The need for an interdisciplinary approach is paramount to the formation of a solid foundation for understanding the therapeutic value of electrotherapy. But even the scientific justification of the efficacy of bioelectromagnetic will not in itself lead to adoption of electromagnetic healing devices.

Strong resistance to change has been the hallmark of medical scientific endeavor. Medical therapeutic advances are slow, when compared to advances in other scientific fields. Treatment is an aspect of medicine most restricted by social, cultural and ethical risk/benefits, only slow progress can be achieved because of these interactive forces. The extreme caution in seeking new modalities also stems from the trust and responsibility inherent within the doctor-patient relationship, which has been and continues to be the reason for this reluctance to change.

Failures on the part of the physician negatively impact the "placebo" therapeutic benefit. A patient's doubt in either the doctor, or the profession in general, seriously diminishes the effectiveness of the physician. While at the same time, society more than ever expects cures from physicians. Their demands are frequently so unrealistic, that as TIME Magazine pointed out in 1989 (cover story: Doctors and Patients, July 31, 1989, pg 48), the doctor-patient relationship is deteriorating in the United States. By 1994, the American Medical Association reported that more patients were seeking alternative healing modalities than were attending traditional allopathic physicians.

However, attitudes are changing. The potential value of using the electromagnetic spectrum in the medical sciences is beginning to pay off. This is especially true in regard to the use and efficacy of diagnostic instruments that read bioenergy fields, such as CAT scans and MRI instruments. Diagnostic advances are easier to introduce than new therapeutic modalities. New diagnostic techniques enhance the capability and reputation of the medical user, but in no way do they jeopardized his position. In utilizing diagnostic equipment the risk is usually minimum.

Compare the ready acceptance by the medical profession of these electromagnetic diagnostic instruments(CAT, MRI) with their reluctance in adopting electromagnetic therapeutic devices. Therapeutic devices need to have their "mechanism" explained while diagnostic equipment is able to succeed on their instantaneous merits. For example, physicians readily employ CAT scans without having any knowledge of how they work. Push the scan button and the results are immediate and obvious.

Electromagnetic healing devices and electrotherapy offer a new way to look at the treatment of disease. Unfortunately, human behavior tends to resist the perception and acceptance of new ideas, this can preclude the acceptance and use of new and novel ideas or techniques. New developments in medicine, particularly ones that promise increased healing power or reduction in human discomfort, are met with varying levels of excitement. Patients for whom available treatments failed, or were only partially successful, are most excited about the new procedure. A physician in a specialty area where success is limited and prognosis is generally poor, is also likely to be excited. Physicians and health professionals in areas where current techniques and available medications provide good or professionally acceptable patient prognosis are likely to be skeptical or simply less enthusiastic.