M2 · The thermal foundationControl.
Control.
In hand.
Your operator chooses settings, placement and movement, guiding the thermal applicator by hand.
Thermal deliveryHands-on control
NUSBE M2 · M1
Thermal foundations.
Robotic evolution.
M1 was developed from the M2 thermal platform, evolving from operator-guided application to robotic delivery.
M1 · The robotic evolutionWarmth.
Warmth.
In motion.
Body-contour mapping, contact-force and temperature feedback support robotic delivery and operator checks.
Thermal deliverySensing & feedbackMotion control
Trained operator throughout.
15 components. One connected system.
Inside
NUSBE M1
Technology in focus.Scroll to exploreView all components
Explore the engineering.
Thermal delivery
Electromagnetic power source
Generates the electromagnetic energy used by the thermal applicator.
Body mapping
3D imaging system
Captures a three-dimensional visual reference to help your operator set up the treatment area.
Body mapping
Infrared temperature monitoring
Monitors surface temperature to support your operator’s thermal checks.
Guided movement
6-axis robotic arm
Six degrees of freedom position and move the applicator along the selected programme’s path.
Thermal delivery
Integrated thermal applicator
Brings thermal delivery and guided contact together in one dedicated applicator.
Guided movement
Servo motors
Drive the arm’s joints to follow the selected movement programme.
Guided movement
Flexible airbag linkage
Provides a flexible connection within the applicator assembly as the arm moves.
Thermal delivery
Optical module
Integrates a light source into the thermal applicator assembly.
Guided movement
Precision gear assembly
Transfers motor movement through the arm’s joints to position the applicator.
Body mapping
3D positioning display
Shows the mapped body contour as a visual reference for your operator’s positioning checks.
Live control
Multi-joint force sensing
Collects force feedback from the arm’s joints during guided movement.
Live control
Live force tracking
Shows changes in contact force so your operator can monitor the session.
Live control
Speed & movement tracking
Displays movement speed and tracking information for your operator to review.
Live control
Live temperature tracking
Displays temperature readings over time to help your operator follow the thermal session.
Live control
Central control module
Coordinates the selected programme and sensor inputs, with your operator responsible for session decisions.
How the system works.
Body mapping, robotic movement and thermal feedback in one workflow, supervised by a trained operator.
Energy delivery.
Guided by skin feedback.
Thermal applicator
The treatment head applies thermal energy at the selected area.
Infrared sensing
Infrared imaging monitors temperature distribution at the skin surface.
Illustrated operating principle: surface warming compared with energy directed toward a selected deeper area. Skin feedback guides output adjustment.
Eddy-current thermal delivery
High-frequency electromagnetic fields induce circulating currents within tissue. Tissue resistance converts that energy into heat.
PID output adjustment
The controller compares measured temperature with the treatment setting and adjusts energy output in response.
Temperature protection
Temperature monitoring and protective controls support a response when operating limits are reached.
Map the body.
Guide every movement.
A 3D operating concept showing body mapping, the selected movement path and session feedback.
- 01
Map contours
Build a 3D surface model of the selected treatment area.
- 02
Follow the surface
Position the head along a coordinated treatment route.
- 03
Respond to change
Use feedback and protective pauses as contact or movement changes.
- 04
Display the feedback
Bring the body map, treatment path and session feedback into one view.
3D body sensing
A surface model helps guide the selected treatment zone and planned route.
6-axis robotic arm
Flexible positioning, motion limits and contact feedback support controlled movement across body contours.
Contact & release.
Tactile feedback helps adapt contact force, while an air-pressure rhythm supports a smooth contact-and-release sequence.
Responsive safeguards.
Designed to react.
Temperature, contact and movement feedback, with a trained operator throughout.
Illustrated responseSkin temperature changes
Monitoring / response
Surface response
Thermal output adjusted
Surface layerUnderlying tissue
Sense. Adjust.
Skin-temperature feedback informs adjustment of thermal output.
Adapt to contact.
Force feedback helps guide contact adjustment as body contours change.
Pause to reassess.
