voll, Vega, SCIO) and AcuGraph

Version followed: Electroacupuncture according to Voll (EAV) as described in a 2025 continuing-education course of the Vienna Medical Chamber (Ärztekammer Wien); the Vega test and related "bioelectronic" devices as described by regulators, trial reports and consumer-protection sources; the EPFX/QXCI (later sold as SCIO) as described by investigative journalism; AcuGraph ("Digital Meridian Imaging") as its maker Miridia Technology and a user clinic describe it. The psychotherapist works alongside this method and does not perform, sell, order, interpret or recommend any electrodermal test or device treatment. Row 180 (AcuGraph) is covered here.

1. Introduction

Electrodermal testing (EDT) is a family of devices that pass a small current through the skin, usually between a hand-held electrode and a probe pressed on points the method maps to acupuncture meridians, and read the skin's electrical resistance or conductance. Practitioners hold that these readings reflect the state of organs, meridians or the body's "regulation", and some versions hold that bringing a substance into the circuit changes the reading, which is used to "test" allergies, intolerances, "toxins", deficiencies or which remedy suits the person. [source: Quackwatch, Electrodiagnostic devices; Ärztekammer Wien course page]

EAV (Voll). Reinhold Voll, a German physician, is reported to have developed EAV in 1958 by combining acupuncture-point theory with skin-resistance measurement; his first transistorised device was called the Dermatron. [source: Quackwatch; Bionity lexicon, which gives Voll's dates as 1909–1989 [uncertain: secondary, unverified]] In the Vienna course, conductance is read mainly at acupuncture source points ("Quellpunkte") on hands and feet; high readings are read as irritation, low readings as degenerative change, and a falling pointer ("Zeigerabfall") as an acute process. A "Medikamententest nach Voll" (also called the "Ankoppelungsphänomen", after O. Bergsmann) holds that readings shift within seconds when a substance is introduced. Voll mainly used weak direct-current impulses, nosodes and homeopathic complex preparations as treatment. [source: Ärztekammer Wien course page]
Vega test. A student of Voll, Helmut Schimmel, is reported to have reduced the measuring points from about 850 to around 60 and helped create the first Vegatest model; the date is given as the 1960s by one secondary source and not given by another. [source: Quackwatch; Bionity [uncertain: secondary, unverified]] Glass ampoules of test substances are placed in a tray in the circuit and the reading is repeated. [source: Quackwatch]
EPFX / QXCI / SCIO. A computer-linked device with straps on the forehead, wrists and ankles, colourful body graphics and a "zap" mode said to send frequencies into the body; some operators placed hair, saliva or blood samples on a plate on the device. Its seller, William Nelson, registered his company with the FDA as a biofeedback manufacturer in 1989; the FDA ordered him in 1992 to stop false claims; he was indicted on felony fraud counts in 1996 and left the US for Hungary. [source: Seattle Times, 18 Nov 2007; BioSpace, 2007] The device was also marketed as the Quantum Xrroid Consciousness Interface (QXCI) [source: Wikipedia, EPFX [uncertain: secondary, unverified]]; the later name SCIO is [uncertain: not verified].
AcuGraph. Miridia Technology, whose president Adrian P. Larsen DC developed it, calls AcuGraph "Digital Meridian Imaging". [source: Miridia exhibitor page] As a user clinic describes it, a hand-held probe touches points on the hands and feet and a colour-coded graph of "energy" across the meridians appears within minutes, used to guide acupuncture point choice, lifestyle and herbal advice. [source: In Step Physical Therapy page] It is a meridian "stress" or "balance" graph used mainly by acupuncturists and is not, in the cited sources, marketed to diagnose allergies or disease.

