Effects of EMF on the human body

Human beings are bioelectrical systems. Our hearts and brains are regulated by internal bioelectrical signals. Environmental exposures to artificial EMFs can interact with fundamental biological processes in the human body. In some cases, this may cause discomfort, or sleep disruption, or loss of wellbeing (impaired mental functioning and impaired metabolism) or sometimes, maybe it is a dread disease like cancer or Alzheimer’s disease.

BioInitiative 2012

2.4 GHz wifi, 4.8 60 GHz wigig right on attenuation mark of (excites) free O2

“6 GHz, in (this) region we are finding the body is most sensitive.”

There's a clear cell phone-cancer link, but FDA is downplaying it

“SAR is 10 to 12 higher than human sensitivity. SAR is a concept devised to distract science from the real targets, and for decades it has done a great job” of distraction.

( Russia has entirely different attitude to radiation: levels allowed are 1000 times less than in the USA.)


Vienna Medical Association's 10 Medical Rules for EMF-sensitive patients

Dr Andrew PT Tresidder, Should NHS premises provide free access to wi-fi?

Affected people experience symptoms from exposure to RF transmissions, which include headaches, brain fogThe loss of intellectual functions such as reasoning; memory loss; and other neurological abilities that is severe enough to interfere with daily functioning., inability to think clearly, speech disturbance, palpitations, sleep disturbance, epistaxis, fatigue, dizziness, vertigo, odd pains and tinglings in limbs - and interestingly ants exposed to wifi lose their ability to forage and die, amongst other creatures affected by non-thermal effects. Prevalence in the population is estimated at 3-5%, mainly undiagnosed.

Unfortunately, there is a common misperception that this is due to a nocebo effect - but the sham used in some trials was actually biologically active. CFS/ME and the Gulf War syndrome were both initially thought to be psychological disturbances by some investigators, since disproved.

The Austrian Medical Association has published guidelines on the topic EMF guidelines (Austria)

Current UK safety limits for RF are based upon the flawed misapprehension that non-thermal = non-harmful, and at present there are no plans to review this. Basically, if it doesn’t start to cook you in six minutes, it’s safe…..

It has been known for well over 30 years that there are non-thermal (signal) effects of RF.

Non-thermal biological effects of exposure to RF (microwave) signal include increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier, failure of repair of DNA breaks, heat shock protein synthesis, cellular calcium efflux, sympathetic upregulation and others. RF is currently classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Class 2b possible carcinogen. Other research shows adverse effects on semen quality amongst other biological effects.

History tells us that technological advance ALWAYS precedes safety considerations in all industries (see use of car safety belts, Xrays and asbestos for example), and the rollout of 24 hour transmitting wifi, cordless phones, and other technology has been on the presumption of no harm.

Meters and mobiles

lorenzo “California knew smart meters were dangerous California knew...

It is unfortunate that transmitting technology is so useful, and so widespread - because this leads us all to believe that it cannot be harmful. However, in the insurance industry Lloyds of London have withdrawn health liability cover for wifi routers.

You could ask them to move it, or replace it with an mechanical meter. Show them the sleeping cap and tell them you now know you are electrosensitive. You never know what their response will be. See what they say. Trudy got hers removed (in Arizona) (without a fee).

2016 study links mobile-device-addiction to depression

Lleras and Panova surveyed over 300 university students with questionnaires that addressed the students' mental health, amount of cellphone and Internet use, and motivations for turning to their electronic devices.

further study

First, they evaluated responses to a questionnaire about technology use and emotions, which was completed by 318 undergraduates.

Then, to examine cellphone use in a stressful situation, the team asked 72 students to spend five minutes writing about a personal flaw or weakness that made them uncomfortable.

people in their 40s increasingly developing dementia.

Neurodegeneration 1)

Non-thermal microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) act via voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) activation. Calcium channel blockers block EMF effects and several types of additional evidence confirm this mechanism. Low intensity microwave EMFs have been proposed to produce neuropsychiatric effects, sometimes called microwave syndrome, and the focus of this review is whether these are indeed well documented and consistent with the known mechanism(s) of action of such EMFs. VGCCs occur in very high densities throughout the nervous system and have near universal roles in release of neurotransmitters and neuroendocrine hormones

Warning signs

Among the more commonly reported changes are sleep disturbance/insomnia, headache, depression/depressive symptoms, fatigue/tiredness, dysesthesia, concentration/attention dysfunction, memory changes, dizziness, irritability, loss of appetite/body weight, restlessness/anxiety, nausea, skin burning/tingling/dermographism and EEG changes. In summary, then, the mechanism of action of microwave EMFs, the role of the VGCCs in the brain, the impact of non-thermal EMFs on the brain, extensive epidemiological studies performed over the past 50 years, and five criteria testing for causality, all collectively show that various non-thermal microwave EMF exposures produce diverse neuropsychiatric effects.


The increased social and public interest in this subject, based on the epidemiological data associating the extra risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), childhood leukemia, adult brain cancer, and miscarriage with the EMFs exposure of the power line radiation [3–9], prompted the World Health Organization (WHO) Report (2007) and WHO Environmental Health Criteria (EHC) Report (2007) to issue precautions against the ELF-EMFs

cancer risk Using a cell phone for an hour a day increases cancer risk by 500%, study shows.

