EMF Exposure

[Vulcan59]

Hi kvasilys,

Welcome to the forum. :) We recommend all new members to post an introduction in the Newbies section telling us a bit about themselves, and how they found their way here. Have a read through that section to get an idea of how others have done it. Thanks.

 

[obyvatel]

It is very interesting topic discussing here.
I think on top of negative EMF produced by electronic devices there are also "almost ultra-sounds" they produce.
Sometimes you can hear in the silent room very quiet sound of your electronic devices.

I am new to this forum and maybe my question is naive but are there any devices to protect your home from negative EMF?

Hi kvasilys,
Your question is not naive. This topic has been discussed a few times in the forum. A couple of strategies that have been brought up have been using silk ( link ) and earthing ( link ). Also, it is generally considered to be a good idea to turn off electrical and electronic devices where and when possible inside the house - specially when sleeping.

 

[LQB]

It is very interesting topic discussing here.
I think on top of negative EMF produced by electronic devices there are also "almost ultra-sounds" they produce.
Sometimes you can hear in the silent room very quiet sound of your electronic devices.

I am new to this forum and maybe my question is naive but are there any devices to protect your home from negative EMF?

Yes, since some people's metal fillings have been known to demod AM signals, some electronic noise may undergo the same producing audio. Makes you wonder if the "almost ultra-sounds" are actually doing some damage. Some ES folks claim they can also "hear" some EMFs.

On the devices - there are a lot of frauds and cons out there. For dirty power filters, check out stetzerelectric.com. If AC mag fields are high due to faulty wiring - you need to fix the wiring. Easy tests in both cases will tell you if you have a problem.

 

[Sirius]

Welcome to our forum, kvasilys!

I think on top of negative EMF produced by electronic devices there are also "almost ultra-sounds" they produce.
Sometimes you can hear in the silent room very quiet sound of your electronic devices.

Yes, since some people's metal fillings have been known to demod AM signals, some electronic noise may undergo the same producing audio. Makes you wonder if the "almost ultra-sounds" are actually doing some damage. Some ES folks claim they can also "hear" some EMFs.

What you hear are at all likelihood not microwaves or your wiring per se but as you said, some electronic devices which is nothing unusual. It is not certain whether sensitives really hear EMFs. They could as well perceive something akin to ear ringing or other effects triggered by EMFs within their bodies.
Though everyone can hear EMFs with professional meters!

There are, for example, issues with windmills regarding ultrasounds. They produce unhealthy noise. If the same also applies to some household electronic devices?

I am new to this forum and maybe my question is naive but are there any devices to protect your home from negative EMF?

Well, no. There are no active devices for the average person which block or reduce radiation available if the term “device” is interpreted verbatim; nothing which is affordable, legal and available on the market. There are only shielding materials, either commercial ones or self-made.

As LQB pointed out, there are plenty “frauds and cons out there”—which in my opinion worsens the situation simply because more lies are spread about the matter so that public opinion drifts even more into conclusions far away from truth. BTW, how much fraud and corruption can be observed in the field of Big Pharma and mainstream medicine? Bizarrely, the majority continues to show loyalty to that system even if confronted with shocking facts (some people need authority). In contrast, any alternative health treatment must be imaginary simply because there are frauds out there.

 

[kvasilys]

Thanks a lot for your answers.

Here is interesting piece of information on EMF exposure.

This article is in French but Google can translate.
Basically it is a first picture of cell phone radiation.

http://obsession.nouvelobs.com/high-tech/20120712.ZDN7398/les-ondes-electromagnetiques-enfin-photographiees.html#reagir



As for the devices I am still trying to figure out how it might work. Most of them fake and scam but some I think might work. I do not know how, because how can they change the electromagnetic waves? But I felt something good.

Short story: I was at home of my friend who uses products from the website _www.terrasensus.com
He had problems with sleep and low energy. He bought couple of things and now he is very energized. When I visited him I felt warmth when I held the products in my hands and it was very calm in his home.

Can anything really make such an influence?


Here is also a quote from one document I've found on the internet about human cell charges:

"The presence of charged ions in a cell and in the fluid surrounding the cell sets up a charge distribution across the membrane wall. Normally, there are positive charges outside the cell, and negative charges inside the cell. With this charge distribution, the cell is equivalent to a small capacitor separated by a dielectric (insulator), with the
cell membrane acting as the dielectric. The potential difference across the cell membrane can be measured by a voltmeter by placing one probe in the extracellular fluid and one probe inside the cell. A typical “healthy” cell in equilibrium has a potential difference across its cell membrane of 100 mV. During cellular metabolism, excessive positive charges can enter the cell, and the cell subsequently needs to pump out the positive charges to return to equilibrium. It is this changing potential difference across the cell membrane, from a state of equilibrium to one of nonequilibrium, which causes the cell membrane to transmit fundamental and harmonic frequencies."