The supplied technical overview describes a protective pause when sudden movement is detected.
Stop thermal output.
Abnormal-temperature protection is described as switching off energy delivery. Residual warmth can remain.
People stay in control.
Suitability checks, trained supervision and client feedback remain essential throughout.
About this illustration
Based on the supplied NUSBE technical overview. This animation explains operating concepts; it does not show live readings, measured response times or safety certification. Confirm protective functions, operating limits and suitability with the team during your equipment demonstration.
What to compare in a demonstration.
How is the path personalised?
See how the body map informs a path around the selected treatment area.
What changes during treatment?
Watch the response to changes in skin temperature, contact and movement.
What supports ongoing operation?
Review remote status monitoring, fault diagnosis, maintenance planning and service coverage.
The research behind our thermotherapy.
01 / 08Chronic bronchitisView study
02 / 08Chronic pelvic inflammatory diseaseView study
03 / 08Frozen shoulderView study
04 / 08Chronic prostatitisView study
05 / 08Chronic gouty arthritisView study
06 / 08Breast hyperplasiaView study
07 / 08Ankylosing spondylitisView study
08 / 08Lumbar muscle strainView studyNUSBEResearch
in focus.8 clinical reports
in focus.8 clinical reports
Chronic bronchitis
- Reported sample
- 180participants90 per group
- Study duration
- 14days
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF moxibustion
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupTraditional moxibustion
Traditional moxibustion applies warmth using burning moxa, an herbal material, at selected areas of the body. This is the comparison treatment used in this report.
Response rate as printed
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 180 reported; 90 per group
- Study duration
- 14 days
Participant counts conflict. Page 6 reports 84.4% versus 51.1% response. The control outcome counts do not add up to the stated group size, so the comparison needs clarification.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF moxibustion versus traditional moxibustion.
Figure notes
- Response rate as printed
- Page 6. RF: 63 resolved + 13 improved out of 90. Control: 22 resolved + 24 improved; with 34 non-responders, its categories total 80, not the stated 90. Printed percentages are retained, not corrected.
How the study was conducted
Groups assigned by admission order; not described as randomised.
What was measured: Study-defined response: cough, sputum and wheeze resolved or improved.
Read these figures in context
- Source inconsistency: the control table says 90 participants, but its outcome categories total 80.
- Page 5 also describes acute-exacerbation recruitment but remission-stage inclusion criteria.
- Admission-order allocation and the short assessment period limit interpretation; this is not a NUSBE session success rate.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Moxibustion. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 4–7. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Chronic pelvic inflammatory disease
- Reported sample
- 86participants43 per group · results table
- Study duration
- 2weeksRecurrence at 1 year
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF moxibustion
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupAntibiotic regimen
The comparison group received an antibiotic regimen. Antibiotics are medicines that act against bacteria. This report compares that drug-based programme with its RF thermal protocol.
Response rate as printed
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
One-year recurrence as printed
Lower is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 43 per group; total reported as both 86 and 186
- Study duration
- 2 weeks; recurrence reported at 1 year
Total enrolment conflicts. The table reports response in 39 of 43 RF participants and 32 of 43 controls. It records 2 versus 8 recurrences at one year. The overall enrolment total conflicts elsewhere in the report.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF moxibustion versus an antibiotic regimen.
Figure notes
- Response rate as printed
- Page 11: 39/43 RF and 32/43 control. The abstract says 86 participants, while page 10 says 186; the table uses 43 per group.
- One-year recurrence as printed
- Page 11: 2/43 RF and 8/43 control. Lower means fewer reported recurrences. The conflicting total enrolment and incomplete follow-up reporting remain unresolved.
How the study was conducted
Coin-toss allocation described in the methods.
What was measured: Study-defined symptom and ultrasound response, plus one-year recurrence.
Read these figures in context
- Source inconsistency: the abstract says 86 participants; methods say 186 despite two groups of 43.
- Allocation concealment, blinded assessment and detailed follow-up attrition are not described.
