Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is Robert O. Becker well regarded in the medical and scientific community?

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 02:18 AM
link   
I am asking this as a layperson. I've searched the forums and googled but can't seem to find a definitive answer. I ask that any answers to the following questions be supported by links or recommended reading, with my thanks.

1) Is Dr. Becker "for real?" That is to say, is he a bonafide medical doctor and physiologist?

2) Is Becker well regarded by his peers in the medical and scientific community?

3) Was he really a two time Nobel Prize nominee, and if so, in what capacity?

4) Was the quote from his book (which I will post below this) taken out of context, or placed in proper context?

I can find numerous websites that quote the above claims or imply them, but I cannot seem to find an official website where his work can be reviewed, papers he has published (other than published books,) or any sort of official endorsement or confirmation of the claims made.

The reason I am asking is because a rather hard to swallow (but nonetheless interesting) website stated the following regarding medically facilitated mind control programs:


...the mind controllers need an EEG to determine the frequency of one’s brain waves so that they can be matched by a microwave transmitter. Ideas, memories, voices – even commands – can be transmitted by corresponding the frequencies of the microwaves with the EEG brain frequencies. This is the most scientific method of behavior modification and control. Robert O. Becker, MD in his 1985 book, The Body Electric, explains that such a procedure “has obvious applications in covert operations designed to drive a target crazy with voices or deliver undetectable instructions to a programmed assassin." Becker also wrote, “Eventual monitoring of the evoked potential from the EEG, combined with radio frequency and microwave broadcast designed to produce specific thoughts or moods, such as compliance and complacency, promises a method of mind control that poses immense danger to all societies – tyranny without terror." (pp. 319-20) Dr. Becker is a two-time Nobel nominee for his work in biological effects of electromagnetism and is a pioneer in this field.

Source: Escape from MK-ULTRA

It is important to cut through hearsay, misrepresentation, hype, agendas, and embellishment when considering topics of such potential importance. This and other subjects are debated endlessly on ATS, but too often, sources are accepted at face value without asking a question as simple as "is this information regarded as reliable?"

If someone of Dr. Becker's implied standing truly stated the above, I'd like to know whether he is really the medical professional and scientist he is described as being, and if he is not, then I'd like to know that as well. Thanks to anyone who can help answer my questions!

[edit on 6/23/2007 by AceWombat04]




posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 06:39 AM
link   
If you do a search in PubMed for Becker, RO, you come up with 89 records. He does seem to be a prolific researcher in established medical journals. I couldn't find him in any current physician directories, which might mean he is primarily a researcher these days and does not practice.



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceWombat04
1) Is Dr. Becker "for real?" That is to say, is he a bonafide medical doctor and physiologist?

Yes and no. He's a retired, board certified orthopedic surgeon and apparently was a clinic director.


2) Is Becker well regarded by his peers in the medical and scientific community?

Niether respected nor disrespected as far as his early research goes. I compared the number of citations for him with the number of citations and references for some of his coauthors and found they have more material out and are cited more often.

I see him cited only twice on PubMed. (ooops. Toromos was right. he's in there 89 times.)


3) Was he really a two time Nobel Prize nominee, and if so, in what capacity?

Anyone can be a nominee. I could nominate you, for example. The founder of the "Crips" street gang was (no fooling) nominated for a Nobel Prize.



4) Was the quote from his book (which I will post below this) taken out of context, or placed in proper context?


Robert O. Becker, MD in his 1985 book, The Body Electric, explains that such a procedure “has obvious applications in covert operations designed to drive a target crazy with voices or deliver undetectable instructions to a programmed assassin." Becker also wrote, “Eventual monitoring of the evoked potential from the EEG, combined with radio frequency and microwave broadcast designed to produce specific thoughts or moods, such as compliance and complacency, promises a method of mind control that poses immense danger to all societies – tyranny without terror." (pp. 319-20) Dr. Becker is a two-time Nobel nominee for his work in biological effects of electromagnetism and is a pioneer in this field.

It's probable.

Becker has his own pet theories about the body, and some of his later publications (available only through alternative medicine journals) seem fairly unsubstantiated. He had something on fibromyalgia and electric treatment that has not been taken up although he claims 100% cure rate.


If someone of Dr. Becker's implied standing truly stated the above, I'd like to know whether he is really the medical professional and scientist he is described as being, and if he is not, then I'd like to know that as well.

I haven't time to check his papers (I will later this weekend) but from the bits I've looked into, I wouldn't class him with Pastuer, Curie, Salk, and wouldn't class him as someone I would seriously consider for the Nobel Prize in medicine.


[edit on 23-6-2007 by Byrd]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Since he was able to regrow frog limbs and since he is responsible for the use of electric current on bone fractures to heal...I think he is very much Noble Prize material.