Core idea of change, as the methods hold it. Skin-point readings are taken to reveal disturbed regulation or meridian "energy" before or beneath symptoms; "testing" substances identifies what burdens or suits the body; balancing points with current, remedies or acupuncture restores regulation. These are the methods' own explanatory models, attributed here, not established physiology. [source: Ärztekammer Wien; Miridia; In Step]

Regulatory status (one line each). USA: the FDA treats devices that use resistance measurement to diagnose or treat disease as Class III requiring premarket approval; a few hold 510(k) clearance only for biofeedback or skin-resistance measurement, which does not permit diagnostic claims, and importation of EAV devices has been barred. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] UK: the advertising regulator has ruled that Vega-type claims to detect food sensitivities, deficiencies or enzyme needs were not substantiated. [source: ASA/CAP advice] Canada: licences for several Vega devices were suspended in 2002. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] Austria: a medical chamber offers EAV as physician continuing education while stating the evidence is "vorläufig unzureichend" (so far insufficient). [source: Ärztekammer Wien]

Evidence status (one line). In a double-blind randomised study against skin-prick tests, electrodermal (Vega) testing could not distinguish allergic from non-allergic people, and the authors concluded it "cannot be used to diagnose environmental allergies". [source: Lewith et al., BMJ 2001]

2. Framework

The methods' own frameworks are summarised so the therapist can follow what the client went through; the therapist's own work runs in parallel and is set out after.

How a client typically meets the test (as sources describe it). [source: Quackwatch; Ärztekammer Wien; In Step; Seattle Times]

Who offers it: physicians and dentists in some countries, naturopaths, homeopaths, chiropractors, acupuncturists, nutrition and "wellness" practitioners, and unlicensed operators, some with a few days' training or mail-order certificates. [source: Seattle Times]
The session: the client holds a metal electrode (in EAV, a brass cylinder, sometimes wrapped in moist gauze) and the operator presses a probe on points of the other hand or a foot; a reading, bar or sound appears; for AcuGraph, shoes and socks off and a probe touches each point for a few minutes. Vega and EAV "medication tests" add substances in glass ampoules to the circuit; EPFX-type devices attach straps and show graphics. [source: Quackwatch; In Step; Seattle Times]
The result: a list of "stressed" organs or meridians, "allergies", "intolerances", "toxins", "parasites", deficiencies or remedies; often a product plan follows (homeopathics most often, supplements, diet changes, further sessions, sometimes a home device). [source: Quackwatch]
Repeat testing is used to track "progress" (AcuGraph re-scans each session). [source: In Step]

Training routes as published. The Vienna course is a short continuing-education unit for physicians with basic acupuncture training, with a note that reliable technique takes several days of practice; other routes include device-maker training and operator certificates. [source: Ärztekammer Wien; Seattle Times]

The psychotherapist's parallel framework [synthesis]:

Notice and ask (any session): routine enquiry about tests, devices, remedies and practitioners; record.
Understand (1–2 sessions, woven in): meaning, hopes, explanatory model, what the result has changed in eating, spending, medical care, relationships.
Decide and coordinate (as needed): values-based decisions; consented contact with GP, allergist, dentist, pharmacist or paediatrician.
Address risk (at any point it appears): delayed care, restrictive eating, children, pregnancy, finances, coercive groups.
Treat what is in scope (ongoing): health anxiety, somatic symptoms, perceived environmental or food intolerance, grief or regret, using established approaches (see Domain II).

Move from 1–2 to 3 when a test result is driving a health, diet or financial decision; move straight to 4 whenever risk signs appear; move to 5 when the pattern of testing reflects anxiety, reassurance-seeking or somatic distress. [synthesis]

3. Guiding principles

Curiosity before information. Ask what the test meant to them before saying anything about tests; people disclose more when not judged. [synthesis]
Attribute, do not adjudicate. Describe meridians, "energy" and "regulation" as the method holds them; avoid stating them as fact or mocking them. [synthesis]
Stay in scope. The therapist does not interpret readings, confirm or refute diagnoses, or advise on remedies, supplements or medicines; medical questions go to the doctor, pharmacist or allergist. [synthesis; cf. APA Ethics Code 2.01 Boundaries of Competence]
No commerce, no conflicts. Never sell, refer for profit, or co-locate commercially with a testing practice; manage any conflict of interest. [source: APA Ethics Code 3.06 Conflict of Interest, 3.05 Multiple Relationships]
Autonomy with information. Support the client's own decisions while making sure they have accurate information and know the regulator and trial findings exist. [synthesis; cf. APA 10.01 on disclosing risks and alternatives]
Cooperation with medical care. With consent, coordinate with the client's doctor. [source: APA Ethics Code 3.09 Cooperation with Other Professionals]
Safety first where stakes are high. Delayed diagnosis of serious illness, restrictive eating, children and pregnancy override neutrality. [synthesis; source for harms: Quackwatch; Seattle Times]
Avoid harm, including shaming harm. People who relied on the test often feel foolish; respond to regret and anger without blame. [source: APA Ethics Code 3.04 Avoiding Harm; application is synthesis]
Know the reporting routes. Product, advertising and professional-board routes exist and the therapist should know them. [source: MHRA; ASA/CAP; synthesis]

