EAV Discussions using the AVATAR

Electro-Acupuncture Testing, Electro-Acupuncture According to Dr. Voll
EAV is a valuable testing technology.  There is an ongoing discussion regarding the following questions;
  • What is EAV and how does it work?
  • Is EAV a viable, valid and valuable testing modality?
  • How can it be possible to test different remedies ?
  • How can you test different remedies on the computerized
    instruments?
  • How do the computers get the remedies inside the
    software?
  • What are the differences between EAV devices?
  • How does EAV Testing stand in the eyes of the Food and Drug
    Administration, (FDA)?
This article will attempt to answer these questions.
Every EAV instrument is an OHM meter, i.e. It measures
one thing – electrical impedance.
Back in the late 1940′s, Dr. Reinholt Voll, MD began an
investigation of the effects of electricity on the human physiology. In his
studies, Dr. Voll used a technique known as Impedance or OHM metering. In simple terms, some materials are very electrically conductive, for example metals like steel and copper – electricity flows very easily through metals and therefore
there is no substantial resistance on the electricity flowing through the metal.
Other materials are not conductive, for example wood or rubber, and since these
materials are not conductive, their resistance to electrical current is very
high. An OHM meter measures electrical resistance (impedance), and it is also
capable of measuring conductance since the inverse of resistance (1/resistivity
approximately), is conductance.
Dr. Voll found that if he tested the electrical conductance on any general area of the human body, there was a fairly high level of electrical resistance. This is a curious point since we know that the body has a large volume of electrically conductive fluids within it. But, the skin is very resistant, by its nature to electrical current. Dr. Voll also found that at certain specific locations on the anatomy, the electrical flow is much more conductive, and these points generally correspond to the Eastern Medical Acupuncture points. Therefore, you can use an impedance or OHM meter to test the acupuncture points. This is somewhat simplistic, but it does describe the basic process of EAV.
EAV Testing indirectly measures the “Energetic
System” of the body. It does not measure the physiology, the biochemistry or the
pathology components of the human body. However, the “Energetic System” is
related to these components, from the standpoint of physics, not chemistry.
Acupuncture is a science that works with the “Energetic” system of
the body.

The human body is biochemical (physical). It has an electrical
component and also an energetic aspect as well. The acupuncture meridians are a
communication and energetic flow network.
“Energetic”, in this sense, is
a somewhat elusive term. Yes, the meridians do have some form of energy, but it
is not electricity. There is a controversy about the validity of Acupuncture
because scientists cannot measure the energetic system of the body directly,
i.e. they cannot prove that acupuncture meridians exists using conventional
measurements. It is important that you keep this fact in mind. EAV does not
directly measure the acupuncture/energetic system of the body directly. This is
not scientifically possible at this time. But, there is a bio-physiological
phenomenon that occurs when you run electricity through the acupuncture points.
The electrical flow (conductance) gives us an indication of the energetic health
status of the meridian that we are testing. For example, if you are testing the
Liver Meridian with an EAV instrument, the meter will give an indication of the
Liver Meridian’s energetic status. Remember, energetic is not electrical, but we
can use electricity to indirectly measure the energetic system.
The
“Universal Baseline” makes EAV a viable testing modality.
The
EAV/OHM meter gives us conductance readings and there is intrinsic value in
this; however the actual reason that we can use EAV to evaluate the meridians is
because, as Dr. Voll discovered, there is a Universal Baseline. Regardless of
who is tested, no matter what their age, weight, sex, nationality or race, a
reading of 50 with no change over time (no indicator drop), is an indication of
an energetically healthy meridian. Readings that are significantly above 50 (65
plus) indicate inflammation, and this is due to the fact that when tissue
becomes inflamed, the concentration of body fluids increases and therefore the
conductance will increase accordingly. This inflammation occurs in the tissue
and also in the proximity of the related acupuncture point as well. When a
reading is significantly lower than 50 (below 30) then it is believed that this
meridian is low energy or possibly degenerative. When a reading steadily drops
in value from the high point down, this is known as an “Indicator Drop” (ID),
and it can point to a weakness or disturbance in the meridian.
EAV is
a valid health screening modality because the test readings are reproducible.