- These are disease-specific research observations, not advice to replace prescribed treatment or promised NUSBE outcomes.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Antibiotics. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 9–12. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Frozen shoulder
- Reported sample
- 126participants63 per group
- Study duration
- 2weeks
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF treatment + exercise
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat. Both groups also performed shoulder exercises.
Comparison groupIbuprofen, rest + exercise
The comparison programme included ibuprofen, rest and shoulder exercises. Ibuprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medicine (NSAID). Shoulder exercises were part of both groups’ programmes.
Study-defined response
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Post-treatment shoulder function (JOA)
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE grouppoints
Comparison grouppoints
Post-treatment performance (KPS)
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE grouppoints
Comparison grouppoints
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 126 participants; 63 per group
- Study duration
- 2 weeks
Source-reported findings. Page 16 reports response in 57 of 63 RF participants and 48 of 63 controls, alongside higher post-treatment shoulder-function and performance scores in the RF group.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF treatment versus ibuprofen, rest and exercise; shoulder exercises in both groups.
Figure notes
- Study-defined response
- Page 16: 57/63 RF and 48/63 control, combining marked and effective responses. This is not a cure rate or a forecast for NUSBE sessions.
- Post-treatment shoulder function (JOA)
- Page 16: reported means 86.68 ± 6.42 RF and 73.76 ± 6.57 control; baseline means were 56.19 and 56.24. Higher scores indicate better function on the report’s scale.
- Post-treatment performance (KPS)
- Page 16: reported means 82.64 ± 5.18 RF and 74.25 ± 5.32 control; baseline means were 54.98 and 54.81. Higher scores indicate better performance on the report’s scale.
How the study was conducted
Allocation by drawing lots.
What was measured: Shoulder-function score, performance score and study-defined symptom/function response.
Read these figures in context
- The report does not describe allocation concealment, blinded outcome assessment or longer-term follow-up.
- Systematic adverse-event results and deep-tissue temperature measurements are not reported.
- The findings concern this clinical protocol; the collection does not identify an exact M1/M2 model or a robotic delivery protocol.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Ibuprofen. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 14–17. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Chronic prostatitis
- Reported sample
- 88participants44 per group · results table
- Study duration
- 30days
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF moxibustion
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupTraditional moxibustion
Traditional moxibustion applies warmth using burning moxa, an herbal material, at selected areas of the body. This is the comparison treatment used in this report.
Unreconciled table response
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 24 per group in methods; 44 per group in results
- Study duration
- 30 days
Methods and results conflict. The results table prints 97.73% versus 81.82%, using 44 participants per group. The methods instead describe 24 per group; the response-rate comparison cannot be reconciled from this file.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF moxibustion versus traditional moxibustion.
Figure notes
- Unreconciled table response
- Page 21 prints 43/44 RF and 36/44 control. Pages 19–20 describe only 24 per group. These are unreconciled source figures, not a reliable estimate for NUSBE clients.
How the study was conducted
Random-number-table allocation described in the methods.
What was measured: Study-defined response using symptom resolution or score reduction.
Read these figures in context
- Material denominator conflict: methods describe 48 participants in total, but the results table uses 88.
- The symptom-instrument definition and response classification also need checking against the original report.
- Do not interpret the printed percentages as a verified treatment success rate; journal and peer-review status remain unverified.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Moxibustion. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 19–22. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Chronic gouty arthritis
- Reported sample
- 78participants39 per group · results table
- Study duration
- 4weeks3-month response criterion
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF moxibustion
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupTraditional moxibustion
Traditional moxibustion applies warmth using burning moxa, an herbal material, at selected areas of the body. This is the comparison treatment used in this report.
Response rate as printed
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 72 stated; table and groups imply 78
- Study duration
- 4 weeks; response definition includes 3-month follow-up
Sample totals conflict. Page 26 reports response in 36 of 39 RF participants and 27 of 39 controls. Those groups total 78, while the methods state 72 participants.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF moxibustion versus traditional moxibustion.
Figure notes
- Response rate as printed
- Page 26: 36/39 RF and 27/39 control. These table percentages match their counts, but page 25’s total of 72 conflicts with 39 + 39 participants.
