NLBS #34: EMF Sensitivity Syndrome Is Nothing But Junk Science and Misinformation

originally posted by: HRF1965
a reply to: theNLBS

Consider this before you dismiss the effects of electromagnetic fields on biology: the way bone increases mass in areas that are being stressed is to first put out an electromagnetic field that attracts calcium ions. If you think that the presence of competing magnetic fields does not affect this process, think again.

such as calcium efflux?

calcium efflux

originally posted by: HRF1965
a reply to: theNLBS

Consider this before you dismiss the effects of electromagnetic fields on biology: the way bone increases mass in areas that are being stressed is to first put out an electromagnetic field that attracts calcium ions. If you think that the presence of competing magnetic fields does not affect this process, think again.

Actually, the way that works is that bone is piezoelectric. It puts out electric fields under stress that stimulate osteoblasts, and near bone defects the field is larger, due to the discontinuities.

But that's not the same thing as a radio wave. They don't work the same way.

a reply to: Bedlam

so you are saying the emf would stem from the electric field but not that the emf is not present.

That would be an assumption based on limited knowledge of what all emf can do but you may be right of wrong based on current knowledge.

It could be a form of communication where the electric is needed to produce the voice or emf

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

Double blind studies I think you mean.

It's used both ways...

Double-blinded study: A medical study in which both the subjects participating and the researchers are unaware of when the experimental medication or procedure has been given. Double-blinded studies are often used when initial studies shows particular promise.

The testing was non-invasive using surface probes (much like non-invasive EEG probes using conductive gel) on 104 test cases by tech's and myself, so no the cost wasn't too bad.

Cheers - Dave

Right.

Last time I checked, microwave ovens operated at roughly the precession frequency of hydrogen. That's EMF, now you propose that EMF can't really hurt you and it's all junk science (or at least you go along with the OP BS). I wouldn't jury-rig a microwave safety switch, turn it on and have someone stick their head inside for 10 minutes. That's not a long time, do you think you couldn't get too much "exposure" from that, develop cancer, cook your brain?

EMF can be dangerous, it's also the way microwave weapons work, but there are two types, actual heating systems that operate at about 1mm depth that do cause skin cancers and there there are the higher frequency units that operate using an EMF envelope to produce pain through nerve induction (feels like burning, itching and tearing all at the same time).

WiFi, radio phones, cell towers, etc. operate in multiple or fractional wavelengths of the precession frequency of hydrogen, some may fall on the 4/1, 2/1, 1/4, 1/8, etc wavelengths, so should we be concerned just from the uncommon common sense standpoint, not even getting the science involved? I think so, but there is also a large body of evidence that shows that EMF can cause cancers, autoimmune disease and in general damage to organics.

And I haven't even gotten into constructive interference from two separate sources operating at the same frequency that produce "nodes" of higher energy.

If you don't believe so, do some experiments with microwaves or x-rays and plants, hell, use some UV-A and B which is also EMF and can cause blindness. Did you know that 650nm laser at low wattage can cause significant retinal heating, enough to cause temporary or total blindness? Oooopps, that's EMF too.

Sure does seem safe to me /sarcasm off

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

I wouldn't jury-rig a microwave safety switch, turn it on and have someone stick their head inside for 10 minutes. That's not a long time, do you think you couldn't get too much "exposure" from that, develop cancer, cook your brain?

Good to know you wouldn't do that. I wouldn't use a 1000 w WiFi router either. What you're saying is akin to "Don't cook with a gas stove because forest fires are really hot.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

it is proving at the far end of the spectrum that emf waves interact with us and that interaction can be deadly. The question then becomes what level does the effects stop? The answer varies from person to person and depends on the make up of that "energy"

a reply to: deadeyedick

it is proving at the far end of the spectrum that emf waves interact with us and that interaction can be deadly.

By far end of the spectrum do you mean ionizing radiation? Something that microwaves aren't.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

That is very much beside the point of emf sensitivity is real and can kill you

a reply to: deadeyedick

Ok, I'll play. How can "emf sensitivity" kill you?

Do you even know anyone that can successfully determine when they are exposed and when they are not?

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

Last time I checked, microwave ovens operated at roughly the precession frequency of hydrogen.

42.56MHz, 2.45GHz, poTAYto, poTAHto.

That's EMF, now you propose that EMF can't really hurt you and it's all junk science (or at least you go along with the OP BS). I wouldn't jury-rig a microwave safety switch, turn it on and have someone stick their head inside for 10 minutes. That's not a long time, do you think you couldn't get too much "exposure" from that, develop cancer, cook your brain?

Again, as I've said up thread, it's the same thing as climbing into a big oven. Heat is heat. Can stoves burn? Sure. Can microwave ovens? Sure. Can a few hundred mW at a distance? No.

EMF can be dangerous, it's also the way microwave weapons work, but there are two types, actual heating systems that operate at about 1mm depth that do cause skin cancer...

Citation needed

...and there there are the higher frequency units that operate using an EMF envelope to produce pain through nerve induction (feels like burning, itching and tearing all at the same time).

And, what is an "EMF envelope"?

...but there is also a large body of evidence that shows that EMF can cause cancers, autoimmune disease and in general damage to organics.