I would not call his research and his conclusions, Pet Theories, thats just lame byrd and lacks class or professionalism let along any understanding of his work.

Nor does the amount of time he has been quoted as qualifying his work...mainstream is not interested in his work and the trouble he had to get funding was incredible.

His work is cutting edge and not even in the modern paridigm so why would they reference his work???


The Current Of Injury is very important and how many doctors understand that basic concept>?

How many could tell you why a salmander can regrow his arm but the frog cannot> How many doctors could tell you WHY you bone heals...and if it did not, why not.
Dr Becker could...he is one of those very few who actually asked why and found out. How many others have even considered his research that are a physician? Ask your family physican what would happen if your fracture did not knit...he would laugh at you, tell you your body does it all by itself.
OH REALLY?

[ats]

Shot with unknown at 1969-12-31[/ats]

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 23-6-2007 by junglelord]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Bryd can you give me a reason why a liver can regenerate but a kidney cannot>?


While your head spins around on that one I will give you the answer...

I would bet 100 to 1 that a liver can regenerate because its current of injury is negitive, the same as the salamander....just like bone when it regenerates. Its a negitive current of injury.

Muscles like cardiac or skeletal muscle and other tissues like kidneys do not regenerate they heal with scar...because of the opposite current of injury. Its positive.

Dr. Becker applied microcurrents to a femur bone that would not heal and it knitted after sevens years non union. It was directly because of his work that current is used to heal bone that will not union. Its all about the current of injury. The patients bone was not supply the correct current of injury. How many people even think in those terms>?

He is a genius.
He has regrown limbs on frogs.


[edit on 23-6-2007 by junglelord]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 12:54 PM
link   
He did his work just south of my location and was pivitol in preventing a high voltage line going through NY state.

His book The Body Electric is a incredible read and educational on many levels, from the difficulty in obtaining funding for such research that was considered "Frankenstein" in nature and not well liked and presented huge hurdles in itself. Then there was the lack of scientific papers here but he did find good research in Russia that sent him on the right track. To his ability to regrow limbs on frogs to the discovery of a NY state trapper with a broken femur for seven years that he healed with his research and microcurrents and a silver foil on the fracture.


The Body Electric tells the fascinating story of our bioelectric selves. Robert O. Becker, a pioneer in the filed of regeneration and its relationship to electrical currents in living things, challenges the established mechanistic understanding of the body. He found clues to the healing process in the long-discarded theory that electricity is vital to life. But as exciting as Becker's discoveries are, pointing to the day when human limbs, spinal cords, and organs may be regenerated after they have been damaged, equally fascinating is the story of Becker's struggle to do such original work. The Body Electric explores new pathways in our understanding of evolution, acupuncture, psychic phenomena, and healing.

www.amazon.com...

[edit on 23-6-2007 by junglelord]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Another fast response here as I hop in and out...

I did look at the current bioelectric journals in publication and he hasn't had articles in the journal Bioelectromagnetics, and I don't think his recent work has been cited in any of the articles on wound healing. Most of the references I see to him (on quick scan in journal databases) tend to end in the 1990's. A recent article (this month) in Bioelectromagnetics indicates that some people (small percentage) do experience suome effects (vertigo was the one they talked about) in high magnetic fields (MRI machine is the specific instance)... but I haven't read that article yet. I will later.

There's been a lot of development in the field since he wrote his early books, and it's fairly safe to say that research has gone far beyond that early work.

I'm pretty sure MKULTRA has been proven a hoax (but I'm not completely sure)... I'll look up current research to see if it supports that concept. I don't think it does, but I will go look (much later. I'm at a conference right now.)


[edit on 23-6-2007 by Byrd]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   
So if I understand correctly, the consensus is essentially that he was a bonafide doctor of medicine and has published peer reviewed work, but that his work may be viewed by contemporary researchers as dubious or controversial at best. (Note: for those who support his research, I am not saying this to imply that his work is necessarily flawed or dubious, but merely to point out that it seems to be viewed as such, or perhaps merely as being outdated now, by many newer contemporary researchers, judging by their lack of reference to his work.)

All I can seem to ascertain about MKULTRA (though I am always 100% prepared to be wrong, as I know my knowledge is limited) is that it, BLUEBIRD, ARTICHOKE, etc. were real attempts at developing offensive means of behavior modification and interrogation techniques (as should be expected for the period, I would imagine,) but that it has never been proved or broadly supported that they or other programs sought or achieved genuine "mind control," or that they were deployed against normal citizens. I believe the congressional hearings I read some time ago indicated that at least a few people were unwittingly dosed with hallucinogens and the like, but that nothing further than that has ever been substantiated. Is that a fair assessment?