How to use a cell phone

guidelines for cell phone use:

1. Never carry a cell phone on your person or in your pocket. Always have it in a separate bag.

2. Keep cell phone in airplane mode except when actually being used.

3. Never use a cell phone when a landline is available.

4. Do not use a cell phone as a primary method of communication. Give out your land line number and not your cell phone number for incoming calls to minimize the number of calls to the cell phone.

5. Do not use the cell phone for any purpose other than making emergency calls.

6. Wear a protective clothing device over your head when using a cell phone.

Our response has appeared on the website of 'Safe Tech for Schools, Maryland.' safe technology

An Interview with Nobel-laureate Devra Davis, who was traveling around Australia at the time. effects of mobile phone use on male fertility, on children and on unborn babies in the womb I just love the hands-free headset for her telephone: Here is a presentation she made at the University of Melbourne The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation

The Israeli Psoriasis Association is selling retro handsets to its members to make them aware of RF dangers: Israeli text

Nyima Another public health scientist speaks out: Cell Phones, Brain Cancer and Public Health

San Jose Mercury News carries an article which states (inter alia) that cell towers on a school gym are a radiation hazard. “The cell tower brings radiation to the campus that's the first thing, and the [building] safety issue as well,” said Jenny Yuan, parent of a sophomore at the high school. “We're talking about the safety issues with the building because we already talked to the district about radiation and they ignored that.” cell towers on a school gym

kids developing Diabetes: Article: kids developing diabetes Paper: Glycated Hemoglobin and type 2 diabetes So we knew that the brain controls blood sugar.

From M P Study Site

Prof. Marshall replies to someone whose outdoor seating is impacted by close neighbour You really can't afford to be sitting within 10 ft of a smart meter. The front of ours is directed at our neighbors (by the installer) and the inside of the wall behind the meter is painted with yShield, which also stops the cellphone signals which were getting in through the electrical panel.

davidmac (Hoffer) An important paper on how Electosmog Influences autoimmune disease can be found here at pubmed: Electrosmog impacts autoimmune response It's not unreasonable to conclude that the nationwide rollout of 5G will likely contribute to an epidemic of autoimmune diseases and a further deterioration of those already battling such diseases.

TM Posted: Tue May 31st, 2016 02:34 “I have been reading the literature from the first half of the 20th century and the mechanisms for EMF damage are well-documented, but just ignored. Frohlich pointed out that the human eye is capable of detecting just one photon of non-ionizing radiation, for example. Photosynthesis is similarly a very sensitive molecular process.

You have all seen the mechanism for biological damage – those atoms bobbing around in my molecular dynamics emulations (such as this one: Activation of the human VDR by Olmesartan ).

Lorentz determined in the 19th century that moving charges had a force exerted on them by an electromagnetic field, and this was one of the pillars of Einstein's initial “Special Theory of Relativity.” Once you really start to research the literature there is nothing new or complex here… unless you put your head in the sand…”

TM Posted: Mon Jun 20th, 2016 22:48 “William Bise reported that Human Biology was sensitive to RF at very low levels.1 He reported in 1977 that human EEG was affected below -80dBm. He also reported headaches induced at -60dBm.

I was skeptical of his numbers until I reproduced similar results with the CWS and shielded clothing. Recently I found he had been an RF Engineer for 14 years prior to his study, so I now trust his measured values …I have located a copy of testimony that he gave to a Senate committee in 1978 about his studies which give even more detail about his equipment and subjects. His submission starts on page 3 here: Senate hearing on Radiation Health and Safety 95th Congress

Biological activity

Effects of 5G in Costa del Sol illustrated by pensioner

Abstract biological activity of low-intensity R F radiation

Analysis of the currently available peer-reviewed scientific literature reveals molecular effects induced by low-intensity RFR in living cells; this includes significant activation of key pathways generating reactive oxygen species (ROS), activation of peroxidation, oxidative damage of DNA and changes in the activity of antioxidant enzymes.

It indicates that among 100 currently available peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, in general, 93 confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems.

A wide pathogenic potential of the induced ROS and their involvement in cell signaling pathways explains a range of biological/health effects of low-intensity RFR, which include both cancer and non-cancer pathologies. 3)

On the basis of two decades of epidemiological studies, an increased risk for childhood leukemia associated with Extremely Low Frequency fields has been consistently assessed, inducing the International Agency for Research on Cancer to insert them in the 2B section of carcinogens in 2001.

Care should be taken to avoid methodological limitations and to determine the patho-physiological relevance of any alteration found in EMFs-exposed biological system. 4)


Rico Articles from Canada … baby monitors

health experts

TM Dr Oz suggests “Why Cell Phones Could Cause Cancer in Kids” kids

Mike I linked to this article: Researchers suggest link between solar storms and incidences of RA and GCA solar storms The reason was that it seemed to indicate that for RA, there is no safe manmade RF EMF level as RF signal strength from these solar storms is really low. Further, these storms are brief, so my thinking was that it wasn't actually the storms, but the state of the sun where the solar cycle RF signal was at its highest. In other words, natural background RF when it cycles higher correlates with RA, and that level is so many orders of magnitude lower than manmade RF.

