applied mechanical stress. Growth functions, both in response to injury, mediated through the nervous
system DC electrical activity, and in response to mechanical stress to bone, mediated through the
piezoelectric properties of the bone matrix, operate by means of cellular responses to very low-level
electrical currents of appropriate polarity. This has been determined to be, at least in part, mediated
through an initial action upon the cell membrane, with subsequent activation of the internal DNA-RNA
mechanism of the cell.
The implication of these findings would appear to be considerable. Clinically, the physician
may be able to stimulate a desirable growth process by the application of appropriate electrical
parameters, a therapeutic capability never before available. Included in the growth stimulation
possibility it would appear feasible to postulate the ability to stimulate growth process, such as
regeneration of missing body parts, normally lacking in the human. The "biasing" effect of the direct
currents flowing within the CNS upon the action potential activity of the neurones proper could lead to
more efficient clinical methods for the control of pain and the production of anesthesia. At the level of
basic biological knowledge, further exploration of this electrical data transmission and control system
could lead to a better understanding of a number of biological processes of a basic nature, which are
poorly understood in the light of the chemical concept alone. Finally, the existence of such an
electronic system within living organisms leads to the postulate that it could provide a linkage
mechanism between electromagnetic fields in the environment and living things, with changes in the
field being reflected in alterations of functions in the living organism.
References
1. Weiner, N. 1948. Cybernetics. New York: Wiley.
2. von Neumann, J. 1958. The computer and the brain. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
3. Lund, E.J. 1947. Bioelectric fields and growth. Austin: Univ. of Texas Press.
4. Burr, H.S.1944. The meaning of bioelectric potentials.
Yale J. Biol. Med.
16:353.
5. Gerard, R.W., and Libet, B. 1940. The control of normal and "convulsive" brain potentials.
Am. J.
Psychiat.
96:1125.
6. Libet, B., and Gerard, R.W. 1941. Steady potential fields and neurone activity.
J. Neurophysiol.
4:438.
7. Libet, B., and Gerard, R.W. 1962. An analysis of some correlates of steady potentials in mammalian
cortex.
Electgroencph. Clin. Neurophysiol.
14:445.
8. Bishop, G.H. 1941. The relation of bioelectric potentials to cell functioning.
Ann. Rev. Physiol.
3:1.
9. Caspers, H. I961. The cortical DC potential and its relationship with the EEG.
Clin. Neurophysiol.
13:651.
10. Terzuolo, C.A., and Bullock, T.H. 1956. The measurement of imposed voltage gradient adequate to
modulate neuronal firing.
Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA
42:687.
11. Nias, D.K. I976. Therapeutic effects of low-level direct electrical currents.
Psychol. Bull.
83:766.
12. Tasaki, L., and Chang, J .J. 1958. Electrical response of glia cells in rat brain.
Science
128:1209.
13. Kuffler, S.E., and Potter, D.D. 1964. Glia in the leech.
J. Neurophysiol.
27:290.
ELECTROMAGNETISM & LIFE - 43