You are visiting Barbara Feick Gregory's Computerized Electro Dermal Screening Website

I highly recommend his website. I will try to answer the junk information in this article by Stephen Barrett, M.D.   I have deleted the discussion of the equipment.  He has some wonderful information on his site. And he is right about being careful. You need to use your common sense when you go to a CEDS technician or a medical practitioner. The practices vary quite a bit. The equipment varies. If something doesn't feel right to you, find a different technician or medical practitioner.

Canada has its own version of Quackwatch called Canadian Quackery Watch - don't miss their site! The arguments are the same; I'm not going to bother with their claims - My comments are in the yellow boxes.

"Electrodiagnostic" Devices  Stephen Barrett, M.D.

The devices described in this article are used to diagnose nonexistent health problems, select inappropriate treatment, and defraud insurance companies. The practitioners who use them are either delusional, dishonest, or both. These devices should be confiscated and the practitioners who use them should be prosecuted. If you encounter any such device, please report it to the state attorney general, any relevant licensing board, the FDA, the FTC, the FBI, the National Fraud Information Center, and any insurance company to which the practitioner submits claims that involve use of the device.


The CEDS or EAV device such as I use is NOT a diagnostic device and is also NOT covered by any insurance company that I know of. I do not know of anyone using a CEDS device who submits a bill to any insurance company for the use of the device. Whether a medical practitioner can use such a device depends on what kind of license he has.  I am not dishonest so Mr. Barrett says I am delusional. He is entitled to his opinion....I will withhold my opinion of him... The FDA cleared my EAV devices which I checked out thoroughly BEFORE I bought them... There are a number of medical offices with prominent doctors who use the equipment in their offices. Dr. Jonathan Wright and Dr. Mercola are two of them.


These practitioners claim they can determine the cause of any disease by detecting the "energy imbalance" causing the problem. 


Wrong. CEDS can detect energy imbalances - that is true. But I can only find imbalances that MAY be causing problems. It would be up to a medical doctor to determine if what I am finding IS the cause. I would expect a good physician would run the appropriate medical tests.


Some also claim that the devices can detect whether someone is allergic or sensitive to foods,  deficient in vitamins, or has defective teeth. Some even claim they can tell whether a disease, such as cancer or AIDS, is not present. 


Double blind studies have confirmed the accuracy of these devices for detecting allergies and sensitivities. Until some double blind studies are done on vitamin deficiencies and defective teeth, there is no proof that these devices can detect these problems. Some physicians and dentists are using the devices in this manner and have found it to provide very useful information. CEDS CANNOT tell whether a disease is NOT present. 


EAV devices are marketed by several companies, most of which also sponsor educational seminars. Most make blatant medical claims, but a few pretend that the device is used for "stress testing." 


I prefer the word "screening." EAV is not a medical "test." Obviously he has NOT read the extensive double blind studies done on EAV


The "Equipment for Sale" page of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians Web site occasionally lists used EAV devices. A 1998 ad suggests that practitioners who use these devices are well aware that the FDA disapproves of their use: 


VegaTest II was not cleared by the FDA to be marketed in the USA. But as I understand it, it is perfectly legal to own one for home usage.


VegaTest II complete with carrying case, extra hand electrode, instruction manual (Short Manual of Vega Test), test kits and 114 food vials. $2,000 for the whole kit and kaboodle. Remember, Vega units are no longer available in the United States. Save yourself the expense and hassle of importing a Vega unit (and avoid the possibility of having the unit confiscated at the border).

Manufacturers and users often characterize EDS devices as "biofeedback" or "stress testing" devices. Biosource, for example, asserts that the devices "provide the physician with a method for identifying imbalances within the electromagnetic circulatory system of the body and aid in the selection of appropriate medicines and treatments necessary for a return to good health." Some practitioners also claim to use their device as aid to diagnosis rather than the sole basis for diagnosis. I believe these statements are double-talk and would not stand up in court. 


Physicians are not supposed to use EDS as a medical test. Even medical tests are not 100% accurate. Physicians should never diagnose something based on a single test. There is no "doubletalk" except in Barrett's brain.


CPT codes are supposed to reflect what actually takes place. EAV testing is not biofeedback treatment. I believe that the use of a biofeedback CPT code for EAV testing would constitute fraud. 

I wouldn't call EAV biofeedback "treatment". You don't treat anything with EAV. Creating a vial of treated water for a client to take may help balance their energy. Balancing energy is not medical treatment.


Although the IABP Web site claims that EAV can figure out what is wrong with patients, it also states that they "have not been cleared for sale as diagnostic devices, and their use cannot be construed or considered a medical procedure. These devices cannot diagnose specific conditions within the body or treat any diseases." I assume this disclaimer is an attempt to ward off federal regulatory action for marketing an unapproved diagnostic device. 


No, it is to make it clear that EAV is NOT a diagnostic device and people who use it should not claim that it is.


Legal Status

The FDA classifies "devices that use resistance measurements to diagnose and treat various diseases" as Class III devices, which require FDA approval prior to marketing. In 1986, an FDA official informed me that the FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health had determined that the Dermatron and Accupath 1000 were diagnostic devices that posed a "significant risk." 


I don't use either. I find it interesting, however, that these were considered diagnostic - doesn't that mean they work? 1986 was quite a while ago. Just as computers have changed significantly, so has CEDS technology.


As a result, bogus "electrodiagnostic" devices are being used by many chiropractors, acupuncturists, dentists, "holistic" physicians, veterinarians, and self-styled "nutritionists."  They are also used to determine "allergies," detect "nutrient deficiencies," and detect alleged problems in teeth that contain mercury-amalgam ("silver") fillings. 