4. Intervention inventory

All interventions below are the psychotherapist's own work alongside a client who uses, has used or is considering electrodermal testing. All example wording is the author's illustrative wording, not drawn from any manual. [synthesis unless a source is tagged]

4.1 Routine, non-judgemental enquiry and recording

Purpose / when: At intake and whenever a client mentions "allergies", "intolerances", "toxins", "energy scans", "meridian tests" or a new remedy plan. Testing is often not volunteered.
Steps: (1) Ask a general question about health practitioners and tests outside the GP. (2) If EDT is named, ask who did it, what device or name was used (Vega, EAV, bioresonance, AcuGraph, "quantum" or "biofeedback" scan), what they were told, and what followed (products, diet, cost, further sessions). (3) Ask whether their doctor knows. (4) Record factually in the client's words, without evaluative language.
Example language (illustrative): "Lots of people see practitioners outside their GP. Have you had any scans or tests like that, the kind where you hold a metal rod or have points on your hands checked?" / "What did they tell you the results showed?"
Watch for: Embarrassment or defensiveness (slow down, normalise); results that now govern eating, spending or medical decisions; a serious illness "ruled out" by a scan. It is working when the client describes the test and its consequences openly.

4.2 Exploring meaning, hopes and the explanatory model

Purpose / when: After disclosure, to understand what drew them and what the result does for them (control, an explanation for unexplained symptoms, hope, distrust or past mistreatment by medicine, identity, belonging to a community).
Steps: (1) Ask what led them to the test and what they hoped it would show. (2) Ask how they understand the result works (their model, e.g. "my meridians showed stress"). (3) Ask what changed after the result: relief, fear, new restrictions. (4) Reflect the need underneath (being taken seriously, certainty). (5) Note any previous experiences of being dismissed by doctors.
Example language (illustrative): "Before the scan, what were you hoping it would help you understand?" / "It sounds like it was the first time someone gave your symptoms a name. That matters."
Watch for: Long histories of medically unexplained symptoms (see 4.8); grief or anger at medicine; the test as a substitute for a feared diagnosis. Working signs: the client can name the need the test met, separate from the test itself.

4.3 Clarifying what the test is and what is known about it (information, not verdict)

Purpose / when: When a decision depends on the result, or the client asks the therapist's view.
Steps: (1) Ask permission to share information. (2) Describe neutrally: practitioners hold that skin-point readings reflect organ or meridian state; regulators in several countries have acted against diagnostic claims; a double-blind trial found the Vega test could not identify known allergies. [source: Lewith et al. BMJ 2001; ASA/CAP; Quackwatch regulatory list] (3) State plainly that you cannot interpret readings and that allergy, intolerance or illness questions belong with their doctor or an allergy service. (4) Ask for their reaction and leave room to disagree.
Example language (illustrative): "Would it help if I shared what I know about how these tests are regarded? … Practitioners see the readings as reflecting the body's energy or regulation. When this kind of test was checked against standard allergy tests in a blinded study, it didn't pick out who was allergic. That's information for you to weigh; I'm not the person to confirm or rule out an allergy, your GP is."
Watch for: Feeling corrected or shamed (return to 4.2); arguing (do not debate meridian theory). Working: the client can hold both their experience and the information and wants a medical check.

