Biocommunication — improving patient compliance and clinical outcomes

Case study

Rachel is in her late 20s and has been divorced for five years (no children). Her marriage of three years failed as the result of her ex becoming addicted to pornography and his subsequent perverted sexual pursuits.

Although she’s lived with chronic constipation her entire life, Rachel’s health would be considered good until she learned of her husband’s infidelity. Within days of this discovery her health began to fail. Her first symptom was a debilitating migraine headache that landed her in the hospital for several days. Within two months, her migraines were followed by cardiac arrhythmia and a racing pulse, the cause of which was determined to be Graves’ disease. She was prescribed medications appropriate to each condition.

After a few years she concluded that the medicinal cocktail she was consuming every day was creating its own set of problems and not completely solving the problems they were intended to address. Most days she felt she was running on raw willpower.

About a year ago, she decided to stop taking her prescribed medication and upon doing so immediately felt healthier. She still maintains the lifestyle choices she has learned over the years, and during those times of the month when her headaches get worse she takes the edge off with a few 800 milligram doses of ibuprofen.

She still grieves over the failure of her marriage, and even though she has a boyfriend who’d like to get married, she’s hesitant to do it again.

This is part of Rachel’s health history. She came to the clinic looking for better answers and resolution to problems she doesn’t want to carry the rest of her life.

Successful practice involves:

1. Identifying the problem correctly,

2. Designing and implementing a treatment plan that can deliver the desired outcome, and

3. Communicating enough understanding to the patient to get them to follow-through. Without patient compliance the best plan is doomed to failure.

Identifying the problem requires information. We gather this with health histories, x-rays, physical exams, blood tests, etc. With training and experience we learn to connect the dots and create “the patient’s story.” But some patients present with such complexity that the dots are hard to identify, let alone connect, leaving the story incomplete.

Biocommunication

Biocommunication is a computerized technique that helps you identify and connect the dots by essentially allowing the body to “have a conversation with a computer.” The computer has in it a library of binary signatures for items that may have clinical significance. In a process called a biosurvey, the computer sequentially sends a predetermined number of these signatures to the body and records the body’s responses. Each binary signature is unique, so each response carries its own value. It’s like the body’s filling out a survey, thus the name biosurvey.

Biocommunication is not a diagnostic process; it doesn’t identify or treat disease. What it does provide is a determination called biological preference. Each response is scored as a positive or a negative. A positive response is considered a biological preference and a negative response a biological aversion. The computer can read the intensity of each response, so the body’s responses can be ranked. This ranking allows you to attach a priority, making it easier to know what you should pay attention to.

The biosurvey process is fast and noninvasive so a substantial amount of data can be processed in a short period of time. The objective is to make better decisions faster; helping you choose the best diagnostic procedures and the therapies most likely to get results.

In December 2007, a pilot study using biocommunication technology was conducted in Beijing China at Hospital 301. On the campus of 301 is situated a completely modern, eight story diagnostic center. The normal procedure at this diagnostic center is to keep each patient overnight and during a two-day period complete a battery of diagnostic tests. At the conclusion of the testing period a report of findings is compiled together with the opinions of the attending physicians.

During a one week period, a biosurvey was run on a large number of patients at the diagnostic center. At the end of the week, the results of those biosurveys, along with the lab results and reports of finding for each patient was given to John Diamond, MD in Reno, Nevada for analysis. Dr. Diamond was trained as a pathologist and had several years experience in his own private complementary and alternative medical practice, so he was well acquainted with the data given him. His analysis showed an 85 percent correlation between the biocommunication data, the biosurveys, and the diagnostic reports. His findings were analyzed further by a physicist William Tiller, PhD, and Zeng Qiang, MD, the director of the diagnostic center at Hospital 301. These three then authored an article reporting their experience and conclusions.¹

Conclusion

Even though the biosurvey is not diagnostic (any more than a health history is) it does have clinical value and can help you connect the dots fo
r your patients. When you build a treatment plan that takes into consideration biological preference of the individual patient you’re more likely to achieve your clinical objectives.

Possibly the most significant advantage biocommunication gives you is its ability to inform your patients. Biosurvey reports are like pictures that illustrate your patient’s story. As you connect the dots the biosurvey reports will validate your conclusions, and seeing “what my body has to say” is compelling to any patient.

Rachel’s initial biosurvey provided information that facilitated the selection of appropriate nutritional supplements and homeopathic remedies. It was also a factor in determining the specific approach to physical adjustments augmented with acupuncture. And possibly the most surprising “dot” that was identified was her unresolved grief.

As Rachel listened to “her story” the lights came on inside. For the first time things started to make sense. On her first visit Rachel received significant relief, and she left more hopeful than she had been in years. “It was like the pain and burden just melted away,” was her comment. Without biocommunication technology the approach to every problem would lack the individualized component that often makes the difference between failure and success.

References

¹ Remote Health Assessment Using a Frequency-Based GSR Stress Bio-Survey Technology – A Pilot Study in China, Zeng Qiang, MD; W. John Diamond, MB, BCh, MD; and William A. Tiller, PhD. (unpublished)

 

This research was provided by ZYTO Corporation.