If you take a patient and then have three very well trained EAV
practitioners test that same patient (points only and not different Remedies),
one practitioner following the other, you will get essentially the same test
results. There will be slight differences, but the overall test will be the
same. The operative factor here is “well trained”. There is a specific technique
to EAV Testing and it can be learned. The key is learning how to get a correct
reading on a particular point. The difficulty is in accurately testing the
actual point and not something else in the proximity of the point!
The
acupuncture points lie close to the bone in the fascia between the bone and the
overlying tissue. To test a meridian point you have to get the Point Probe
electrode (the instrument used to take a conductance reading), close to the
bone. The problem is that the point has a specific location and the skin covers
that location. It is very easy to disturb the skin when taking a reading and
this causes the readings to elevate dramatically. It is also difficult to find
the point location. There is no road-guide map to show the exact point
placement. The process of learning EAV involves some basic techniques as well as
getting a sense of feel. The only way that a practitioner can determine the
proper placement of the Point Probe and the proper testing pressure is by good
training, dedicated practice and ultimately, “feel”. Learning EAV is similar to
learning to play a musical instrument. Anyone can tap a key and play a note on a
piano, just as anyone can put a Point Probe on the skin of a patient and get a
reading. But, it takes practice to learn how to play the notes of a song, and it
takes a sense of feel to turn those notes into something that is musical.
Without the feeling, the notes sound mechanical.
EAV requires both
art and science.
Every EAV device is a technical instrument, but
without the intuitive feeling of the practitioner it is useless for testing
acupuncture points. Notably, this dissuades the interest of many practitioners.
But this sensitivity and feeling is a fundamental component of medicine.
You can put a scalpel in the hand of any medical school student and tell
him where to cut, how deep and the length of the incision. But the difference
that qualifies a top surgeon is in part due to his sense of how to cut which can
only come from the experience and his intuitive sense of surgical cutting.
  • Good acupuncturists feel where to place the needles.
  • Good chiropractors feel where and how to adjust.
  • A good psychotherapist must go beyond the words his patient
    is saying and intuit into what is being conveyed.
EAV is a valuable test because it gives us a powerful,
energetic insight into the physiology, biochemistry and pathology of an
individual.
Keep in mind that EAV is indirectly testing the Energetic
System, not the physiology, biochemistry or pathology of the body. Making any
inference about the health of the body through EAV must be kept in the domain of
energetically related indications. EAV status is closely related to all of these
other factors and it can be an indicator or qualitative screening tool, but it
is not testing the actual physiology, nor the biochemistry or pathology.
So, what is the value of EAV, since it is only a relative
indicator?
It would be a mistake to assume that EAV is not measuring
a valuable parameter. When a practitioner uses standard blood test values, the
purpose is in part to get a better understanding of the health of the cells of
the body.
“Health” in reality can be broken down to the health of the
tissue, the organs and the glands, and these are composed of cells. But when you
are measuring the blood, you are not measuring the cells directly. It is
extremely difficult to measure the cells but we can indirectly get a sense of
what is going on within the cells by measuring the blood.
Similarly, the
energetic system is a component of the body. It is related to everything going
on in the body, and therefore, measuring the energetic system gives us a
valuable, non-invasive sense of everything that is going on within the body.
EAV is also valuable because it offers “Remedy Testing”.


Over the course of two decades, Dr. Voll and his associates
perfected EAV Testing. They based all of their findings on clinically proven
cases in hospitals in Germany.
By accident, they discovered Remedy
Testing. In the routine course of EAV Testing a regular patient, they noticed
that the patient’s EAV readings were significantly altered by the remedies that
were being kept in the patient’s top coat!
The nature of Remedy Testing
is simple. If you find a meridian with an unfavorable reading (low, high or with
an Indicator Drop), you can test different remedies on the patient. If a given
remedy is favorable to the meridian, it will then alter the reading, bringing it
closer to the ideal (50 and no ID).
How do you actually test the
remedy?
The technique of Remedy Testing is simple. A remedy is
brought into the energetic field of the patient and the practitioner performs an
EAV reading. The remedy has its own electro-magnetic/Energetic field. This is a
unique energy field emanating from the remedy, and this field completely
describes the remedy.
Every cell in the body has the capacity to
distinguish the remedy by sensing into this electro-magnetic field. Therefore,
on a subconscious level you know what is in the remedy, even if you cannot
taste, smell or even see the remedy. This may be difficult to believe since we
rely on and trust in our conscious senses. But we are not completely conscious
of everything that occurs in our environment. And, just because we are not
conscious of something, does not prove that it does not exist.