So as I understand we have to remove positive charge from us time to time. Is it more to the question of Earthing (thanks for obyvatel for the link) or some devices might do it as well?

Mod Note: deactivated website link

 

[LQB]

Here is also a quote from one document I've found on the internet about human cell charges:

"The presence of charged ions in a cell and in the fluid surrounding the cell sets up a charge distribution across the membrane wall. Normally, there are positive charges outside the cell, and negative charges inside the cell. With this charge distribution, the cell is equivalent to a small capacitor separated by a dielectric (insulator), with the
cell membrane acting as the dielectric. The potential difference across the cell membrane can be measured by a voltmeter by placing one probe in the extracellular fluid and one probe inside the cell. A typical “healthy” cell in equilibrium has a potential difference across its cell membrane of 100 mV. During cellular metabolism, excessive positive charges can enter the cell, and the cell subsequently needs to pump out the positive charges to return to equilibrium. It is this changing potential difference across the cell membrane, from a state of equilibrium to one of nonequilibrium, which causes the cell membrane to transmit fundamental and harmonic frequencies."

So as I understand we have to remove positive charge from us time to time. Is it more to the question of Earthing (thanks for obyvatel for the link) or some devices might do it as well?

I'm not sure what the meaning of the bolded part of your quote is. But moving charge (ions) is current, and that current will produce a local magnetic field. If the current oscillates, then the mag field will oscillate at whatever that frequency is. Harmonic frequencies are usually associated with distortion of the fundamental.

 

[paralleloscope]

The three major EMFs are AC mag fields, dirty power, and wireless RF signals. Nowadays we all have exposure to all of them 24/7. We know that dirty power frequencies above about 2KHz are absorbed by the body below the skin. RF wireless penetrates deeply. AC mag fields go right through you with much negative effect. There are numerous theories out there for the bio mechanism (like the Melatonin Hypothesis). Whatever the actual mechanism(s), they must be related for these EMFs because the disease spectra overlap so closely (also overlaps with diet/toxins). There have been studies trying to get to the details of the effects - lots of mice studies. A good place to start is powerwatch.org (UK). If you sign up to their RSS, you can get study summaries once per month - you can also look at past ones.

After researching the EMF area, I've found very little tying all of this together (powerwatch is pretty good though). I'm currently writing up a large paper that attempts to do this based on what we have to date with some focus on what everyone can do to minimize exposure in the three major areas.

Thanks for your answers and links and I'm Loooking forward to your paper. And yes it's really difficult to get a good overall picture of the actual EMF interaction with biology. There are still quite a few papers finding little support for a connection between EMF and health hazards, it's hard to say wether these are done with industry bias, bad methodology or by a factor that EMF's only have physiological effects on people with sensitive nervous systems (which we AFAIK medically don't have a map of).

Jim Waugh's book should be here any day, looking forward to learning how AC mag fields are detrimental (the pulse probably).

1301 fluorescent bulbs planted and lit by the electric field given off by power lines; in 2004 at freeway M4 in Bath, UK. By artist Richard Box.
_http://vimeo.com/11137816

 

[Sirius]

Hello,

Thanks for your answers and links and I'm Loooking forward to your paper. And yes it's really difficult to get a good overall picture of the actual EMF interaction with biology. There are still quite a few papers finding little support for a connection between EMF and health hazards, it's hard to say wether these are done with industry bias, bad methodology or by a factor that EMF's only have physiological effects on people with sensitive nervous systems (which we AFAIK medically don't have a map of).

There is an evident link between studies' sponsors and their results (which facts are allowed to be revealed to the public; industry and government always find ways to manipulate and hide undesirable results using numerous tricks).
See, for example: http://www.diagnose-funk.org/images/brennpunkt1020064.jpg (an overview of cellphone studies)

Red = funded by industry (*= partially)
Brown = funded by US Airforce (*= partially)
Black = funded at public expense or by others
Grey = unknown sponsor
The first row shows studies asserting effects by cellphone radiation. The second row comprises those studies claiming the opposite.

The problem, however, is that most studies focus only on cellphone radiation exposure by either end-user devices or cellphone towers. This technology has been available on the market for a certain time, cellphone towers attract more public attention than small gadgets. The installation of cellphone towers must first be approved, and so on.