4.4 Values-based decision support without coercion

Purpose / when: When the client is deciding whether to keep testing, follow a product or diet plan, buy a home device, or rely on a scan instead of medical assessment.
Steps: (1) Name the decision. (2) Elicit what matters to them (health, money, family, feeling in control). (3) List options including doing both (keeping a practitioner they value while also getting medical assessment). (4) For each option ask about likely benefits, costs, risks and what they would need to know. (5) Agree a next step they choose; record that the choice is theirs. No published decision aid specific to EDT is known; use a general pros-and-cons format. [uncertain: not verified]
Example language (illustrative): "What would matter most to you in a year's time looking back on this choice?" / "Is there a way to do what feels right to you and also get the medical check, so you're not choosing one or the other?"
Watch for: Your own pull to persuade (a rupture risk); pressure from the practitioner or a group. Working: the client makes a decision they can explain in their own values.

4.5 Coordination with the doctor, allergist, dentist or pharmacist (with consent)

Purpose / when: Whenever EDT results drive diet exclusion, remedy use alongside medicines, dental work, or reassurance about symptoms needing medical assessment.
Steps: (1) Explain why coordination helps. (2) Obtain written consent specifying what is shared. (3) Encourage the client to take their result sheet and product list to the GP or pharmacist; the therapist does not advise on stopping or starting any remedy or medicine. (4) If the client consents, send a brief factual letter: what the client reports, the decisions it is driving, your concerns (e.g. restricted intake, symptoms not yet assessed). (5) Agree who follows up.
Example language (illustrative): "Would you be willing to show your GP the list of foods and products from the test? They can check whether anything needs looking at and whether the products fit with your medicines."
Watch for: Refusal from fear of being dismissed (prepare the client for the appointment, role-play asking questions). Dental extraction or amalgam removal based on device readings has led to professional discipline in reported cases; encourage a second dental opinion. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions]

4.6 Risk recognition and response: delayed or replaced medical care

Purpose / when: When a scan has "ruled out" or "cured" serious illness, or symptoms such as weight loss, bleeding, persistent pain, fever, breathlessness or lumps are being managed only by device sessions.
Steps: (1) Ask directly whether the symptom has been seen by a doctor. (2) Express concern clearly and kindly. (3) Ask what makes medical review hard (fear, cost, distrust). (4) Problem-solve barriers; offer to help them prepare. (5) Document advice given and response. (6) If the person lacks capacity, is a child, or is a dependent adult, follow safeguarding (4.10).
Example language (illustrative): "I'm worried that this symptom hasn't been checked by a doctor. A scan result can't tell either of us what's causing it. What would make it possible to get it looked at this week?"
Watch for: Reported deaths have involved untreated leukaemia and cancer during reliance on EPFX sessions, and an HIV case falsely declared cured. [source: Seattle Times 2007; Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] Working: an appointment is made and kept.

4.7 Restrictive eating after "intolerance" results

Purpose / when: When a test produces lists of foods to avoid, especially in clients with an eating-disorder history, orthorexic preoccupation, children, or pregnancy.
Steps: (1) Ask what they have cut out and how their eating has changed. (2) Screen for eating-disorder features with a validated tool you are trained in (weight change, fear of foods, rigid rules, distress when rules break). (3) If present, refer for medical and dietetic assessment and follow eating-disorder pathways. (4) Encourage confirmation of any suspected allergy through medical allergy testing before long-term exclusion. (5) Do not set diet rules yourself.
Example language (illustrative): "Since the test, how many foods are off the list? How do you feel when you eat one of them by accident?"
Watch for: Shrinking food lists, anxiety about "contamination", children's diets restricted. The ASA notes that claims to diagnose conditions needing medical supervision can discourage essential treatment. [source: ASA/CAP advice] Working: intake broadens under medical or dietetic guidance.

4.8 Health anxiety, somatic symptoms and perceived environmental or food intolerance

Purpose / when: When repeated scans, new "findings" each visit, or checking and reassurance-seeking maintain anxiety; when symptoms are persistent and medically unexplained; when the client attributes many symptoms to multiple chemicals or foods (idiopathic environmental intolerance). Cross-reference Domain II for full protocols.
Steps: (1) Build a shared formulation of the cycle: bodily sensation → worry → test or scan → brief relief or new alarm → more vigilance. (2) Map the costs of testing (money, time, restrictions, fear). (3) Use established CBT for health anxiety or somatic symptom disorder approaches as described in Domain II: attention and threat appraisal work, reducing checking and reassurance-seeking, behavioural experiments planned with the medical team, graded return to avoided activities. (4) Agree a single coordinating doctor. (5) Validate that symptoms are real regardless of cause.
Example language (illustrative): "Each scan seems to give some relief, then a new worry. Shall we look at what that cycle is costing you, and whether there's another way to get to feeling safer?"
Watch for: Any reduction in scanning raising anxiety at first (expected; plan for it); new physical symptoms needing medical review rather than psychological reframing. Working: less checking, wider activity, fewer new tests.