And the reason all these people are spending money on this equipment is what??? Would they continue to invest in something that is "bogus"? This is why the EAV manufacturers have statements that you do NOT rely solely on these devices to diagnose problems. The devices point out things that a medical practitioner should CONSIDER. That's all.


The strangest report I have received came from a parent who, after reading this article, telephoned to described how his five-year-old daughter had been tested by an unlicensed practitioner. When the child became restless, the test was continued by probing the parent's hand while the parent held the child. The parent also noted that the practitioner appeared to manipulate the results (seeking a "50" reading on the device) by moistening or drying the child's finger while testing to select the appropriate remedy. Two others I know about who had advanced cancers were erroneously told they were cancer-free. One of them was sold 33 products to get rid of "parasites" and other nonexistent problems. A victim who tried to get a refund was told that the products had been electrically specifically modified for her and could not be used for anyone else. 

EAV is not anything like the medical tests that we are used to. It works by quantum physics not biology. Water is used for conductivity. I can manipulate the results. Part of the skill in using the device is learning how NOT to do so. Any practitioner who told someone they were cancer free does not understand the equipment. There are people who want to make a lot of money by selling alot of products. I'm not one of them.

Enforcement Actions

Government agencies in at least four countries have taken enforcement actions against EAV devices:

Yes, there are a bunch of enforcement actions. I assume that what is listed is about the entire list. Do you also want to list the claims made against regular M.D.s? - (I doubt if there exists enough webspace.) Most of the claims in the USA were against people using equipment that was not cleared by the FDA. The EAV devices that are sold in the USA are sold legally. The companies marketing this equipment have also had their equipment cleared by the FDA.

The Bottom Line

The devices described in this article are used to diagnose nonexistent health problems , select inappropriate treatment,  and defraud insurance companies.  I believe that EAV devices should be confiscated and that practitioners who use them should be delicensed because they are either delusional, dishonest, or both.  If you encounter any such device, please report it to the practitioner's state licensing board, the state attorney general, the FDA , the Federal Trade Commission, the FBI, the National Fraud Information Center, and any insurance company to which the practitioner submits claims that involve use of the device.

1. They are NOT diagnostic devices!! Something that shows up energetically does not necessarily mean that it is a physical condition! 

2. Most healthy people don't bother getting screened; so there is some kind of health problem. The devices point to things that should be considered by a medical practitioner. It doesn't diagnose!

3. Barrett thinks all homeopathic remedies are useless. I am not interested in debating the subject. There has been some research on homeopathic remedies. We are only just now getting the scientific ability to test these remedies by quantum physics. See the references on the links page. Other treatments are only inappropriate if they don't help the person feel better....

4. Again, people who want to get screened by CEDS/EAV have to pay cash for it.  Insurance companies do not cover CEDS screening. They should. It would save them alot of money if they did.

5. I use CEDS to show the client what balances and unbalances his body's energy system.  

6. Barrett only believes in drugs, surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy -  Allopathic medicine. He is entitled to his beliefs. He is not entitled to harass Alternative Health Practitioners. He is asking you to do it for him. The FDA cleared my devices. Why would they want to be bothered with the knowledge that I am using a cleared CEDS device?


Here's more on Barrett: -" "Quackbuster" Loss in Court Reported by Chicago Tribune: Internet Libel Suit Tossed Out: Will Barrett Be Forced to Pay Court Costs?" - "Subject: Quackbusters Barrett, Baratz, SQUISHED(?) in Canadian Court..."

"...However, in what's been called a landmark free speech decision, a judge in Northern California has thrown out a defamation lawsuit against a San Diego woman who called Barrett a "quack" on her own Internet discussion group.

"Alameda County Superior Court Judge James A. Richman has ordered Barrett to pay the woman's legal fees, stating, "Boundaries of permissible public discourse have evolved significantly in the last half-century."

"Barrett, a former psychiatrist who holds no current medical license, is one of the most vocal opponents of non-medical health care and his "Quackwatch" website, launched in 1996, is frequently cited in anti-chiropractic media reports....

"The ruling came on July 25, just two days after New Century Press filed a RICO (racketeering) lawsuit against Barrett and his fellow "Quackbusters."

"The lawsuit charges Stephen Barrett, his wife Judith Barrett, with "Unlawful, Unfair, and Fraudulent Business Practices ... Violation of Civil Rights, Intentional Interference With Prospective Advantage, Negligent Interference With Prospective Advantage, Civil Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), Malicious Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Negligence, (and) Civil Conspiracy."" - "Longtime critic and foe of alternative medicine, Stephen Barrett, M.D.,  has asked the Court in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, to dismiss the libel lawsuit that he filed against Dr. Joseph Mercola, D.O."

The information contained herein is intended for educational purposes only.

BE AWARE: The electrodermal testing devices have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") for assessment of nutritional deficiencies, food allergies, the presence of toxins, Candida, Epstein Barr virus, or the weakness of organs and glands. Use of the device for these purposes is inconsistent with FDA approval. The galvanic skin response device  is a Class II device that may be used for lie detection and for biofeedback.

There are no generally accepted completed clinical studies which demonstrate that the electrodermal testing devices are effective when used to assess for nutritional deficiencies, the presence of toxins, food allergies, Candida, Epstein Barr virus, and the strength or weakness of organs and glands.

Your child's exposure to lead or heavy metals cannot be determined solely through electrodermal testing.

You should not make decisions about your or your child's health and nutritional needs from information obtained solely through electrodermal testing.

You are to discuss all CEDS recommendations with your health care provider before implementing any of them.

There are medical tests for many, if not all of the issues that  respondents use electrodermal testing to assess, and  you are strongly encouraged to confirm the exposures identified through standard medical testing if you or your family physician feel that it is necessary.

Laws regarding this equipment vary from country to country.