Clinical Studies
Key Clinical Studies
The studies below are drawn from the BEMER Medical Expert Center Research Compendium — a 534-page body of clinical evidence compiled between 1999 and 2013. They represent the key studies across the spectrum of BEMER research: from the large-scale multi-centre observational datasets that established clinical norms, to the published, peer-reviewed controlled trials at the top of the evidence hierarchy.
BEMER research began in Europe in 1999, two years after the device's introduction to clinical practice. By 2013, it had accumulated peer-reviewed publications, two randomised controlled trials, and multi-centre observational data from 220 clinical facilities. This is the foundation on which 25 years of clinical use has continued to build.
Video evidence
Physicians' experiences with BEMER
Effect of BEMER on circulation in the liver
1999–2002 · Multi-Centre Dataset
The Foundational Multi-Centre Dataset — AFB Study
Michaelis H. Academy for Bioenergetics (AFB), Liechtenstein. Multi-centre observational study. May 1999 – December 2002.
The largest single BEMER dataset in the research compendium. 1,116 patients across 220 independent medical facilities in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland — 2,031 documented illness cases. Critically, the study intentionally selected predominantly treatment-resistant cases: patients were referred by physicians specifically because they had not responded adequately to conventional treatment. Average treatment period: 6 weeks using BEMER as monotherapy. Existing medications continued unchanged.
76% of patients symptom-free or significantly improved in at least one condition — 88% combined positive response, 6% unchanged, across 40+ conditions.
Highest-responding conditions
Muscle tension (87% symptom-free), wound healing disorders (90%), trauma consequences (100%), fracture healing (100%), weak immune system (100%), sciatica/lumbago (91%)
Lower-responding conditions
Fibromyalgia (50%), heart diseases (64%), spinal disc complaints (61%) — consistent with structural pathology responding less than vascular dysfunction
This dataset remains the most comprehensive multi-condition BEMER evidence base published, and its treatment-resistant patient selection makes the positive outcome rates more clinically meaningful than a general-population study would.
1999–2000 · General Practice Study
Schönfeld General Practice Study (Berlin)
Sch̦nfeld R. Senior Medical Officer, Berlin. In-practice and home therapy study. April 1999 РJuly 2000.
201 patients (103 female, 98 male) across acute and chronic conditions in a Berlin general practice. Both in-clinic and home-loan device use. Treatment periods ranged from 3 to 28+ days.
87.6% overall positive outcome (46.3% symptom-free, 41.3% improved). Acute conditions (n=123): 93%+ positive. Accident injuries: >95% positive.
Chronic psychological symptoms showed 100% improvement, with none unchanged. BEMER demonstrated particular strength for distortions, bruising, and post-traumatic swelling.
Secondary findings spontaneously reported by patients: sleep improvement (most common), blood pressure reduction, improved insulin sensitivity — none were primary treatment targets.
2008 · Controlled Microcirculation Study
Diabetic Polyneuropathy — Klopp
Klopp R. Institute for Microcirculation, Berlin. Published in: Microcirculation in the Focus of Research. ISBN 978-3-033-01464-0, pp. 510–517. 2008.
Geriatric diabetics with polyangioneuropathy. Verum group (BEMER + standard therapy) vs. control group (standard therapy only). 60-day treatment period. Five microcirculatory parameters measured at 3mm and 8mm tissue depth using intravital microscopy: perfused vessel nodes, arteriolar vasomotion frequency-amplitude spectrum, venular flow, initial lymph flow, and leukocyte adhesion.
All five microcirculatory parameters showed statistically significant improvement in the BEMER group vs. control from day 8–10. The control group showed measurable worsening of subcutaneous microcirculation over the same period.
Intravital microscopy showed a clearly visible increase in blood-cell-perfused microvessels in the BEMER group, and decreased leukocyte adhesion to venular walls — indicating improved immune cell mobility through tissue. This study directly validates BEMER's core mechanism — vasomotion stimulation producing measurable improvements in microcirculatory parameters — in a clinically challenging, compromised vascular population.
2010 · Randomised Controlled Trial
Tinnitus RCT — Szilágyi
Szilágyi I. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Dr. Bugyi István Hospital, Szentes. Published: Otorhinologica Hungaria. 2010;56(4):251–260.
Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. 214 patients — Group I (real BEMER, n=108), Group II (placebo BEMER, n=106). Conditions: idiopathic, noise-induced, and presbycusis-associated tinnitus. Both groups received identical standard pharmacotherapy — BEMER was the only variable. The placebo device was indistinguishable from the real device in appearance, sound, and operation; only the therapeutic signal was absent. 8 days of treatment: 8 minutes whole-body mat plus 20 minutes intensive applicator on the temporal region daily.
p=0.001 — highly statistically significant. No adverse events in either group. Best results in lower-severity tinnitus. The study establishes BEMER's effect in tinnitus as significantly superior to pharmacotherapy alone, via improved cochlear and auditory-centre microcirculation.
2009 · Randomised Controlled Trial
MS Fatigue RCT — Piatkowski, Kern, Ziemssen
Piatkowski J, Kern S, Ziemssen T. Department of Neurology, University of Dresden. Published: Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 2009;15(5):507–511. DOI: 10.1089/acm.2008.0501
Patient- and rater-blinded, placebo-controlled randomised trial. Ethics approval: International Ethical Committee Freiburg (EC 02/TS/06). 37 patients with Relapsing-Remitting MS and significant fatigue — 19 verum, 18 placebo. 12 weeks. BEMER 3000 mat, 8 minutes twice daily, in the patient's home. Placebo: identical device, no electromagnetic field, identical sound. Compliance diary maintained.
Physical and cognitive fatigue dimensions improved significantly. No adverse events. Authors conclude: “We were able to demonstrate a beneficial effect of BEMER intervention on MS fatigue.”
MS-related fatigue affects over 75% of MS patients and is a leading cause of reduced employment. It has a significant peripheral vascular component — impaired microcirculatory oxygen delivery to muscle and nerve tissue — which is the mechanism BEMER addresses directly.
2013 · Statutory Market Monitoring
Market Monitoring — Bohn, Hess, Burger
Bohn W, Hess L, Burger R. Published: Journal of Complementary and Integrative Medicine. 2013;10(Suppl):S5–S12. DOI: 10.1515/jcim-2013-0037
658 patient questionnaires across mixed diagnoses. 6-week treatment period. Statutory market monitoring required for CE-certified medical devices — this is regulatory-grade evidence, not voluntary. Three validated outcome instruments used simultaneously: Jenkins Sleep Scale, NRS/VAS pain assessment, SF-12 Quality of Life.
Statistically significant improvements in sleep, pain, and quality of life across all patient groups and all primary diagnoses.
The consistency across diagnosis groups confirms that BEMER's effects operate at the vascular level — improving outcomes regardless of the overlying condition.
Evidence in context
These studies span two RCTs, one controlled microcirculation study, a statutory peer-reviewed market monitoring publication, a 1,116-patient multi-centre dataset, and a 201-patient general practice study. They cover 12 years of clinical observation from 1999 to 2013 — the period during which BEMER established the clinical base for its Class IIa medical device classification across the European Union.
The full condition-by-condition breakdown — 30+ conditions, all evidence levels, all sample sizes — is in the Research by Condition index.
These summaries represent the published evidence as understood at the time of writing. Get Well Now is an independent BEMER SA agent and does not conduct or fund research. Always discuss BEMER therapy with your healthcare provider in the context of your specific health conditions and treatment plan.