Evidence Hub

Post COVID-19 WAR era Clinical Case-Series Report, Unrecognized Pathophysiologic Abnormalities Detected by Quantum Magnetic Analyzer (QMA) Screening in 18 “Healthy” Clients and Patients: A Double-Blind Case-Series from Utrecht, The Netherlands

Bahram Alamdary Badlou

Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, 2026

18 participants

Abstract

Background: Routine checkups in The Netherlands, Iran, and Germany often rely on legacy biochemicals, and imaging tools that may miss early-stage or multifactorial pathophysiologic abnormalities. In the post-COVID-19 war era, the need for updated diagnostic frameworks has been repeatedly emphasized in recent literature, including our different published studies Prepandemic and Postpandemic periods (Bahram Alamdary Badlou and colleagues 2000-2026).

Objective: To evaluate whether the Quantum Magnetic Analyzer (QMA)—a non-invasive, hand-palm–based bio-resonance screening tool—can detect (Patho)Physiologic abnormalities not captured by routine checkups, and offer a modern, rapid and complementary screening tool to the old-fashioned routine diagnostics.

Methods: A randomized, double-blind case-series was conducted in locally in Utrecht, The Netherlands, Frankfort Germany, and Tehran Iran; involving 18 self-reported healthy clients and patients (HCPs), who randomly requested for such modern checkups with our in-house developed Health Checking Procedures (IHDHCPs). Each participant underwent QMA screening according to manufacturer protocol and our HCPs. Neither participants nor the operator interpreting results knew the clinical background of the subjects. Findings were compared with participants’ prior routine checkups and with a control healthy person age 19 years Old (Young) as reference random double-blind control person. No selection for Gender, Age, Known Health and Disease…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 18 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free