But who cares about WiFi and cordless phones, for example? It is argued that (especially WiFi) emits microwaves only with 1/10-20 of cellphones' power strength which leads so many people into the wrong conclusion that they must be harmless. In fact, nowadays the largest threat in terms of microwave emitters are those indoor devices such as WiFi and cordless phones in addition to excessive cellphones usage, running at 24/7. Cordless gadgets are also newer, introduced roughly a decade ago. They are marketed rather aggressively these days so that an average person uses at least one of them at home, be it for the purpose of Internet and communication or just cordless devices such as modern printers, televisions or any other device. It is hard to find anyone _not_ using wireless-mindless technology besides those few people who are aware of the connected health issues.
And studies are rare that cover said devices.

 

[LQB]

Thanks for your answers and links and I'm Loooking forward to your paper. And yes it's really difficult to get a good overall picture of the actual EMF interaction with biology. There are still quite a few papers finding little support for a connection between EMF and health hazards, it's hard to say wether these are done with industry bias, bad methodology or by a factor that EMF's only have physiological effects on people with sensitive nervous systems (which we AFAIK medically don't have a map of).

I think its like Sirius said - when you take a close look, many of these studies seem designed to find nothing. There are quite a few rat/mice studies that have found significant bio-mechanisms. They usually all end the the same kind of statement. "We have found significant blah-blah-blah mechanisms showing possible negative blah-blah-blah, and so we believe that further study is warranted". Those last words probably doom any possibility for further funding and so the whole field of EMF research is slowed down. Here's a few quotes from Waugh's book:

In his book “Living Safely with Electromagnetic Radiation18”, Jim Waugh relates the experience of Dr. George Carlo: “ The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) in 1999 withdrew funding of the research that Dr. George Carlo and 200 scientists were doing at its request to prove that cellphones were safe. The research was terminated because long-term studies were showing leakage of the blood-brain barrier and micronuclei (broken DNA) in blood cells. This meant there were adverse biological effects associated with cellphone use, something the industry did not want the public to know. Despite the withdrawal of industry funding, independent research continued and scientists all over the world have been expressing their concerns about the dangers of cellphones. Epidemiologist Bruce Armstrong and neurosurgeon Dr. Vini Khurana have both publicly stated that each has found increased risk of brain tumors after 10 years of use, on the side of the head where the cellphone is held. … In February 2006, Dr. Hardell published a paper detailing his findings of patients diagnosed with brain cancer between 2000 and 2003 and found that the increase in risk was steadily strengthening in magnitude and statistical significance as the length of cellphone usage was increasing. … Despite the volumes of independent research, the cellphone industry continues to argue that there is not enough proof that cellphones cause cancer. Professor Devra Davis of the University of Pittsburg Cancer Institute asked: ‘How many sick or dead people does it take to constitute sufficient proof?’”

“In early 2008 Dr. Ronald Herberman, tumor immunologist and director of the University Of Pittsburg Cancer Institute, sent a memo to all 3,000 members of his staff requesting that they reduce their use of cell phones and instruct their children to use cellphones only in emergencies. … Dr. George Carlo has predicted an epidemic of brain tumors in the near future because cellphones have been in general use for over 10 years and we are now entering the period of time when associated tumors will begin to appear.”

“In March 2003, the US Environmental Protection Agency proposed new guidelines for evaluating cancer risks to children on the grounds that children may be 10 times more vulnerable than adults to cancer risks from exposure to a wide range of chemicals. This proposal came as a wake-up call and underscored the evidence that children are far more vulnerable to environmental agents, be they chemical, electromagnetic frequencies or others. In 2007, the American Academy of Otolaryngology presented research that found that young people who use a cellphone for an hour or more a day will suffer significant and irreversible hearing damage by the time they reach young adulthood. Research has determined that cellphones can leave young users’ vision impaired due to eye lens opacity, which is much like cataracts. Dr. Om Gandhi of the University of Utah reported that an eye lens of a 10-year-old will absorb five times the cellphone radiation of an adult eye. Young users can become brain impaired. Brain scans illustrate clearly how deeply into a child’s brain cellphone radiation can penetrate. … Dr. Lennart Hardell, commenting on the results of a recent report by a Swedish team, said, ‘There is a 5.2 fold increased risk of malignant brain tumors in children, after one or more years of cellphone use, who start using a cellphone before the age of 20 years.’ “

Dr Carlo wrote the forward to his book. I'd guess that Dr Carlo has done very little funded research since 2000.

There is a unique study done in Germany in the valley of Rimbach. In 2004 they were just getting their fist cell tower on a mountain overlooking the valley - before this they had no cell service. So folks decided to look at the residents before and after the cell tower and to measure the field strength at their homes. Here is the abstract:

This follow-up of 60 participants over one and a half years shows a significant effect on the adrenergic sys-tem after the installation of a new cell phone base station in the village of Rimbach (Bavaria).