4.9 Financial exploitation, product plans and multi-level-marketing pressure

Purpose / when: When a result leads to large product purchases, prepaid packages, an expensive home device or an operator's "business opportunity".
Steps: (1) Ask what they have spent and committed. (2) Ask who benefits from each recommendation (some sellers have promoted testing as a product "profit centre"). [source: Quackwatch, electrodiagnostic devices] (3) Explore pressure: testimonials, urgency, recruitment to sell or operate devices, group loyalty. (4) Support a pause before further purchases and a review with a trusted person. (5) Point to consumer-protection routes (4.11).
Example language (illustrative): "Can we add up together what the testing and products have cost so far? … How do you feel looking at that number?"
Watch for: Shame, secrecy from family, debt, a client who has bought a device and now operates it (sunk cost and identity are high; avoid humiliation). Reported costs have ranged from hourly sessions to home units costing many thousands of dollars. [source: Seattle Times 2007] Working: the client sets their own spending limit and keeps to it.

4.10 Children, pregnancy and dependent adults

Purpose / when: When a parent reports that a child has had "allergy" or "intolerance" scans, has foods excluded, is given remedies in place of medical care, or a pregnant client is relying on scans.
Steps: (1) Ask what the child eats and whether the GP or paediatrician knows. (2) Ask whether a medical condition is being treated by device or remedy alone. (3) Explore the parent's worry with empathy. (4) Encourage paediatric and dietetic review; offer to coordinate. (5) If a child is being deprived of necessary medical care or adequate nutrition, follow your local safeguarding procedures and consult your safeguarding lead. (6) For older children, seek assent and their own view. Never record a child's name in external correspondence beyond what the safeguarding route requires.
Example language (illustrative): "You clearly want to protect her. Would you be willing for us to check the food list with her doctor so we know she's getting what she needs to grow?"
Watch for: Reported harms include a censure for using a Vega device on mothers to diagnose infants' allergies, and an infant death in Australia after a device-using practitioner claimed to treat a heart defect, leading to a manslaughter conviction. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] Working: the child is under medical review and eating adequately.

4.11 Reporting routes

Purpose / when: When a client was harmed, misled about diagnosis, or financially exploited, or you learn of a device being sold with disease claims. Discuss with the client first; reporting adverse events usually needs their consent, while safeguarding may not.
Steps / routes: UK: report a non-compliant medical device to the MHRA by email (devices.compliance@mhra.gov.uk) with seller details, product, the alleged breach and evidence; suspected counterfeit devices can also go via Yellow Card. [source: MHRA] UK misleading adverts: the Advertising Standards Authority, which has ruled against Vega-test claims. [source: ASA/CAP advice] USA: the FDA (device marketing without approval) and the FTC (deceptive advertising) have both acted on such devices; state medical, dental and chiropractic boards have disciplined licensees. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] Australia: the TGA has fined companies over bioresonance scanner claims. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] Canada: Health Canada has suspended Vega device licences. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions] Unlicensed practice of medicine: the relevant licensing body or police. Your own professional body for a colleague who uses these devices diagnostically within therapy.
Example language (illustrative): "What happened to you is something regulators want to hear about. Would you like to look at how to report it together? It's your choice."
Watch for: Fear of the practitioner, loyalty, shame. Working: the client makes an informed choice about reporting.