You can
Remedy Test by having the patient hold the remedy, or you can set the remedy on
a metal plate that is connected electrically to the patient. All EAV devices
have some type of test plate. This plate brings the remedy’s electro-magnetic
field into the ultra-sensitive field of the patient.
Remedy Testing
can give us clues about the cause of a patient’s condition.
One
class or type of remedy therapy that is widely used in EAV Testing is
Homeopathy. Homeopathy is based on the principal that if something is harmful to
a body in its raw form, then if you dilute the substance down to a minute
concentration it can be beneficial in reversing the harmful effects of the
original substance.
Often, the puzzle of what is really going on with a
particular patient is locked deep within the cells. An example may be pesticide
toxicity causing liver disorders. A standard blood test will generally reveal
absolutely nothing about this condition. Taking chemical assays of the blood and
urine may give a doctor some indications of pesticide toxicity, but it is very
doubtful that the indications will point specifically to the liver.
With
an EAV test, unfavorable readings may indicate a disturbance in the liver. The
practitioner may proceed in looking deeper into the situation by choosing to use
Remedy Testing. He may find that a homeopathic preparation of different
pesticides may improve the readings and concludes that this patient,
energetically, may have pesticide poisoning. At this point it should be noted
and understood that this scenario may indicate energetic pesticide toxicity in
the liver, but even if the readings are improved greatly by the pesticide
homeopathic, this is not a foolproof indicator. It is very possible that the
patient may respond to the homeopathic preparation even if he does not have
pesticide toxicity!
Never forget that EAV is energetic testing.
Homeopathic remedies are an energetic treatment. This is not rock solid
biochemistry or pathology testing. This procedure dominantly emphasizes physics.
The point is to get the patient well. EAV Remedy Testing gives us a useful
indicator of remedy effectiveness. It can also be used to help unravel the
question of what has occurred in the past, what is occurring presently and what
is likely to develop in the future.
Computerized EAV Systems improve
testing efficiency and efficacy.
Early generation EAV meters used an
analog needle meter, similar to the speedometer in an automobile. The next
progression in EAV technology involved the interfacing of the meter with a
computer and custom software. Computers are very useful at displaying
information, saving and comparing data and organizing information in database
fashion. EAV practitioners used organized “trays” made of cardboard, each
containing 100 to 200 Remedies organized in rows and columns. The doctors would
physically retrieve the trays and test the individual items, a very cumbersome,
tedious process. One of the goals in computerized EAV was to better organize and
access the thousands of different Remedies that are used in testing.
The
first generation computer EAV instruments attempted to develop systems that
would provide access to hundreds of different remedies sealed in 1 milliliter
test ampoules, built into an elaborate, electronic switching mechanism. The
computer would display the remedy on the monitor and then go out and switch the
electronics to bring the field of the remedy from the trays into the circuit
with the patient. The technology was similar to placing the remedy on the test
plate but much more efficient. However, the cost to build this apparatus was
exorbitant and the instruments were very unreliable. By accident, it was found
that when the computer was disconnected from the electronic remedy tray system
the testing still worked. In other words, with only a remedy displayed as a word
on the screen, the testing system worked!
The next generation of
computerized EAV used this phenomenon, dubbing it the “Holo-Linguistic Effect”,
“Holo”, meaning dimensionality and Linguistic meaning language or words. Thus,
you get a fancy way of saying that words on the screen of a computer are more
than just words on the screen of a computer.
How this mechanism works is
unknown. There have been attempts to explain the phenomenon by means of quantum
physics. It may be more understandable and accurate to say that this phenomenon
is related to the intuitive side of EAV. In every sense, EAV Testing depends on
the developed skills, abilities, intuition, intent and focus of the
practitioner. The value of these factors should not be discounted. In many ways,
they may be the key element in the healing process. Why is it that one patient
gets well and another doesn’t? The belief factor, the intent and “bedside
manner” of the practitioner can play a critical role in getting someone well.
