EMF Exposure

[mcb]

As history goes, this is interesting:

Although German scientists and doctors have lead the way in identifying pulsed RF exposure as a cause for human illness, Germany, today, is no better off with regard to the proliferation of pulsed RF communications. In October 2002 a large group (now 3000 endorsements) of German physicians and medical professionals signed and endorsed the Freiburger Appeal23. This was prepared, in part, to address irresponsible “safety limits policy” (pulsed RF communications) of the German Government, and the fact that the German courts regarded the danger as “purely hypothetical”. Reproduced in full, the Appeal states:

One of the ways corporations promote unhealthy products and processes and avoid responsibility for damage is by taking advantage of legal systems that require specific proof of a kind that often cannot be supplied, rather than applying the sort of common-sense standard that ordinary (non-psychopathic) people tend to use (i.e. err on the side of caution, as if there were a tomorrow).

 

[Sirius]

Although German scientists and doctors have lead the way in identifying pulsed RF exposure as a cause for human illness, Germany, today, is no better off with regard to the proliferation of pulsed RF communications.

Worse than hell there. I think all European countries and US states are roughly equally contaminated with RF exposure. If a country has safety limits lower than the WHO standard, it doesn't make a real difference in most situations. Safety limits must be very low in order to be regarded as safe.

One of the ways corporations promote unhealthy products and processes and avoid responsibility for damage is by taking advantage of legal systems that require specific proof of a kind that often cannot be supplied, rather than applying the sort of common-sense standard that ordinary (non-psychopathic) people tend to use (i.e. err on the side of caution, as if there were a tomorrow).

They operate using deception.

 

[LQB]

Although German scientists and doctors have lead the way in identifying pulsed RF exposure as a cause for human illness, Germany, today, is no better off with regard to the proliferation of pulsed RF communications.

Worse than hell there. I think all European countries and US states are roughly equally contaminated with RF exposure. If a country has safety limits lower than the WHO standard, it doesn't make a real difference in most situations. Safety limits must be very low in order to be regarded as safe.

Yeah, I think any metropolitan area is going to look the same and the rising levels with time are exponential. Based on what I've seen so far, the level should be 1nanoW/cm2.

One of the ways corporations promote unhealthy products and processes and avoid responsibility for damage is by taking advantage of legal systems that require specific proof of a kind that often cannot be supplied, rather than applying the sort of common-sense standard that ordinary (non-psychopathic) people tend to use (i.e. err on the side of caution, as if there were a tomorrow).

They operate using deception.
[/quote]
Absolutely! That's how the Precautionary Principle has been tossed to the wind.

 

[LQB]

Here is an interesting find from Prof Henshaw in which he responds to a recent Danish cell phone study:
http://www.emfacts.com/2011/10/henshaw-responds-to-danish-mobile-phone-study/

Mobile phone radiation could be detected by the human brain.

Denis L Henshaw, Emeritus Professor of Human Radiation Effects
School of Chemistry University of Bristol Cantocks Close, Bristol, BS8 1TS

Re: Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours: update of Danish cohort study. Frei, et al. 343:doi:10.1136/bmj.d6387

In their introduction, Frei et al. [1] state: “So far, the mechanism of potential non-thermal interaction between radio frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and living systems is unknown.” This statement does not concur with scientific knowledge.

Mobile phones typically have three types of EMF emissions associated with them: in the GSM system a 900 MHz radio frequency, a 217 Hz pulsing signal and an extremely low frequency magnetic field (ELF MF) associated with the battery [2]. The ELF component has so far been ignored in all epidemiological studies of mobile phone exposure and cancer. During phone use, this ELF component exposures the whole brain to MFs ranging from a few to tens of micro-tesla, above the intensity of power frequency ELF-MFs that have been repeatedly associated with increased risk of brain tumours in adults [3,4].

Animals across a wide range of species detect small changes in the Earth’s magnetic field, which is exploited for navigation. Homing pigeons and newts are estimated to have a limiting magnetic detection sensitivity of 0.01 micro-tesla and magnetic compass sensitivity below 0.2 degrees [5]. Two types of magneto-receptor are widely discussed [6, 7], one based on structures of magnetite particles, the other on a chemical compass exploiting the radical pair mechanism, RPM in which low intensity MFs alter the quantum spin state of the unpaired electrons in a free radical pair. Both mechanisms are relevant to the interaction of mobile phone EMFs in humans.

Thus, the human brain contains magnetite particles [8], some up to 600 nm in size, capable at body temperature of transducing both low intensity ELF MFs and microwave EMFs [9, 10].