4.12 Boundaries in your own service

Purpose / when: When a colleague or a multidisciplinary clinic offers AcuGraph or EDT scans, or a client asks you to use, interpret or recommend one.
Steps: (1) Decline to perform, interpret, sell or refer for profit. (2) Keep any shared-premises arrangements free of referral incentives. (3) Do not present a meridian graph as psychological assessment. (4) If a licensed colleague uses a device to diagnose, raise it through supervision and, if needed, their board.
Example language (illustrative): "That isn't something I use or interpret. I'm happy to talk about what the results meant to you."
Watch for: Conflicts of interest and multiple relationships. [source: APA Ethics Code 3.05, 3.06; 9.01 Bases for Assessments] Working: clear separation, documented.

5. Handling problems

None of the method's own sources address psychotherapy; all guidance in this section is [synthesis] except where a source is tagged.

Client feels judged and withdraws. Repair explicitly: name that the topic may feel loaded, apologise for any implied criticism, return to their goals. Ask what would help them feel respected. (illustrative: "I may have sounded like I was dismissing something that has helped you. I'm sorry; that's not what I want.")
Client insists the scan is accurate and asks you to agree. Do not debate meridian theory. Acknowledge their experience, restate your scope, and keep the focus on decisions and safety. (illustrative: "I can see it fits your experience. I'm not able to confirm it either way; what I can help with is making sure the decisions that follow are the ones you want.")
Client wants you to endorse a home device or join a selling scheme. Decline clearly and kindly; explain your ethical limits on commerce. [source: APA Ethics Code 3.06]
Stuck in repeated testing. Treat as reassurance-seeking (4.8); agree a pause and monitor anxiety rather than the scan.
Overwhelm after learning of regulatory actions or trial results. Pace information; attend to shame and regret; normalise that many educated people used these tests; explore grief for time, money or health lost.
Non-adherence to medical follow-up. Explore barriers (fear, prior dismissal, cost); rehearse the appointment; offer a letter with consent; involve a supportive relative if the client agrees.
Family conflict. One family member may rely on scans while another is alarmed. Offer a joint session focused on shared goals (the child's health, the household budget), not on who is right.
Risk escalates (serious symptoms ignored, a child at risk). Shift from neutrality to clear advice and safeguarding (4.6, 4.10); document.
The client is themselves an operator. Explore identity, livelihood and investment without humiliation; if they make disease claims to the public, discuss legal exposure and the regulators that have acted (4.11). [source for regulatory actions: Quackwatch]
Your own reactions. Contempt or rescuing impulses are common; use supervision.

Harm account

What was actually done

The test as clients experienced it. The client holds a metal electrode while an operator presses a probe on points of the hand or foot; a needle, bar or tone responds. The reading depends partly on how hard the probe is pressed. In "medication" or substance tests, glass ampoules of substances (often homeopathic preparations) are placed in a tray in the circuit and the reading repeated; an engineering check reported that the sealed glass did not affect readings. [source: Quackwatch, electrodiagnostic devices] Other systems show a rising bar with a sound (Interro) or on-screen body graphics. [source: Quackwatch; Seattle Times 2007]
The "findings". Operators reported allergies and food sensitivities, deficiencies, "parasites", organ "weaknesses", dental problems linked to fillings, "toxins" and infections, and some claimed to detect the absence of cancer or AIDS. [source: Quackwatch, electrodiagnostic devices; Seattle Times 2007]
What followed. Homeopathic products most often, supplements and diet changes, further paid sessions; one sales message to practitioners framed testing as a "profit centre". [source: Quackwatch] With the EPFX, sessions included a "zap" mode said to send frequencies into the body; sessions cost from tens of dollars upward and home units many thousands. [source: Seattle Times 2007]
Key events. 1958: EAV developed by Voll in West Germany. [source: Quackwatch; Bionity] Late 1980s: William Nelson sells the EPFX from Colorado; 1989 FDA registration as biofeedback maker; 1992 FDA order to stop false claims and a recall; 1996 indictment on nine felony fraud counts and departure to Budapest; reported sales of more than 10,000 devices in the US. [source: Seattle Times 2007] 2007: the FDA moved to block import of the EPFX, which Nelson claimed could cure cancer and AIDS. [source: BioSpace 2007] 2001: a double-blind BMJ trial found the Vega test could not identify known allergies. [source: Lewith et al. 2001] US agencies issued orders against a series of EDT device makers from the 1980s to 2016, including a voluntary recall of software that exceeded its clearance; in 2020 the FTC warned a wellness centre over claims that device-selected homeopathics could prevent or treat COVID-19. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions]