The “Words on the Screen” technique works. It has proven itself in tens
of thousands of case histories. The results go far beyond the scope of
coincidence. Is this a foolproof solution? No, of course not. Can the instrument
be misused? Yes, and this has a lot to do with the intentions of the
practitioner. Is “Word Testing” as accurate as testing the actual remedy? The
question again clearly relates to the developed skills, abilities, intuition,
intent and focus of the practitioner. If a practitioner’s overall skills are
questionable, then the results can be distorted. But, if the practitioner’s
ability and intent is clear and clean, then “Word” Testing can be very
effective.
The advantage of Word Testing is simple. A computer can
organize, display and sort through thousands of remedies in a very efficient
manner. A practitioner can literally start with 20,000 different remedies and
sort down to the few key remedies in a short period of time by using the
facilities of an EAV Computerized System.
Current generation
computerized EAV Systems do not have “Remedy Frequencies” in the software.
The concept of “Word” Testing is just too simple and too unbelievable.
“There must be some sort of technical magic involved with these devices, some
technique that programs the remedies into the computer.” At least, that is what
many people are led to believe. This scenario almost sounds plausible until you
take a look at some very simple, scientifically accepted, universal truths.
  1. Every remedy has a frequency, but to say this doesn’t even
    begin to do justice in describing the immense complexity of the frequency
    pattern of a specific remedy.
  2. At this time there is no known method that will measure the
    actual frequency of a remedy. This is far beyond the scope of current day
    technology.
  3. If you cannot measure something, then you certainly cannot
    turn this unknown into a digital signal and program it into a computer.
  4. Even if you could measure the frequencies and program them
    in, there is no way for the computer to broadcast them back to you out of the
    software.
What we are dealing with here is the true essence of
nature and life.
A good example is a synthetic vitamin. Synthetic
vitamins have the exact molecular structure as the natural counterpart. However,
they do not have the same effect in the body. Synthetic vitamins do not absorb
as easily, they do not have the same nutritional effects and over a period of
time, synthetic vitamins can produce side effects not found with natural
vitamins. The synthetics have the correct molecular structure, but they are
missing something. They are dead and not alive. The “frequency” in part,
accounts for this difference. Actually, the difference is far beyond just a
frequency; it is beyond the domain of our present conscious or scientific
understanding.
This raises the question: How do you measure and
quantify life?
Another example is a high-potency homeopathic remedy.
At potencies of 24X (24 dilutions of 1 part per 10) the chance of having one
molecule of the original substance in a bottle of a remedy is one in a million.
Let’s say we have a 100X homeopathic (one part of the original substance diluted
one part per ten, 100 times, basically one drop in a large lake). If we measure
this very high potency remedy using a gas chromatograph (an instrument that
bends light to measure the specific molecular constituents of any material) we
will get a result that tells us, without any question, that what we are dealing
with is nothing more than average, ordinary water. Give this 100X remedy to some
patients and they certainly will see a different reaction than what you would
expect from water. The high potency homeopathic (greater than 24X/12C etc.) has
no original substance in it but it carries a powerful frequency signature of the
original substance. However, state of the art technology, such as the gas
chromatograph, cannot measure this.
Research scientists have spent
months trying to decipher the electro-magnetic frequencies of remedies and at
best they have come to the conclusion that there are patterns and tendencies,
but nothing more exacting than this.
Clearly, we cannot measure the true
frequencies of remedies and we certainly cannot digitize and program something
that we cannot measure.
The difference between computerized instruments is
nominal. They essentially do the same thing.
Every EAV instrument is an OHM
meter, and there is absolutely no exception to this rule. The
computer-interfaced models give us, in addition, a powerful set of software
tools to work with.
Each manufacturer has its own way of approaching
EAV Testing. But, there are no secret technologies.
Some of the
manufacturers have incorporated signal/frequency generators as a means of
offering a “secondary recognition system”. This is their way of explaining the
fact that they use “Word Testing” as well as an arbitrary square wave signal.
This type of technology needs to be explained.
The devices we are
talking about use a “square wave” signal generator. Every remedy listed in their
database is arbitrarily assigned a square wave frequency – a very simple
frequency value. There should be no question about the fact that these
frequencies are assigned. They are in every respect arbitrarily assigned. This
process can be simply illustrated.
Square waves do not occur in
nature!
AC amplifiers make good square waves, but you will never
find a square wave in nature. Remedies never make square waves, and the
frequency of any remedy is never, in any way, measured as a square wave.