The RPM forms part of basic spin chemistry [11] in which low intensity MFs can increase the lifetime of free radical pairs by singlet- to-triplet, S-T, interconversion of their quantum spin states. The increased lifetime of free radicals allows increased availability to cause biological damage, for example to DNA. The energy levels involved are some ten million times below thermal energy, the action being of the nature of a quantum mechanical switch.

There is compelling evidence that the avian magnetic compass utilises the RPM acting in the eye on cryptochromes protein molecules [12], best known for their function in controlling circadian rhythms. The magnetic compass can be disrupted by radio frequency fields. In the American cockroach disruption was seen by 1.2 MHz fields at 0.018 micro-telsa [13], well below current ICNIRP public exposure guidelines [14]. There is evidence that human cryptochromes are magneto-sensitive [15] and that ELF MFs disrupt circadian rhythms in man [16].

IARC has recently classifieds radio frequency EMFs as a 2B possible carcinogen, based on the main body of case-control epidemiology and accumulated exposure to mobile phone radiation and increased risk of brain tumours in heavy users [17]. Research into the possible health effects of mobile phones should now concentrate on designing epidemiological studies with more relevant exposure metrics and at investigating further the mechanistic pathways by which exposure may increase the risk of brain tumours and other adverse health outcomes. Meanwhile, precaution against undue exposure is warranted and should be encouraged.

References:
1. Frei P, Poulsen AH, Olsen JH, Schuz J. 2011 Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours:update of Danish cohort study. BMJ 2011;343:d6387 doi: 10.1136/bmj.d6387
2. Tuor M, Ebert S, Schuderer J, Kuster N. Assessment of ELF Exposure from GSM Handsets and Development of an Optimized RF/ELF Exposure Setup for Studies of Human Volunteers. Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society, Report: BAG Reg. No. 2.23.02.-18/02.001778, Zurich, January 2005.
3. O’Carroll MJ, Henshaw DL. 2008. Aggregating epidemiological evidence: comparing two seminal EMF reviews. Risk Anal 28:225-234.
4. Kheifets L, Monroe J, Vergara X, Mezei G, Afifi AA. 2008. Occupational electromagnetic fields and leukaemia and brain cancer: An update to two meta-analyses. JOEM 50:677-688.
5. Gould JL. 2010 Animal Navigation: Longitude at Last. Curr Biol 21;R226 DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2011.01.063
6. Lohmann KJ. 2010. Magnetic-field perception. Nature 464:1140-1142.
7. Phillips JB, Muheim R, Jorge PE. 2110. A behavioral perspective on the biophysics of the light-dependent magnetic compass: a link between directional and spatial perception? J Exp Biol 213, 3247-3255. doi:10.1242/jeb.020792.
8. Kirschvink JL, Kobayashi-Kirschvink A, Woodford BJ. 1992. Magnetite biomineralization in the human brain. PNAS USA 89:7683-7687.
9. Vanderstraeten J, Gillis P. 2010. Theoretical Evaluation of Magnetoreception of Power-Frequency Fields. Bioelectromagnetics 31:371- 379.
10. Kirschvink JL. 1996. Microwave Absorption by Magnetite: A Possible Mechanism for Coupling Nonthermal Levels of Radiation to Biological Systems. Bioelectromagnetics 17:187-194.
11. Brocklehurst R, McLauchlan KA 1996. Free radical mechanism for the effects of environmental electromagnetic fields on biological systems. Int J Radiat Biol. 69:3-34.
12. Ritz T, Wiltschko R, Hore PJ, Rodgers CT, Stapput K, Thalau P, Timmel CR, Wiltschko W. 2009. Magnetic compass of birds is based on a molecule with optimal directional sensitivity. Biophys J. 96, 3451-3457. (doi:10. 1016/j.bpj.2008.11.072)
13. V?cha M, P??ov? T,and Mark?ta Kv??alov? M. 2009. Radio frequency magnetic fields disrupt magnetoreception in American cockroach. J Exp Biol. 212;3473-3477.
14. ICNIRP Guidelines 1998: International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic and electromagnetic field (up to 300 GHz). Health Phys 74(4):494-522.
15. Foley LE, Gegear1 RJ, Reppert SM. 2011. Human cryptochrome exhibits light-dependent magnetosensitivity. Nature Comm. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1364
16. Henshaw DL, Reiter RJ. 2005. Do magnetic fields cause increased risk of childhood leukaemia via melatonin disruption? Bioelectromagnetics Suppl 7:S86-S97.
17. WHO IARC Monograph Working Group, Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Lancet Oncol. 2011 Jul;12(7):624-6.

That magnetic field is huge - 10's of mTs is 100's of mG. I'm sure it depends on the design of the particular cell phone, but this is definitely a level that you do not want to bathe your brain in.