Thanks to everyone who has posted thus far. I deeply appreciate your insights.



posted on Jun, 24 2007 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceWombat04
So if I understand correctly, the consensus is essentially that he was a bonafide doctor of medicine and has published peer reviewed work, but that his work may be viewed by contemporary researchers as dubious or controversial at best.

That's correct. There was a lot of excitement about his work with fractures in the early 1980's... it was well known at the Texas Tech Medical School (where I was getting a degree).

However, by the time he started warning about electrical fields and cell phones, his reputation for having unsubstantiated ideas was notable. I think it's perhaps because of his extreme viewpoints -- while everyone certainly could agree that there might be harm, not everyone was prepared to buy into the "yes it harms everyone and you get cancer and leukemia and so forth!" model.

Data on clusters of medical problems simply didn't bear out his observations.



All I can seem to ascertain about MKULTRA (though I am always 100% prepared to be wrong, as I know my knowledge is limited) is that it, BLUEBIRD, ARTICHOKE, etc. were real attempts at developing offensive means of behavior modification and interrogation techniques (as should be expected for the period, I would imagine,) but that it has never been proved or broadly supported that they or other programs sought or achieved genuine "mind control," or that they were deployed against normal citizens. I believe the congressional hearings I read some time ago indicated that at least a few people were unwittingly dosed with hallucinogens and the like, but that nothing further than that has ever been substantiated. Is that a fair assessment?

After doing a little reading, yes, I think that's a fair assessment. They ddidn't achieve any real form of "mind control" (because if they had, we wouldn't be so diverse.)

I don't know if they used Becker or not (BTW, he did not recommend magnetic pulse devices for fibromyalgia -- as I found out on a second reading of that one page. But he's cited as though it was the subject of one of his papers.) He did coauthor a paper saying that there were high rates of suicide in areas where high-voltage trasmission lines. A number of followup studies contradicted his findings.



posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Thank-you to everyone who posted. I apprecoate your insights and the time it took to post them. It's good to know what's what.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


You know at one time almost everyone believed the world was flat . Ohh yes and that the sun revolved around the earth . The best way to answer something like this is to try it . Think about this now ...say i had a simple cure for a good number of medical releated problems and I presnted this information to the Food and Drug Administration and to my peers ( who by the way make a living off the sick ) do you think it would get approved ? We are talking about an industry as greedy and ruthless as the oil companies where live only mean dollar signs . What the FDA and the peers are really about is treatments not cures . Keep them treated and keep the revenue coming in

Riding on the heels of discoveries that have finally provided physicians the ability to treat chronic and debilitating diseases, the Pharmaceutical industry has quickly become the most profitable industry in the world. This profit has come at a price. The massive political influence of the pharmaceutical industry has helped secure it not only favored tax status, but also the ability to bypass advertising restrictions, influence drug approvals, and even craft legislation like the Medicare Prescription Drug plan.

High prices for prescription drugs continue to force many patients to decide between expensive treatment for their illnesses and basic necessities like rent, food, and clothing. Total spending for pharmaceuticals exceeded $140 billion in 2001, more than tripling since 1990. While most other countries have prices much lower than the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has argued that high U.S. prices are necessary to adequately fund research and development. An analysis of where drug companies invest their revenues, however, shows that they invest twice as much into an enormous marketing apparatus rather than research & development . Can you imagine that



posted on Nov, 27 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
I personally knew Dr. Becker in the 1968-1974 time period and actually was in his lab at Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse, NY many times. His experiments were clean, and the published material was backed many times by the experimental evidence. After a minor initial contremps with the Hall Effect in the blood stream, he worked with several local Physicists and Biophysicists from Syracuse University (which was across the street) and got the Physics of the electrical fields and their measurements correct. Most of the experiments were disarmingly simple and can easily be repeated with minimal facilities. Much of his material was published in the Proceedings of the New York State Academy of Science - and are available inexpensively as photocopy reproductions via Interlibrary Loan. I do not think full text is available on the web YET.

When he talks about bioelectric phenomena in the small (relating to one or a few organisms), believe him.

His assertions about the global electromagnetic environment are (as he himself noted) hypotheses that need to be tested. However raising funds to test them is politically incorrect at this time in our societies.

An ex physics / biophysics grad student



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Complete, downloadable book from Becker : The Body Electric
www.scribd.com....
At the end is some instructive account of the difficulties he met on the "medical politics" aspect (coming from the MOD after he had testified about power line dangers.

He got the VA's William S.Middleton Award ; was chief of research in Washington (p. 337), medical investigator in the VA research system (p. 338).






top topics



 
1

log in

join