A square wave can look quite convincing to the uneducated eye on an
oscilloscope. It makes it appear as if the computer is sending out the actual
signal of a remedy, but it is not the frequency of the remedy and it has no
correlation with any remedy!
If these manufacturers could actually
measure the frequencies of remedies they would come up with complex patterns
that look nothing like a square wave.
Another critical point worth
considering is this: Assume that the square wave signal generated by a testing
device is in fact the actual frequency of a remedy. Also assume that the
technology is capable of “square wave recognition” (the device can measure the
frequency of a remedy). If this assumption were valid then when an unknown
remedy is placed on the measuring tray, the computer program should be able to
recognize that remedy and name it, provided that it matched a corresponding
pattern programmed into the software. This however is not the case. A simple
test of the validity of this assumption would be to place a remedy that has no
label on a device and have the device, with no operator intervention, tell you
what is inside the bottle. The devices are certainly not capable of performing
this simple, analytical and objective verification.
In the final
analysis between different types of manufacturers’ devices, a shopper can get
very confused and frustrated trying to decipher the differences.
Again, when you clear away all of the hype and look at the actual
differences, all of the devices do the same thing in their own way. All of them
are quite capable of doing EAV Testing. It is valuable to look at the
technological differences but one must keep one thing in mind: “Scientific
Reality”. At this point, it is obviously better to evaluate different devices
based on other criteria as, for example the following factors:
  • Is the software easy to use? Is it user friendly, and does
    it offer the features, tools and capabilities you need to handle testing now and
    in the future when your capabilities expand?
  • Is the software current technology? In the software
    development game the tools and rules change every year. Some software developed
    more than six years ago is not compatible with current-generation operating
    systems (Windows 95, 98 and NT). What will the picture look like in another
    three years?
  • Upgradability. Can you upgrade your device at a reasonable
    cost year after year as the technology changes, or will you have to buy a new
    device in a few years to stay current with technology?
  • Does the software have hardware limitations? Some software
    and hardware configurations are not compatible with current generation
    computers. For example Pentium Class computers are too fast for some DOS
    applications.
  • Reliability. Does the device you are examining have a track
    record of being dependable? This is the kind of question you should ask other
    users who have experience with the device in question.
  • Service. What is the typical failure rate of equipment, and
    what is the turnaround time for repairs? An EAV device is useful only if it is
    working properly in your office when you need it.
  • Support. Is technical support available or even better, how
    available? This is another question that should be directed to current users of
    any device.
  • Training and clinical support. Where can you get hands-on
    training, and is the training coming from a reliable, educated source.
It all boils down to the real issue of finding a device that
you can count on, learn to use, and feel comfortable with, along with a source
of support that will stand behind the product now and in the future.
The current status with the FDA is that there is no specific
classification called “Electro-Acupuncture Testing” or “Electro-Dermal
Screening” (EDS), or any other derivation of this type of testing.
In 1976, Congress passed the Device Amendments Act. This legislation
gave the FDA full authority over any type of medical device. This includes
everything from a tongue depressor to an MRI system.
The job of the FDA
is to ensure the safety of both patients and practitioners, as well as to ensure
that all “claims” being made about any device are proven and acceptable.
For example, the medical device component of the Avatar System is an
FDA-Registered Medical Device. It is called the ProComp and it is manufactured
by Thought Technology Limited of Montreal, Canada. It is classified as a Class 2
(sellable to professionals and not over the counter, safe to both user and
practitioner), Physiological Feedback, Data Acquisition System. It falls in the
same testing class as EKG, EMG, EEG, GSR, Skin Temp and Poly-Plethysmograph.
Software used with a medical device is in a “gray” area of
classification with the FDA. At this time, if the software makes no evaluations
or suggestions about diagnosis or treatment, then the software does not require
FDA approval.
Every medical device must be “Registered” under the
classification of an “Approved” procedure.
For example, x-ray is an
approved procedure, but if Phillips Corporation wanted to introduce a new x-ray
device to the market, it would have to pass FDA manufacturing specifications as
well as operating safety criteria. The new device would also have to go through
a “510K” approval process to be accepted as being “equivalent” to an existing
registered device, i.e. Phillips Corporation must prove to the FDA that the new
device is essentially the same thing as another registered x-ray device. The new
device would be registered, not approved, as an x-ray device. After going
through this process Phillips Corporation could make the claim that the new
device is an x-ray device and nothing more than this.