Another bad source is headphone speakers. When you use them, you're bathing both sides of your brain with pretty high levels - at least the ones I've measured.

Another quote from Henshaw:

In my estimation, official review bodies have cited less than 10% of the available scientific evidence relating to ELF-EMF effects. In some areas, none of the literature has been cited

 

[LQB]

Here is another good paper on the effects of dirty power on dairy cows: http://www.electricalpollution.com/Research.html.
Relationship of Electric Power Quality to Milk Production of Dairy Herds

Abstract. Public Utility Commissions (PUC) in several states adopted 0.5 volt or 1.0 milliampere as the actionable limit for utilities to respond to complaints of uncontrolled voltage. Dairy farmer complaints that animal behavior and milk production were affected by electrical shocks below adopted standards were investigated on 12 farms in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota. Milk production per cow was determined from daily tank-weight pickup and number of cows milked. Number of transient events, transients, voltage (peak-to-peak), waveform phase angle degree, sags, and sag-Vrms were measured from event recorders plugged into milk house wall outlets. Data from 1705 cows and 939 data points were analyzed by multiherd least-squares multiple regression and SAS-ANOVA statistical programs. In five herds for 517 days, milk/cow/day decreased -0.0281 kg/transient event as transient events increased from 0 to 122/day (P<0.02). Negative effects on milk/cow/day from event recorder measurements were significant for eight independent electrical variables. Step-potential voltage and frequency of earth currents were measured by oscilloscope from metal plates grouted into the floor of milking stalls. Milk decreased as number of 3rd, 5th, 7th, 21st, 28th, and 42nd harmonics and the sum of triplen harmonics (3rd, 9th, 15th, 21st, 27th, 33rd, and 39th) increased/day (P<0.003). Event recorder transient events were positively correlated with oscilloscope average Vp event readings, with number of measures over 90 Hz, and number of 4th, 7th, 10th, and 42nd harmonics per day. Steps/min counted from videotapes of a dancing cow with no contact to metal in the barnyard were correlated with non-sinusoidal 8.1 to 14.6 mVp impulses recorded by oscilloscope for 5 min from EKG patches on legs. PUC standards and use of 500-Ohm resistors in test circuits underestimate effects of non-sinusoidal, higher frequency voltage/current common on rural power lines. ...

A review by California Health Services Department prepared for the PUC, reveals human health risks from electric and magnetic fields from power lines in the home or workplace [29]. Chen et al. [9] reported that ELF (extremely low frequency) inhibition of differentiation of Friend erythroleukemia cells was dose dependent on electromagnetic exposure; and because ELF inhibits the same enzyme in-vitro as phorbal esters, phenobarbitol, and dioxin, it falls in the same class of carcinogens that proliferate but do not cause cancer. Human colon cancer cells increased six-fold during exposure to electromagnetic fields in-vitro [31]. Electrical exposure disturbed melatonin secretion patterns in blood by the pineal gland [5], increased brain cancer and leukemia among electrical workers [23, 37], increased leukemia in children [23], and decreased T lymphocytes in power plant workers [28]. A higher rate of suicide among utility electricians and linemen than utility workers not employed in those jobs, suggesting increased risk of mental depression and disturbed sleep patterns upon chronic exposure to low frequency electromagnetic fields [39], further suggests electric field or electromagnetic field involvement with central nervous system functions [3].

The author list is:

Donald Hillman, Ph.D, Professor Emeritus - (Member)
Department of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824. Donag1@aol.com
Dave Stetzer, Industrial Electrician
Stetzer Electric, Inc., Blair, WI 54616
Martin Graham, DEE, Professor Emeritus - (Member)
Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1770
Charles L. Goeke, M.S. Analyst
Goeke Enterprises, Mason, MI 48854
Kurt E. Mathson, EE
Stetzer Electric, Inc., Blair, WI 54616
Harold H. VanHorn, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus
Department of Animal Science, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Charles J. Wilcox, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus
Department of Animal Science, Geneticist, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL

This includes four Professors Emeritus including Graham (Graham-Stetzer filters)

In most homes/residences the wiring is not shielded in metal conduit (as in most office buildings). This allows an electric field to penetrate the living area and provides a possible path to people through capacitive coupling of the higher frequency noise components of the dirty power. In addition, the home wiring can radiate these noise components since, depending on geometry, the wiring can act as an antenna at the higher frequencies (the ones that are the most damaging).

