Talk:Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation

message: This section talks about studies that show TENS to be effective or not, but the sentences discussing these studies are not specific as to whether these studies were evaluating TENS' ability RELIEVE pain temporarily (e.g., pain relief for a short period of time--hours/days) or ELIMINATE pain altogether forever (e.g., no more chronic low back pain forever... necessitating a longitudinal study). It would be helpful if the author could provide a bit more about the study goals and methodology to make this point clear. Otherwise the summary of studies is really too general, too superficial to make any assessment of the efficacy of TENS. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.54.8.119 (talk) 19:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Medical Uses --> Pain section

message: Please insert citations, there are many medical quotations but no citations to verifiable sources. You may consider establishing some footnotes instead of inline citations. JennyLen 22:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations needed 

message: I've put a "tone" tag on the section labelled "Safety".  Whilst I appreciate the intent, the tone is suggestive of advocacy--it instructs the reader on the use of the equipment, it warns of possible risks, and so on.  As an encyclopedia we may want to present some or all of that information but not in this way. --Tony Sidaway 23:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone

message: TENS is often used by men for sexual stimulation.  Does this use need to be at least pointed to here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.167.219 (talk) 10:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And this is how we have wikidecay 47.221.236.73 (talk) 05:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexual Uses

message: The phrasing of paragraph three under "Uses" seems to imply that they are not. 
I'm unsure how to correct this, as I don't know what the writer meant to say or where they got their information. LSASM (talk) 01:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Clinicians are people too

message: I hope people take no offense, but this article made me chuckle a few times. Compare it with the corresponding chapter in on the two somewhat mainstream electrotherapy books  . Probably the most damning issue from a medical perspective is that this article doesn't even mention the lack of efficacy in most metaanalyses (starting on p. 277 in Tim Watson's book, and going for a a couple of dozen pages!) Also, the purported theories of how TENS works are presented as a sure thing here. Even the distinction between TENS and AL-TENS is lacking. The safety section seems to have some "improvements" over the usual stuff mentioned in those books. Compare with the similarly terse exclusion rules in  (the other books have more detailed discussions) Etc.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tijfo098 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: So do you think you could do better?  Huh?  Do you? Looie496 (talk) 04:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, I'll work on it a bit. Already done a little referencing, but I don't have a lot free of time, even on weekends. Tijfo098 (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Great.  Apologies for being a little bit belligerent, but your first sentence and section title were a little bit offensive.  (Not to me personally; I haven't contributed to this article.)  Regards, Looie496 (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree - I have tagged with weaknesses as I see them, and broken into sections (and other recommendations as per my edit summaries). I strongly urge separate sections for efficacy and usage to clarify. Widefox (talk) 15:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hilariously bad article 

message: Someone kept adding that exception to the safety section, but I didn't find support for it in the medical literature. On the contrary, Robertson p.160 says:
While this is not a blanket endorsement for sexual use, probably no adverse effects have been recorded. Tijfo098 (talk) 14:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penis, clitoris etc. 

message: I came to this article hoping to find technical information on how TENS machines work, in particular their mysterious (to me) ability to run two circuits through the same body. Any engineers out there who can fill in this missing information?
Tesspub (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does it work? 

message: I noticed the image for the (American Imex) unit posted at right near top of article is not citing which unit it is.  Normally, you mention the subject in metadata of a photo alongside photographer and time photo was taken?  As an example, that unit resembles the AI-86 but is probably one of the newer models.  47.221.236.73 (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image model numbers/manufacturers? 

message: Hi  thanks for helping flag the recent edit by an IP editor (edit). I personally found many of their edits improve the article, including the removal of the primary research study (an RCT) as per WP:MEDRS. I do think that aat least one of their suggestions should be brought to the talk page first before it is added to the article, specifically the sentence where they added that TENS is a pseudoscience. I have no idea if this is correct or not, but likely some discussion by Wikipedians and volunteers more familiar with CAM and which therapies are considered pseudoscience or not and citations to back this up is warranted. Would you agree to me reverting your revert and then remove the sentence that the editor added on pseudoscience and bringing it back here to the talk page? Thanks again! JenOttawa (talk) 03:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Any of those edits need references.  That's why I undid them. If you wanted to readd the sentence about it being pseudoscience, it would need a reference stating such. David (talk) 17:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edit by IP 

message: The article would be greatly enhanced by providing more specifics about device functionality -- e.g. typical voltages/currents, whether devices maintain constant/selectable current or voltage, safety limitations on consumer equipment, etc., etc. I know some of these are hard to quantify, because we're talking about the human body as the load, with many variations in resistance depending on electrode and placement, and Ohm's law dictates that if voltage is a set value, the current depends on the resistance of the load, and vice versa. So a TENS unit that delivers 50v on an open circuit might only give 5v into electrodes on someone's skin, especially if the design is (as I  suspect) to maintain a predefined current at any particular setting of the controls. 
Manufacturers tend to be a bit coy about providing these kinds of specs for TENS units, no doubt because the measurements are hard to standardize. A few consumer units I have seen do have labels with rudimentary specs, for example "Maximum output 60v at 1000Ω" or "Current 20-100 ma at 500Ω". But what is the resistance between two skin electrodes? Is it of the order of 500-1000Ω,  or is it very different? I realize it can vary a lot depending on several factors, but some average or common ranges would be informative.
Possibly this information is available in some other article, but if so, it should be linked here. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 13:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Device specs