How computer and phone EMF signals affect our blood

originally posted by: Jakal26
...........
Here is a pdf of a "double blind peer reviewed study" (their claim, not mine) published in the European Journal of Oncology LIbrary Vol 5 2010.

“Provocation Study using Heart Rate Variability shows Radiation from 2.4 GHz Cordless Phone affects Autonomic Nervous System.”

...for any that are interested.

There's a number of problems with that paper, although it's one the anti-EMF crowd love.

eta: Enjoy while I go out and do the grocery shopping!

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

There is a ton of disparaging info out there on her. Seems a lot of people think since she's a botanist, she has no business even commenting on EMF radiation, much less publishing studies on it.

Many of the skeptic's comments don't actually debunk or disprove her studies. They'll just say "she isn't doing the study properly." I'll admit, some of their arguments are good.

Many Americans discount European studies, as we've seen.
How's this for conflicting info:

Cell phones linked to brain tumors.

Cell phones don't cause cancer.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

There is a ton of disparaging info out there on her. Seems a lot of people think since she's a botanist, she has no business even commenting on EMF radiation, much less publishing studies on it.

Well, it's a bit like me writing studies on tobacco with a physics degree. Although I'd say you will get better results with physicists or engineers writing botany than you will with a botanist writing physics.

a reply to: Bedlam

I don't know if they have or haven't been.

Perhaps I asked the question in the wrong fashion. I understood already why a botanist might not have the knowledge she claims to have. Was attempting "balance" I suppose. Lots can be learned "in the field" over years time....

Anyways, thanks for the link, reading a bit of it now.

originally posted by: ColeYounger

Many Americans discount European studies, as we've seen.

I note you haven't brought up that the European Journal of Oncology is actually not a real journal, but an internal publication of the Ramazzini Institute. It's sort of like an anti-meat screed published by the CSPI, written by a CSPI writer under the name of a journal that's also run from inside CSPI.

a reply to: Bedlam

Don't know much about them other than they were at odds with the American Cancer Institute over aspartime supposedly causing cancer. Thanks for the info.

a reply to: Jakal26

The "journal" that published that is not a real pub, it's an in-house journal from Ramazzini Institute. Which is not renowned for its quality. They're one of those advocacy groups like CSPI or PCRM, that publish 'studies' under the guise of being good science, but somehow always have crappy controls, or funky data, or poor stats, or too small a group, but always show that eating meat, eggs, or dairy is evil.

Which seems great until you find out PCRM and CSPI are PETA in drag.

Ramazzini always has some study or other showing the evils of EM or Splenda or the like,but always are being taken to task for crappy errors.

If you want to show that something causes cancer and it's trendy, RI is your soapbox.

a reply to: ColeYounger

The only problem I really see is that if what she suggests is true, you'd see noticeable life-span decreases in major urban centers where Wi-Fi is everywhere, everyone has the newest smartphones, and unlike rural areas which typically only have one or two cell phone carriers even available, all the major carriers and several small carriers run full 4G/LTE Data over the airwaves. Surely if the study had any merit, we'd be seeing life-expectancy numbers dropping in urban areas.

Take where I live for example, Tokyo. If you want to talk EMF pollution, never has there been a more wretched hive of scum and EMF villany than in Tokyo. I literally can't go somewhere in Tokyo where I don't get a wifi signal. Dozens of cell-phone carriers pump varied frequencies of EM waves all over the place. Power lines are literally everywhere, and absolutely EVERYONE under age 65 constantly has their noses to their smartphones pretty much 24/7. Yet, here in Japan we have some of the highest life-expectancy numbers of any civilized nation. Hell, Japanese Women top the global life-expectancy charts, and they spend 90% of their lives attached to their cell phone. I've seen Japanese Youth have full blown crying screaming panic attacks if they think they've lost their precious iDevice for even a moment.

But the data doesn't seem to support the narrative of EHS or what-have-you. Sure, some people are able hear certain frequencies others cannot. I used to be able to tell if one of those old tube TV's was on in someone's house before I even got to their door because I could "hear" it. I digress. She has interesting ideas, I'd be really interested if some other sciencey-type person heeded her call to arms though, an expert on EM radiation for example, saying "This lady knows her stuff".

I see a few people arguing here. The fact is that the signals can cause blood cells to take on a charge and when they get a charge, they stick together. The Doctors information is correct, but it would not apply if the charge is lessened on the blood cells if they are working correctly. Yes, electric waves can charge up blood to get attracted to each other, there are actually a couple of research articles I read on that about a year ago, they were on NIH. Now, I had never thought of applying this info to cell phone signals but this does sound reasonable that it can do that.

This woman just shows something, maybe she could not identify the exact reason because she did not have the precise knowledge to do so.

a reply to: rickymouse


I noticed earlier you mentioned sulfur intake. I was doing more research, and found some info by an MD who specializes
in treating people who were exposed to heavy metals and chemical toxins. He mentioned how exposure to constant
EMF and RF was a growing concern. He said one of his recommendations in the first line of defense was to take MSM for its sulfur. It's really inexpensive. Some people had miraculous results while others got nothing. It's weird how supplements seem to work that way.

MSM miracle?

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
It is bully mentality against anyone that claims to be sensitive to EMF.