There is an undercurrent of contention in the literature as to whether it is the electric field or the AC magnetic field that is responsible for the health effects. Based on what I see, I would say they are both right. Even in a house with very little net current (faulty wiring) you will find places (like the electric range) where AC mag fields will be very high. The high frequency noise components will appear in the AC mag field and these go right through the body. It may also be that noise in the AC mag field can have much greater low-level effect that the electric field. I haven't seen any serious attempts to separate these two.

 

[mcb]

The research article link that Laura posted last weekend in the "Life Without Bread" topic presents a rather clear picture of cell metabolism as a series of processes that depend upon organic capacitors and regulated, graduated electrical potentials. It is not hard to imagine how EMF at any frequency in forms that do not exist naturally might be able to throw a monkey wrench into the works, setting the stage for cancer and other diseases. I am particularly concerned about low-frequency high-energy fields, having seen this, but I also see the potential for coupling with high-frequency low-energy sources.

Common sense would dictate staying away from EMF, but that's not how industry works.

Simply blasting your brain with microwaves, as so many people like to do now, can produce disease-causing mutations but not as many heritable ones (it depends on where the phone is and for how long when its not pressed to one's head). It sounds like a great way to keep the population under control without totally destroying it, and maybe that is what is really going on.

It may be that the "worry" about cell phones (which doesn't seem to actually influence too many people's behavior) is a distraction from all the lower-energy EMF sources that do the rest of the work of compromising health.

 

[LQB]

The research article link that Laura posted last weekend in the "Life Without Bread" topic presents a rather clear picture of cell metabolism as a series of processes that depend upon organic capacitors and regulated, graduated electrical potentials. It is not hard to imagine how EMF at any frequency in forms that do not exist naturally might be able to throw a monkey wrench into the works, setting the stage for cancer and other diseases. I am particularly concerned about low-frequency high-energy fields, having seen this, but I also see the potential for coupling with high-frequency low-energy sources.

Common sense would dictate staying away from EMF, but that's not how industry works.

Simply blasting your brain with microwaves, as so many people like to do now, can produce disease-causing mutations but not as many heritable ones (it depends on where the phone is and for how long when its not pressed to one's head). It sounds like a great way to keep the population under control without totally destroying it, and maybe that is what is really going on.

It may be that the "worry" about cell phones (which doesn't seem to actually influence too many people's behavior) is a distraction from all the lower-energy EMF sources that do the rest of the work of compromising health.

Thing is when you use a cell phone in a car or other public transportation, you're blasting everyone multiple times due to reflections, and if reception is marginal, then the phone is transmitting at max power. To me, this is inconsiderate of others health conditions - known or unknown. The literature is full of studies that show clearly the detrimental effects of cell/DECT phones and their base stations.

I think you're right, the "controversy" over cell phones provides some cover for the other EMFs in that the "doubt" in people's minds is easily transferred to any mention of the other EMF health threats they live with.

From what I've learned so far, I treat EMF like diet and toxic exposure - they can all work together against health, and the products you choose that contribute to these three areas is important.

 

[mcb]

Thing is when you use a cell phone in a car or other public transportation, you're blasting everyone multiple times due to reflections, and if reception is marginal, then the phone is transmitting at max power. To me, this is inconsiderate of others health conditions - known or unknown. The literature is full of studies that show clearly the detrimental effects of cell/DECT phones and their base stations...

At some point I have to give up and look for ways (if there are any) to improve cellular repair. I have remarked before that if I didn't even carry a cell phone I would still be exposed to all the other ones on public transit (light rail, mostly), but the truth is that that amounts to less than an hour a day exposure, while the exposure from 40 or so cell phones in my office (not counting the three floors below us) continues all day and the reception is even worse than on light rail, making the power levels higher. I can tell by how quickly my own phone's battery drains in different places. (Which reminds me, I need to set it to forward to my office phone during the day--then I can shut down all its radios. I'm going to start doing that right now. Somewhere along the line I lost the habit.)

I have begun taking other steps to reduce EMF in the office (where I go in three days a week) but with all those other phones I am not sure it will make a big difference. Unfortunately, putting in a Faraday cage is not an option. It doesn't meet the guidelines for office decoration.

 

[LQB]

Thing is when you use a cell phone in a car or other public transportation, you're blasting everyone multiple times due to reflections, and if reception is marginal, then the phone is transmitting at max power. To me, this is inconsiderate of others health conditions - known or unknown. The literature is full of studies that show clearly the detrimental effects of cell/DECT phones and their base stations...