In the case of
EAV Testing, the FDA would have to look at every testing aspect as a different
procedure!
For example, testing the liver meridian and determining
that there is a chance of pesticide poisoning would be one procedure. Testing
the liver point and determining that there is Malathion poisoning (a common
specific insecticide) would be another procedure. Roundup poisoning in the Liver
would be another procedure. Each of these tests is considered a specific
procedure, even though all of these are basically pesticides or insecticides.
This does not even begin to mention the thousands of different toxins,
pathogens, remedies, etc. that can be tested on an EAV System. Every one of
these is qualified as a different procedure. And, for any one of these to pass
the FDA’s approval process, it must be proven scientifically that the testing
procedure is statistically accurate, regardless of the patient or the testing
practitioner.
This may give you some idea of the scope of procedures
required by the FDA and it should bring some reality to the absurd notion that
EAV Testing will ever be approved.
Every device that is used by a
medical practitioner, including even a tongue depressor, must be registered (not
approved), with the FDA.
However, there is an exception to this
rule, called the “Investigational Device Exemption” (IDE). The FDA will allow
experimental devices to go through a temporary proving period.
The IDE
program allows a manufacturer to sell a limited number of devices to
practitioners to use as a proving ground for their proposed, new procedure.
There are some rigid stipulations with the IDE program. The manufacturer may
sell the devices, but is not allowed to make any profit on the sale. If the
device procedure is not approved after the established test time period, the FDA
may require that the manufacturer collect and refund the price of all of the
devices that were sold.
Every time these devices are used, all of the
test data must be collected by the practitioner and sent to the manufacturer to
be evaluated by an “Investigational Review Board” (IRB).
Every patient
tested on the device must sign a waiver, signifying an understanding that the
test is experimental.
It is illegal to charge a fee to a patient for an
experimental test.
And, after all of this procedural annoyance, the IRB
must present the findings of its evaluation to the FDA to be either approved or
denied as a new procedure.
Remember, every procedure (every disease and
every condition), is considered under this provision a new IDE and a new IRB.
While it is true that every device used by a medical practitioner
must be registered with the FDA, the FDA does not control “how the device is
used”.
For example, every EAV device is an OHM meter or more
specifically a “Skin Conductance Meter”. The FDA has an approved procedure
classification for this type of testing – Skin Conductance Metering.
If
a practitioner wishes to use this approved type of procedure to evaluate
acupuncture points, then that is up to the discretion of the practitioner and
his licensing boards. The FDA is concerned with the claims made by a
manufacturer and the safety of a device, but not how the practitioner uses the
device.
The State Practitioner Boards control what is deemed as
“Standard Medical Practice and Procedure” under the bylaws of the Board. Some
State Boards have a specific listing of EAV Testing as an approved modality.
In all situations, it should be understood that EAV is an energetic
evaluation. The claims that any practitioner makes about the use of EAV must be
restricted to the field of “Energetic testing”.
When a practitioner
claims that he is diagnosing a disease or a condition with an EAV device, this
is an inaccurate and misleading claim.
Energetic testing is not a
medical diagnosis. EAV is a useful qualitative and supplemental screening
procedure. It is not designed to replace standard practices and protocols.
Any findings made with EAV techniques should be validated with
standardized certified procedures.
In summary,
Electro-Acupuncture according to Dr. Voll is a very straightforward technology.
EAV devices are simply skin conductance meters with or without a
software/computer interface. But in clinical application, the simplicity of this
modality cannot explain or justify the value and effectiveness of EAV Testing.
EAV stands as a remarkable and viable asset for the forward looking medical
practitioner. Given the nature of EAV Testing, it is understandable why many
practitioners often have difficulty believing in and feeling confident in EAV.
Some have grasped at stories and answers that seemingly give substance to the
inexplicable questions that cannot be answered with our current level of
scientific understanding. There are no secret mysterious or magical
technologies. In the final analysis, we are left with the fact that EAV works
and the critical component is the human element. EAV is the integration of
science and art, electronics and intuition, software and intent. And, as Hamlet
said, “There is much that cannot be explained between heaven and earth”.

There are no comments yet. Be the first and leave a response!

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?

Trackback URL http://blog.cleansingwaters.net/2012/08/eav-discussions-using-avatar/trackback/