E-Stim and Muscle

Way back when the internet was just a dream, electricity was seen as a means to power machines, to make life easier, and to warm your bread into its toasty goodness. No one – except for the bored kids – would ever think of letting it run through your body for pleasure, let alone for medical purposes. Everything changed when the Relax-A-Cizor attacked. A device originally created in the 1950s, the Relax-A-Cizor is  one of the first cases in America where electricity was used by the general public to increase muscle mass without actually doing too much. Sadly, it was banned by the FDA in 1970 because the government deemed it “potentially hazardous to health”, because why mindlessly pump your body with electricity when no one understands the side effects  entirely? It just means people have to test it more, make it better, faster, stronger… when we have the technology.  Nowadays, there’s a large variety of machines that zap the body to massage muscle, reteach the brain, help exercise it after surgery, and pain relief.  

But how does it work? How can 10 to 15 volts cause your muscles to get stronger, relax them, or even exercise them? Well, before the scientist within you tries to experiment, here’s the gist of it:

 

THE MACHINE ITSELF

There are many devices with different designs, but they all follow the same understanding of basic circuits. There are two electrodes (dull metal disks) attached to different parts of the skin that have a positive and negative end. These two ends are points for the electricity to flow. Basically, positively and negatively charged objects relate to the amount of electrons they have. Think of it like two children and the flu. The flu is bad, and so is negative. Child 1 doesn’t have flu, and is happy and positive. Child 2 has the flu, and is unhappy and negative. Being as children are, Child 2 decides to cough on his positive brother, getting him sick and making him negative. This flow of electrons (or in this case the flu) creates a current that goes through the skin, taking the shortest, and easiest route possible. The fluids in our body (like our blood) allow for a number of different currents if the voltage is strong enough. In general, the body has a pretty large resistance, and as found by a guy named Ohm (not a Tibetan monk) you need a good amount of voltage to make a good current. Think of resistance as a mountain and current as a miner going through the mountain, the energy of the miner is the voltage… and you need a whole lot of energy to dig through a mountain. John Henry, anyone?

A Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) unit . Used to relieve pain and entertain bored doctors with a thing for electricity.
A Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) unit . Used to relieve pain and entertain bored doctors with a thing for electricity.

WHY ARE MY MUSCLES MOVING ON THEIR OWN!?  

Now you’re probably asking me: “But Lee, how does this current make my muscles move?” Well, remember the two children? That exact same concept is at play within muscle cells. If you remember your high school biology class, cells have a cell membrane that wrap around it, keeping it divided from the outside world. Typically speaking, there’s a positive charge outside of cells, and a negative charge inside. This is because the cells are dividing Sodium outside and Potassium inside the cell at a ratio of 3 Sodium: 2 Potassium. Both have the same positive charge but because of the 3:2 ratio, there’s more positive outside – this causes it to polarize, where the outside is positive and the inside is negative. If you remember magnets, positive and negative attract, but the membrane doesn’t like either side to be different – so it doesn’t let the charges through. Remember the current? Remember how it’s still flowing through the body where you strapped those two electrodes on? Well now the electricity is flowing through the outside of the cell and makes it negative.  Now, the cell membrane is happy because both sides are negative, so it lets the sodium back inside. If you’ve seen The Martian, there was a scene where Matt Damon had to go into a waiting chamber before entering the main building – this was to equalize  pressure and content in the air so the building wouldn’t explode… like it later did. It’s about the same concept, but without a second chamber.  This is a called an “Action Potential”, where the sodium I mentioned earlier goes into the cell and spreads out. From here the action potential tells the muscle cell that it’s time to contract. When the machine is running the current, the electricity in the current flows through the body and goes along the easiest route possible (often times outside the cells), and since the outside is positive, the flow of electrons outside makes it negative. Since the inside is negative as well, there’s little difference in polarity (the difference in charge) causing certain channels (e.g. proteins)  to open to let sodium inside.  This opening of the door is responsible for causing muscle cells to start contracting through a fairly complicated process. Pretty much, so long as that current is running, sodium will stay inside the cell and continue to make the muscle contract. When the current is turned off, the doors close and the muscle will relax. This is why the machines you get at the local store often deliver a shock in the form of a pulse.  