At some point I have to give up and look for ways (if there are any) to improve cellular repair. I have remarked before that if I didn't even carry a cell phone I would still be exposed to all the other ones on public transit (light rail, mostly), but the truth is that that amounts to less than an hour a day exposure, while the exposure from 40 or so cell phones in my office (not counting the three floors below us) continues all day and the reception is even worse than on light rail, making the power levels higher. I can tell by how quickly my own phone's battery drains in different places. (Which reminds me, I need to set it to forward to my office phone during the day--then I can shut down all its radios. I'm going to start doing that right now. Somewhere along the line I lost the habit.)

I have begun taking other steps to reduce EMF in the office (where I go in three days a week) but with all those other phones I am not sure it will make a big difference. Unfortunately, putting in a Faraday cage is not an option. It doesn't meet the guidelines for office decoration.

Yeah, the cumulative exposure day-in/day-out is the key. And it really should be summed over all the EMFs. And you don't really know what some of it is unless you measure it.

 

[melatonin]

Im thinking of buying a memory foam mattress, as ive heard its far better than a traditional mattress, what with them not having metal in them.
Is this a worthwhile expense?

 

[LQB]

Im thinking of buying a memory foam mattress, as ive heard its far better than a traditional mattress, what with them not having metal in them.
Is this a worthwhile expense?

The mattress I have is part MF and part air chamber - it was expensive. Years ago I bought a cheap twin-sized one for different uses. After using the cheap one a few times, it began causing a sore throat and clogged sinus. I had to throw it out. The expensive one has been no problem after many years (and is very comfortable). My mother uses a Temperpedic MF and has had no problems. I have read numerous accounts of folks having to return MFs because of the outgassing. So if you get one, buy from a source that will take it back if you have a reaction - it will likely be expensive. I like them for comfort alone but they have the added benefit of no metal. A futon mattress on a wood frame might be a good option.

 

[mcb]

When I was reading Detoxify or Die in 2010, out of curiosity I searched for information about memory foam mattresses -- and Tempur-Pedic in particular because we have one. The search turned up quite a bit of information suggesting that they outgas toxic substances, especially when they are new, and that the Tempur-Pedic brand might be especially problematic in some respects.

We still have ours, but I would not buy a new one. Further research would seem to be called for. I don't recall if I found anything about it in the forum (and I don't have time to check right now).

 

[Sirius]

Yeah, the cumulative exposure day-in/day-out is the key. And it really should be summed over all the EMFs. And you don't really know what some of it is unless you measure it.

And many measuring devices aren't really able to sum the various EMFs correctly and reliably. They will point only to the strongest source.

 

[LQB]

Yeah, the cumulative exposure day-in/day-out is the key. And it really should be summed over all the EMFs. And you don't really know what some of it is unless you measure it.

And many measuring devices aren't really able to sum the various EMFs correctly and reliably. They will point only to the strongest source.

Even the same EMF source may take multiple devices to characterize properly. And then you need to evaluate the risk from each in your environment before you decide what to do. I wrote a pretty big section on this process (as well as instrumentation) in the paper I just finished - I sent it off to the chateau crew to have a look.

 

[LQB]

From the research in the KD thread and the paper: Mitochondrial Energetics
and Therapeutics

This creates a
proton electrochemical gradient (P =  +
μH+), a capacitor that is acidic and positive
in the intermembrane space and negative and
alkaline on the matrix side. The potential energy
stored inP is used for multiple purposes:
(a) to import proteins and Ca2+ into the mitochondrion,
....
render the mitochondrial inner membrane
“leaky” for protons. This short-circuits
the mitochondrial inner-membrane capacitor ...

Alterations in the coupling
efficiency can influence ROS generation,
modulating Ca2+ uptake, and predilection
to apoptosis. ...

... Therefore, perturbation
of the mitochondrial regulation of Ca2+ could
also contribute to the pathophysiology of mitochondrial
disease. ...Hence, loss of
Ca2+ homeostasis should be addressed in certain
mitochondrial disorders...

We do know that AC mag fields will modulate the movement of CA2+ outside the body. Inside the body, this modulation has not been characterized.

The chemical electric field gradients set up by the mtDNA are pretty precise in their ranges so that ROS is controlled and functional balance is maintained. These voltages are in the 100s of mV range but operate over very small distances making the E-field gradient very high. The range of pulsed RF at which chronic symptoms begin to show is about 60mV per meter (120mV over 6 feet). This is very small compared to the mt gradients. But apparently it is the pulsed nature of the RF that carries the greatest effect. This suggests that the field amplitude is less importabt that its instantaneous rate of change.

There is some epidemiological evidence for this. Henshaw has remarked on a study that found no correlation between miscarriage and AC mag fields until they expressed field exposure in terms of its pulsed nature (due to dirty power modulation) at levels as low as .9mG. These dirty power noise components are around 100-500KHz. And these are the same range of rates in many pulsed RF comm signals.