After the activation of the GSM base station, the levels of the stress hormones adrenaline and noradrena-line increased significantly during the first six months; the levels of the precursor dopamine decreased substantially. The initial levels were not restored even after one and a half years. As an indicator of the dysregulated chronic imbalance of the stress system, the phenylethylamine (PEA) levels dropped signifi-cantly until the end of the study period.

The effects showed a dose-response relationship and occurred well below current limits for technical RF radiation exposures. Chronic dysregulation of the catecholamine system has great relevance for health and is well known to damage human health in the long run.

This is pretty good if you can wade through all the blood test stats. The paper has 58 references and was published in "Electromagnetic Fields". You can find it here: _http://www.scribd.com/doc/63835313/Changes-of-Clinically-Important-Neurotransmitters-under-the-Influence-of-Modulated-RF-Fields

Jim Waugh's book should be here any day, looking forward to learning how AC mag fields are detrimental (the pulse probably).

Good deal! You will enjoy it, he has a lot of very good advice.

1301 fluorescent bulbs planted and lit by the electric field given off by power lines; in 2004 at freeway M4 in Bath, UK. By artist Richard Box.
_http://vimeo.com/11137816

Yes, pretty impressive. I have a pic of this up close taken at night and its amazing. Prof Henshaw (retired now) gave me permission to use it as well as other pics from his work at Univ of Bristol.

Fixed quotes

 

[LQB]

But who cares about WiFi and cordless phones, for example? It is argued that (especially WiFi) emits microwaves only with 1/10-20 of cellphones' power strength which leads so many people into the wrong conclusion that they must be harmless. In fact, nowadays the largest threat in terms of microwave emitters are those indoor devices such as WiFi and cordless phones in addition to excessive cellphones usage, running at 24/7. Cordless gadgets are also newer, introduced roughly a decade ago. They are marketed rather aggressively these days so that an average person uses at least one of them at home, be it for the purpose of Internet and communication or just cordless devices such as modern printers, televisions or any other device. It is hard to find anyone _not_ using wireless-mindless technology besides those few people who are aware of the connected health issues.
And studies are rare that cover said devices.

Yes, and studies that do look at various EMFs try to separate them and only look at one exposure, when in reality, many of their "controls" are corrupted due to other exposures/toxins/etc. IOW if everyone is sick from a variety of exposures, how will you ever find the footprint of any one of them alone? You won't - and that is also what's happening in some of these studies.

 

[mcb]

We are slowly making progress. I have a "lap desk" now for my notebook that has some shielding in it, although I may need to add a ground cable and/or additional shielding. It is also a thermal shield. I don't use the notebook on my lap all that much, but I sure want below it now when I do.

We moved the bed away from the wall in the second bedroom that has the power meter on the outside wall. The room is still a mess after the mess, but we are thinking about ways to cover and shield the wall. At least the cats will not be spending time right next to the wall. Placing the dresser directly in front of the meter didn't work out. Next I need to provide wired ethernet in the living room. This is quite bit of work.

Edit: swapped the furniture around; dresser mirror now in front of smart meter; I made it work.

(I moved the notebook to the side to show the shielded Lap Desk underneath)

 

[Sirius]

You have a cordless phone??

 

[mcb]

You have a cordless phone??

Yup. You eyes are better than mine to pick that out from all that rubble. The phones aren't used much, and the base station is away from where anyone sits for any length of time. Wi-Fi is the bigger problem in this household, though, and I haven't found a solution yet. At least there are no base stations of any kind in the bedroom end of the house, other than the "smart meter," and no regularly-used wi-fi devices in the bedroom area.

 

[LQB]

You have a cordless phone??

Yup. You eyes are better than mine to pick that out from all that rubble. The phones aren't used much, and the base station is away from where anyone sits for any length of time. Wi-Fi is the bigger problem in this household, though, and I haven't found a solution yet. At least there are no base stations of any kind in the bedroom end of the house, other than the "smart meter," and no regularly-used wi-fi devices in the bedroom area.

Both the handsets and the base transmit and not just when the phone rings or you talk on it. Many researchers consider the DECT phones to be the greater threat since they transmit continuously. If it were me I would get rid of them in favor of the corded version.

Good deal on the laptop and bedroom. If you could center that picture up over the meter and back it with foil, you would probably get a reduction in the power density of a factor of 10 (possibly more) in that area of the house.

 

[mcb]

Good deal on the laptop and bedroom. If you could center that picture up over the meter and back it with foil, you would probably get a reduction in the power density of a factor of 10 (possibly more) in that area of the house.

I took more audio measurements, and if I move the dresser all the way to the left then the mirror and shelves below it will be covering the circuit breakers and smart meter. I can hang a large piece of foil-covered cardboard behind it (grounded). I will also move the vanity well clear of the meter.

The picture will probably move to another wall. It is not going to be a shield. :D

Edit: it moved!