Even ATS. Look at the NLB banner. The feeling sorry for herself meme pic to make fun of those that are sensitive to EMF. I have no Idea if it is bad for me or not but don't tell me I can't feel it. I have not clicked on a NLBS thread since I saw that banner because it is just so pathetic.

You know about the 'video' ATS did was actually (and just from reading the comments - I don't watch the videos) about the gizmos sold to protect you from EMF and not whether EMF effected the body of which there is considerable evidence as our OP points out.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

EMF is considerablly more then cell-phones and cell-towers. It includes the electrical wiring of your home, all of your electrical appliances and gizmos, your auto, high power lines, 'return to ground' current running through the ground to return to substations, wireless utility monitors, micro-wave communication - and then there are the military applications ELF and HAARP to name the two I know of. Any thing that uses electricity produces Electro-Magnetic Fields. It's just become so ubiqious with the all the wireless doohickies.

Interesting. In my experience, from what I've read, and from what I've heard from others, it appears to affect mainly the neurological system, but it's all biologically interconnected anyway, there could very well be an effect on blood.

originally posted by: rickymouse
I see a few people arguing here. The fact is that the signals can cause blood cells to take on a charge and when they get a charge, they stick together.

Radio waves cannot in any way convey charge. It can't charge OR discharge anything. Is THAT what she's saying? If so, it's way more bogus than I was expecting.

The Doctors information is correct, but it would not apply if the charge is lessened on the blood cells if they are working correctly. Yes, electric waves can charge up blood to get attracted to each other, there are actually a couple of research articles I read on that about a year ago, they were on NIH. Now, I had never thought of applying this info to cell phone signals but this does sound reasonable that it can do that.

You need to find and re-read those NIH papers, because not only can radio NOT carry a charge or affect the charge state of anything, but blood cells are immersed in a fine conductive salt solution. A static charge couldn't form.

There is absolutely no doubt that EMF fields affect living tissue.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

"Substantial, deleterious biochemical changes were observed in oxidative stress metabolism after EMF exposure. Antioxidant enzyme activity, glutathione levels in lymphoid organs and the antioxidant capacity of the plasma decreased, but lipid peroxidation and nitric oxide levels in PMNs and plasma and also myeloperoxidase activity in PMNs increased. Oxidative damage was tissue specific and improvements seen after the recovery period were limited, especially in immature rats."

www.mobilfunkstudien.org...

a reply to: ColeYounger

MSM is a good sulfur compound that can help stop the bloodcells from sticking together. This problem with blood sticking together, a problem with an attraction of blood cells can come from many things. The charge is because of an attraction caused by ionization of blood cells. The reason I started to research this is because of what I read about agglutination in the blood type diet book. This charge is created by eating certain types of foods too. I am not sure if antioxidents actually help this problem but certain sulfur compounds do. Many medicines either use nitrogen compounds or sulfur compounds to fix problems in the body. I studied how the attraction worked and it is because of a certain charge caused by a certain ionization that is natural in the body. It forms via chemicals usually when we get a cut. It is extremely complex on how it exactly works but the basics are all I needed to learn. I ran into things like radio waves or electromagnetics possibly making this charge on the sites I visited. But no matter, the prevention is the same, certain sulfur compounds can neutralize this. The problem is that too much and if you get cut you can bleed without the blood coagulating. This can also be a problem. If the body does not process the extra sulfur right, it can lead to headaches and problems with breathing sometime, it is important that the body has adequate intake and can utilize the mineral that forms sulfite oxidase.

a reply to: Bedlam

Yeah, and I suppose you have read a lot of research articles on this. I have read at least a hundred articles on the way sulfur works in the body and blood. Also how it works in dish soap and the chemicals they use in sewage plants. Do you even know what actually causes the attraction of blood cells and causes the agglutination when you get cut? Do you know what actually causes glue to stick? It all has to do with an attraction caused by a kind of charge or ionization. This is not only caused by chemicals, adding energy from any sort, including heat or any other frequencies effects these things. Sound can break bonds or can strengthen bonds as can any frequency.

If everyday wifi/cell phone EMF are proven to cause certain physical or mental conditions (and I have no doubt they will be) in even a small percentage of people, --say an increase in the incidence of some cancer, or clots, or psychiatric disorders---the pay-out from the makers/producers/sellers of same will be absolutely enormous.

The threat of financial loss to many, including some of our posters, would likely be such that they would deny such effects existence to the grave.

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: Bedlam

Yeah, and I suppose you have read a lot of research articles on this.

Not only that, I do work all the livelong day with radio. Radio does not and cannot convey charge. Ever. Nor can sound.

... adding energy from any sort, including heat or any other frequencies effects these things. Sound can break bonds or can strengthen bonds as can any frequency.

Radio is not sound. Sound is not radio. "frequencies" isn't a proper noun. I can't throw a handful of frequency at you. It only has meaning if there's a "frequency of what" in there, explicit or implicit, because all frequency means is how often something cyclic occurs in a unit of time.

Sound is non-ionizing. Radio, until you get EM up in the UV range is also not ionizing. Even if you use gammas on something, and knock electrons off, you still have no net charge, nor can the EM convey charge, or take it away.

a reply to: Tusks

Hey, that is one of the NIH articles I read a while back. Nice find.