How the study was conducted
Random allocation stated without a sequence method.
What was measured: Report-defined response based on pain attacks, symptoms and uric-acid criteria.
Read these figures in context
- Source inconsistency: 72 total participants versus two groups of 39.
- Response categories are self-defined, and no systematic adverse-event results support the report’s no-side-effects conclusion.
- The observations do not establish gout treatment efficacy or safety for a NUSBE wellness session.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Moxibustion. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 24–27. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Breast hyperplasia
- Reported sample
- 82participants41 per group
- Study duration
- 2months
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF moxibustion
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupMoxibustion + point pressing
The comparison combined traditional moxibustion with point pressing. Moxibustion applies warmth from burning herbal material; point pressing uses manual pressure at selected body points.
Unreconciled printed response
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 82 participants; 41 per group
- Study duration
- 2 months
Rates and counts differ. Page 32 prints response rates of 87.7% and 56.2%. Its category counts instead imply 36/41 and 23/41, which round to 87.8% and 56.1%; the source figures need reconciliation.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF moxibustion versus traditional moxibustion and point pressing.
Figure notes
- Unreconciled printed response
- Page 32. RF categories total 36 responders; control totals 23, each out of 41. Those counts do not reproduce the printed percentages. The chart preserves the source rather than silently correcting it.
How the study was conducted
Random 1:1 allocation stated without a sequence method.
What was measured: Study-defined categories combining symptom and lump/scan findings.
Read these figures in context
- Printed response percentages differ from the category-count arithmetic: 87.7%/56.2% printed versus 87.8%/56.1% when rounded from the counts.
- Treatment-course timing, imaging criteria and outcome definitions need clarification against the original report.
- The discussion’s selective tissue-destruction and deep-temperature claims are not demonstrated by a described measurement protocol. This is not a NUSBE breast-treatment recommendation.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Moxibustion · Point pressing. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 29–33. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Ankylosing spondylitis
- Reported sample
- 94participants47 per group
- Study duration
- 12weeks
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF moxibustion
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupControl protocol
The report describes medicines in the abstract and Du-meridian moxibustion in the methods. Moxibustion is a traditional heat procedure. The full comparison and this source discrepancy are documented in Source notes.
Study-defined response
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Post-treatment Schober measurement
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE groupcm
Comparison groupcm
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 94 participants; 47 per group
- Study duration
- 12 weeks
Control treatment conflicts. Page 38 reports response in 43 of 47 RF participants and 35 of 47 controls. Mobility results are also reported, but the abstract and methods disagree about the control treatment.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: RF moxibustion versus a control described as drugs in the abstract and Du-meridian moxibustion in the methods.
Figure notes
- Study-defined response
- Page 38: 43/47 RF and 35/47 control. The counts match the percentages, but pages 35–36 describe different control treatments.
- Post-treatment Schober measurement
- Page 37: reported means 5.19 ± 1.38 RF and 4.04 ± 1.41 control. Higher indicates more lumbar movement in this test; comparator details remain inconsistent.
How the study was conducted
Groups assigned by admission order; not described as randomised.
What was measured: Spinal-mobility measurements and study-defined symptom/function response.
Read these figures in context
- Comparator conflict: the abstract says Western drugs, while the methods describe Du-meridian moxibustion.
- Admission-order allocation and unreported blinded assessment limit interpretation.
- Mobility and symptom scores do not demonstrate prevention of disease progression or guaranteed NUSBE outcomes.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Moxibustion. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 35–38. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Lumbar muscle strain
- Reported sample
- 102participants51 per group
- Study duration
- 4weeks
Treatment comparison
NUSBE groupRF thermal protocol
RF means radiofrequency: energy used to generate heat.
Comparison groupManual therapy + ginger moxibustion
This comparison combined hands-on manual therapy with ginger-partitioned moxibustion. Manual therapy involves practitioner-applied movement or massage; ginger-partitioned moxibustion places ginger between the moxa and the treatment area.