 

But why!?

You can imagine how doctors use this to help retrain the brain, or have patients exercise after surgery. If someone recently had a stroke and can’t move their limbs, doctors can use an electric stimulation (E-stim) machine to move the muscle, and let the brain re-learn how to use its own body. Similar with patients after surgery, they use it to help the muscles exercise and increase circulation of blood to those regions instead of just swelling and having limited circulation, E-stim also helps with rehabilitation, making sure that muscle isn’t lost for patients who aren’t able to move them – instead letting the E-stim machine exercise the muscle.  But what about relaxing it? Well, to answer that, have you ever ignored something and forgot it was there? Like forgetting where your phone is while you’re talking on it, the same thing goes with nerves. There are nerves throughout the body that sense pain and other things, with a constant current running through whatever muscle you choose, those nerves are going to sense it and let your brain know there’s pain. But, after a while the brain gets tired of it and tries its best to ignore it. The nerves in that area become less sensitive – meaning that they don’t tell the brain as often unless the signals increase – and pretty much mute it out. Think about it: to stop pain, you just keep zapping your nerve endings until they stop saying it hurts!

 

BEWARE PSEUDOSCIENCE!!!!

There’s been some claims that E-stim is able to gain muscle and even reduce fat. DO NOT FALL FOR IT! To date, there aren’t many studies that confirm anything significant. It might be a good thing to add onto an athlete’s training, but it’s costly and won’t get you that summer bod in half the time it takes to actually work out. The best bet for that is to eat healthy and have a daily workout routine… and THEN use E-stims to help relax the muscle when you’re sore!

 

The Takeaways

Overall, the use of E-stem is common in today’s society, though there’s still a decent amount that it can’t do. From retaining muscle in patients unable to move, to providing mild pain relief in athletes, there are a number of practical uses for it. Though, keep in mind, that you’re still running electricity through your body, so moderation is important! A small amount of electricity is good, but don’t go sticking a fork in an outlet because that will probably fry you. There’s not much evidence that demonstrate E-stim can reducing fat or gain muscle for healthy individuals. Will E-stem be the new way to get that beautiful 6-pack? Only future studies will be able to show it, and even then, something else might pop up and revolutionize the world!  

 

References:

Marban, E., Yamagishi, T., & Tomaselli, G. F. (1998). Structure and function of voltage-gated sodium channels. The Journal of Physiology, 508(Pt 3), 647–657. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7793.1998.647bp.x

Miller, K. C., Stone, M. S., Huxel, K. C., & Edwards, J. E. (2010). Exercise-Associated Muscle Cramps: Causes, Treatment, and Prevention. Sports Health, 2(4), 279–283. http://doi.org/10.1177/1941738109357299

Porcari, J. P., Miller, J., Cornwell, K., Foster, C., Gibson, M., McLean, K., & Kernozek, T. (2005). The Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Training on Abdominal Strength, Endurance, and Selected Anthropometric Measures. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 4(1), 66–75.

Page, P. (2012). CURRENT CONCEPTS IN MUSCLE STRETCHING FOR EXERCISE AND REHABILITATION. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 7(1), 109–119.

Khogali, S., Lucas, B., Ammar, T., Dejong, D., Barbalinardo, M., Hayward, L. J., & Renaud, J. (2015). Physiological basis for muscle stiffness and weakness in a knock‐in M1592V mouse model of hyperkalemic periodic paralysis. Physiological Reports, 3(12), e12656. http://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.12656

Wilson, J. H., & Hunt, T. (2002). Molecular biology of the cell, 4th edition: a problems approach. New York: Garland Science.

Import Alert 89-01. (n.d.). Retrieved February 17, 2018, from https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_240.html

U.S. Food & Drug Administration. (n.d.). Import Alert 89-01. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_240.html

Canning A, Grenie S (2014) Does Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Improve Muscular Strength Gains of the Vastus Medialis Muscle. Int J Phys Med Rehabil 2:207. doi: 10.4172/2329-9096.1000207

 

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.