Then surely you can post some reasonable examples. By reasonable, I mean not educate yourself and the like.

And I haven't even gotten into constructive interference from two separate sources operating at the same frequency that produce "nodes" of higher energy.

If they're coherent, maybe. Random uncorrelated RF, not so much, eh?

If you don't believe so, do some experiments with microwaves or x-rays and plants, hell, use some UV-A and B which is also EMF and can cause blindness. Did you know that 650nm laser at low wattage can cause significant retinal heating, enough to cause temporary or total blindness? Oooopps, that's EMF too.

Ionizing, non-ionizing, poTAYto, poTAHto.

Low level non-ionizing EMF, no issue. If you think it is, show some repeatable, non-ambiguous studies.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: deadeyedick



Ok, I'll play. How can "emf sensitivity" kill you?



Do you even know anyone that can successfully determine when they are exposed and when they are not?

Indeed you are playing.

one word out of place and you would think that that makes emf safe.

a reply to: deadeyedick

The difference between ionizing and non-ionizing is not trivial. You need to stop treating "EMF" as a single entity.

How can "emf sensitivity" kill you? Be as specific as you can.

ETA: However, lack of EMF (light), in a stairway for example, can kill you.

Injured white rabbits in New Zealand were exposed to an alternating electromagnetic field for 12 hours per day (72 Hz, 380 usec duration, 2 gauss, 1.4 mV/cm bone). These rabbits showed an increase in the rate of re-vascularization and bone remodeling of the femoral head. The study found that “in both the descriptive and quantitative analyses, an increased vasculature associated with PEMF exposure occurred in the early stages of circulatory recovery.” These rabbits actually recovered faster when exposed to an electromagnetic field at 72 Hz.[vii]

www.lymebook.com...

The science on the issue is the biggest load of crap i have ever seen. Just google can emf kill. you will see that unlike just about every other topic science has ever covered everything about this is being withheld except select sites that will never be taken serious. It is likely that any decent research into this has been scrubbed.

So in order to get to the truth perhaps reversing the search to "Is emf a health benefit" you will see that there is an effort and some science that exist stating emf is healthy. From there it is not hard to understand that if our bodies respond positivly to certain emf then it will also respond negativly to other forms of emf.

the cover up is so in your face it is crazy.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
The science on the issue is the biggest load of crap i have ever seen. Just google can emf kill.

A Rife machine website? Really?

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: deadeyedick



The difference between ionizing and non-ionizing is not trivial. You need to stop treating "EMF" as a single entity.



How can "emf sensitivity" kill you? Be as specific as you can.

being sensitive to something can not kill you. that was a typo. however being exposed to something you are sensitive too can kill you. The test are not there but sensitivity works both ways. it can be good or bad. so the post above starts to show that possibly there is a communication going on in our cells that we do not understand yet. or are hiding?

a reply to: Bedlam

Did you read the post?

They only cited a study i did not track the study down.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Bedlam

Did you read the post?

Yah, it was immediately surrounded by hogwash about Rife machines.

Well, it was stated in the OP and by many who replied that there exists no evidence that EMF has any negative or harmful physiological effect. It took 3 minutes to find this paper, along with many more I still have to look at. I'll post them after reviewing them if anyone is interested.

Provocation study using heart rate variability shows microwave radiation from 2.4 GHz cordless phone affects autonomic nervous system

Source- 2010 M.Havas, et al: Eu J Oncology Library Vol.5

Conclusion- "This study provides scientific evidence that some individuals may experience arrhythmia, heart palpitations, heart flutter, or rapid heartbeat and/or vasovagal symptoms such as dizziness, nausea, profuse sweating and syncope when exposed to electromagnetic devices. It is the first study to demonstrate such a dramatic response to pulsed MW radiation at 0.5% of existing federal guidelines (1000 microW/cm2) in both Canada and the US."

originally posted by: Quantum Logic...to pulsed MW radiation at 0.5% of existing federal guidelines (1000 microW/cm2) in both Canada and the US."

And yet, wifi routers have energy densities something like 7 orders of magnitude less at 3 meters distance.

And you might want to pick a better study...

A very recent study by Dr. Magda Havas et al. sharply contradicts accepted studies on electrohypersensitivity (EHS). This study purports to show that the heart rate of electrosensitive subjects is subject to dramatic increases in the presence of EMF from a cordless phone (see Provocation study using heart rate variability). On her web site, Havas states that this study was published “in the peer-reviewed European Journal of Oncology Library Vol. 5 2010”. Upon investigation it turns out that this impressive sounding journal is actually an internal publication of the Ramazzini Institute. This organization is the source of discredited claims that the artificial sweetener aspartame is a dangerous carcinogen. These studies have been widely criticized for serious flaws in methodology in the scientific community, and are not accepted. Not all scientific journals are of equal weight.

linky

It is obvious what you have done and continue to do since the beginning of this thread, Bedlam. I am not interested in debating with one who tows the line of big business, which obviously has a vested interest in silencing anyone who attempts to show the truth concerning the health effects of many of the things in our society today since it would greatly cut into their profits.

You can keep your sacred cow, and I'll continue on my way elsewhere. Cognitive dissonance seems to rule ATS now.