How it caused harm

Missed or delayed diagnosis. A patient with undiagnosed leukaemia died after relying on EPFX sessions; a patient with cancer who bought a home unit died; an HIV-positive patient was told the virus was cured, and family members were later infected. [source: Seattle Times 2007; Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions]
Infants and children. An 18-day-old infant died in Australia after a naturopath using a device claimed to treat a heart defect; the practitioner was convicted of manslaughter. Elsewhere a practitioner was censured for diagnosing infants' allergies by testing their mothers. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions]
Unnecessary procedures. Licensing boards disciplined dentists who extracted teeth, removed fillings or performed jaw surgery on the basis of device readings, causing pain and disability. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions]
False diagnoses and needless restriction. Clients were given allergy, intolerance, toxicity or infection labels that standard tests do not support, leading to products, diets and fear. [source: Lewith et al. 2001; ASA/CAP; Quackwatch]
Financial harm. Hundreds to thousands of dollars on tests and products; a US fraud case involving device-based "diagnosis" led to a long prison sentence and restitution to hundreds of clients. [source: Quackwatch]
Who was most at risk: people with serious undiagnosed illness, people with persistent unexplained symptoms, parents of young children, people prone to restrictive eating, and people distrustful of medicine. [synthesis from the cases above]

Recognising it today

Names and rebrandings: EAV, Dermatron, Vega/Vegatest, bioresonance, "bio-energetic" or "quantum" scans, "meridian stress assessment", "Digital Meridian Imaging", Interro, LISTEN, BioMeridian, Computron, Asyra, ZYTO, EPFX/QXCI and successors. [source: Quackwatch; Miridia] The name SCIO for the EPFX successor is [uncertain: not verified].
Phrases and rationales: "non-invasive scan", "tests hundreds of foods in minutes", "finds the root cause", "detects imbalances before symptoms", "your body tells us which remedy it needs", "FDA registered" (registration of a manufacturer is not approval of a product). [source: Seattle Times 2007; In Step; synthesis]
Red flags in a colleague's or service's practice: device readings used to diagnose allergy, infection, toxicity or cancer, or to rule out disease; product sales after testing; testing children by proxy; advising against medical tests or medicines; presenting a biofeedback clearance as diagnostic approval. [source: Quackwatch, Regulatory Actions; synthesis]
How legitimate versions differ: galvanic skin response used in research or biofeedback for arousal and relaxation training makes no organ, allergy or disease claim; allergy diagnosis uses medically interpreted skin-prick or blood IgE tests. [source: ASA/CAP on IgE testing; Quackwatch on biofeedback-only clearances] AcuGraph as described by its maker and a user clinic is a meridian-balance graph inside acupuncture practice; it becomes a red flag when used to diagnose disease or replace medical assessment. [synthesis]

What to do instead and how to help those harmed

Safer alternatives (for the medical questions): GP assessment; medically supervised allergy testing; registered dietitian input for any exclusion diet; second dental opinion before extraction or filling removal. [source: ASA/CAP; synthesis]
Assessment of affected clients: health status (is anything still unassessed?), eating and nutrition, finances and debt, shame, regret, anger, grief if a relative died, health anxiety, trust in medicine. [synthesis]
Treatment: non-blaming exploration (4.2); grief and regret work; CBT for health anxiety or somatic symptoms (Domain II); family sessions where conflict arose; support to re-engage with medical care. [synthesis]
Ethical, reporting and legal duties: avoid harm and conflicts of interest [source: APA Ethics Code 3.04, 3.06]; safeguarding where children or dependent adults are deprived of care [synthesis]; support client choice about reporting to the device regulator, advertising regulator, consumer protection or the practitioner's licensing board (4.11). [source: MHRA; ASA/CAP; Quackwatch]

Sources

Web sources:

Voll's and Schimmel's own books and the makers' training manuals: their content is described here only through the sources above. [uncertain: not verified]

← Previous · XII-073Bioresonance (MORA, BICOM)Next · XII-075 →Radionics and TimeWaver