Talk:Electrotherapy (cosmetic)

This article makes no mention of the weight of evidence for or against the legitimacy and magnitude of the listed benefits. In fact, it fails to mention that there is any scientific disagreement with the efficacy of some electrotherapy treatments. Other articles on the subject mention studies that raise objections to benefits that are pseudoscientific. 2620:106:A000:705:5965:D920:4E21:BA45 (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The introductory paragraph already frames the subject by noting that the "scientific and medical communities have tended to sideline or dismiss the use of electrotherapy for healthy muscles". The rest of the article provides links to some scientific paper. If you are aware of any academic articles that highlight "scientific disagreement", or "raise objections to benefits that are pseudoscientific", then please present them, otherwise we have nothing more than hearsay. --Iantresman (talk) 22:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Very very deceptive article

This page is full of false information and the majority of the citations are illegitimate.

Citing some book about "beauty therapy" does not prove that ATP is generated by use of these devices. You need to provide a peer reviewed scientific JOURNAL ARTICLE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.118.56 (talk) 01:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

It looks like another editor added the comments regarding microcurrent ATP stimultation[1] and I agree, we need a decent source. I am happy with some of the "beauty therapy" texts supporting some statements, and I note that the article is not without academic texts, eg [2][3] (now 12th ed.) and well cited. I also note a number of poor primary sources. --Iantresman (talk) 14:24, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

With respect to microcurent ATP stimilation, there does appear to be some supporting peer reviewed sources, eg. Cheng N et al, "The effects of electric currents on ATP generation, protein synthesis, and membrane transport of rat skin.", Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982 Nov-Dec;(171):264-72, but we have to ask whether this is relevant to microcurrent beauty treatments. --Iantresman (talk) 14:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Muscle contraction does promote ATP synthesis, however, a normal human male produces about 40 pounds of ATP per day, so I fail to see how micro-production of ATP has any effect on skin "beauty". It does need better references and less WP:synthesis. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 22:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

It does appear that the new information on ATP stimulation is a round about way of promoting a specific brand of product. I've asked the company for some citations. --Iantresman (talk) 21:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I've removed this statement[4] until we get citations that support the clauses:

"Microcurrent .. stimulates ATP production"

" ATP production drives the creation of key structural proteins, such as collagen and elastin"

And that we can infer that Microcurrent stimulates collagen and elastin via ATP production

--Iantresman (talk) 10:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

What evidence is there?

What evidence is there?, and what does the evidence tell us? FreeFlow99 (talk) 09:44, 22 January 2022 (UTC)