Post-treatment disability (ODI)
Lower is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Study-defined response
Higher is better for this measureNUSBE group%
Comparison group%
Source notes
- Reported sample
- 102 participants; 51 per group
- Study duration
- 4 weeks
Methods need clarification. Page 42 reports lower post-treatment disability in the RF group and response in 48 of 51 RF participants versus 41 of 51 controls. Treatment details and the quality-of-life scale need clarification.
“NUSBE group” is the website label for the RF treatment group reported in the source studies. NUSBE M1/M2 are the global-market names; the reports do not identify exact models or evaluate NUSBE-branded systems.
Reported treatment comparison: An RF protocol versus manual therapy plus ginger-partitioned moxibustion; the RF group’s manual-therapy component needs clarification.
Figure notes
- Post-treatment disability (ODI)
- Page 42: reported means 16.14 ± 1.27 RF and 23.46 ± 1.33 control; baseline means were 39.68 and 39.74. Lower means less disability on the ODI, not a percentage of people cured.
- Study-defined response
- Page 42: 48/51 RF and 41/51 control, combining resolved and improved categories. Exact treatment components still need clarification.
How the study was conducted
Block randomisation stated; sequence and concealment details are not supplied.
What was measured: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), quality-of-life score and study-defined symptom/function response.
Read these figures in context
- The title describes RF with manual therapy, while the methods do not clearly specify that manual-therapy component for the RF group.
- The report labels SF-36 as a 120-point scale; that differs from standard scoring. Its quality-of-life figures are not charted pending clarification.
- Blinded assessment, systematic adverse-event results and longer-term follow-up are not described; these are source-reported observations, not NUSBE guarantees.
General terminology: Radiofrequency heat · Manual therapy · Ginger-partitioned moxibustion. These references explain treatment terms; they do not validate this report or NUSBE outcomes.
Source: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, pages 40–43. Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author). Reported comparisons concern the study protocols; they are not forecasts for a NUSBE M1 or M2 session or comparisons with other massage robots.
Research source & notes
Eight comparative reports
RF treatment protocols, comparison groups and reported outcomes. Each study card includes its own methods and figure notes.
Thermal platform design
The thermal applicator, body-contour mapping, robotic arm and feedback displays. Manufacturer product material; not a clinical trial.
Thermal technology overview
Thermal delivery and the manufacturer’s approach to movement, temperature and contact-force control. Used as engineering background. A 43°C equipment setting is not a measurement of deep-tissue temperature.
2022 tissue-heating experiment
A one-animal experiment on the HW/PSP infrared body-contouring device. It does not evaluate NUSBE M1/M2, human outcomes or routine-session safety.
Dr Pan Xiaohai provides thermotherapy research and technical guidance for NUSBE M1 and M2. The English report collection contains eight comparative clinical reports covering studies conducted between 2016 and 2020. Authors: Tian Hui, Zhang Guanghua, Pan Kai and Pan Xiaohai (corresponding author).
The reports describe favourable results for their RF protocols. Several tables contain inconsistent counts, rates or methods, flagged with each report and explained in its source notes. These are source-reported findings, not independently verified NUSBE success rates.
The reports describe RF treatment protocols. Exact equipment model codes, a robotic delivery protocol, journal publication details and trial registrations are not supplied in the collection. Peer-review status has not been verified. Study-specific limitations are shown with each report.
The research provides background for the thermal approach. It does not establish guaranteed outcomes, suitability for every person, or superiority over another commercial robot.
Original sources: English thermotherapy clinical-report collection, equipment platform brochure and manufacturer thermal-technology presentation. Engineering-film excerpts are supplied by the manufacturer and edited for NUSBE, with English descriptive captions and no original audio. Equipment configurations in the films may differ from the supplied M1/M2; the films do not present clinical results.
Anatomical illustrations identify the research topics; they are not patient scans or treatment-outcome images.
General background on RF heating explains the physical principle; it is not a NUSBE approval or endorsement.
Your next service starts here
Bring a new wellness experience
to your business.
Find the right NUSBE setup for your venue, understand your entry options and see how we support your launch.
Plan my NUSBE business