A conference was held in Brussels two weeks ago which I just couldn't get to. The abstracts book is now online, however, with some very interesting papers on MCS and EHS, along with Bios of many key players in Electrohypersensitivity…

Paris Appeal 2015

MP3 audio of the presentations is now online at: MP3 audio TM Jun 2015

A major point too is that the insurance industry has protected themselves from EHS liability. If ever there was a warning sign to industry, that would be it, Mike

Another article from India. The Financial Express. disguised pollution

and reports

TM “Parliamentary report warns cellphones, Wi-Fi a serious health issue

A project of the National Institute of Building Sciences

IEQ Indoor Environmental Quality page 11 For people who are electromagnetically sensitive, the presence of cell phones and towers, portable telephones, computers, fluorescent lighting, unshielded transformers and wiring, battery re-chargers, wireless devices, security and scanning equipmen t, microwave ovens, electric ranges and numerous other electrical appliances can make a building inaccessible.

The National Institute for Occupati onal Safety and Health (NIOSH) notes that scientific studies have raised questions about the possible health effects of EMF’s. NIOSH recommends the following measures for those wanting to reduce EMF exposure – informing workers and employers about possible hazards of magnetic fields, increasing workers’ distance from EMF sources, using low-EMF designs wherever possible (e.g., for layout of office power supplies), and reducing EMF exposure times

Ron “use of mobile phones can be related to the early spontaneous abortions” spontaneous abortions

Mike June 24, 2015 7:10 pm “The hotel that lets you kill the internet” Finally, some sanity

Markt posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2015 12:34 Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans low exposure tumour

Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications Volume 459, Issue 4, 17 April 2015, Pages 585–590 animal cancer from RF

…Complicating matters even further, lower doses were often found to be more effective tumor promoters than higher levels; …“

Birds and bees affected by towers

threat to key ecosystem service

What is going on...

Does electromagnetic hypersensitivity originate from nocebo responses? 5) “Overall, symptoms appear before subjects start questioning effects of EMF on their health, which is not consistent with the hypothesis that IEI-EMF originates from nocebo responses to perceived EMF exposure.”

nocebo effect debunked Paisley

Markt Something interesting is going on here. Solar activity at birth predicted infant survival and women's fertility in historical Norway Published 7 January 2015.DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2014.2032 child survival we show that solar activity (total solar irradiance) at birth decreased the probability of survival to adulthood for both men and women. On average, the lifespans of individuals born in a solar maximum period were 5.2 years shorter than those born in a solar minimum period.

AND sick trees Study finds Wi-Fi makes trees sick A study from the Netherlands indicated radio waves affect the growth of many trees.

A new (free) e-Book from Norm Alster, of the ethics department at Harvard University, is available here: ethics.

An article of summary can be found here: institutional corruption

UK smart meters to cost a lot of money. As the sub-heading says, this is “spybox-tech” and cost seems immaterial these days…

rising costs

Opting out

States Increasingly Allowing Opt-out From Smart Meters States begin to allow opting out from 'smart meters'

Cairo “However, many places charge a meter reading fee.”

Wi-fi in schools

A pre-cautionary approach

…..concerned about the combined effects of WiFi and mycotoxins in water damaged classrooms because research suggests that EMF induce Mold growth; and we don't really know what happens to biotoxins when they're exposed to EMF. Studies and reports can inform schools about the potential risks of radiation exposure and the need for a precautionary approach, especially with little children.

Jo Williams July 28, 2016

Study of Adolescents’ Memory Performance

mold and yeast growth - the evidence.

Exposure to RF-EMFR Generated by Mobile Phone Base Stations with Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

CHILDREN'S respite centre closing its doors after appeals failed to avoid an NBN tower being built nearby.

Parents Petition To Remove School Cell Tower in Ripon School District After Two Students Develop Cancer

Lawsuit started under Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). “US Boarding School Sued For WiFi-Related ADA Violations” The filed documents are here, and I recommend reading Appendix A, indeed, you might want to print the letters in it for your friends and family. 12 yr old sues What I found most interesting was the letter from the EPA at page 43, saying that EPA had originated the FCC's definition of 'safety' but had supplied their opinion “with reservations.” That could make a huge difference in the courts, since that language has disappeared from the FCC and Industry assurances of safety. Unfortunately the documents originally attached to the EPA letter, the two 'enclosures' from EPA to FCC, are missing from the filing. If anybody can find a copy of these I would be most appreciative.

[Here are the two documents I am looking for, listed on page 43 of the WiFi lawsuit. If anybody can help me find these enclosures, EPA advice to FCC, I would be very happy indeed Enclosures: 1) letter to Thomas P. Stanley, Chief Engineer, Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal Communications Commission, November 9,1993, in response to the FCC's request for comments on their Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation

2) June 1999 letter to Mr. Richard Tell, Chair, IEEE SCC28 (SC4) Risk Assessment Work Group from the Radiofrequency Radiation Interagency Work Group\ I believe this may be the letter to Thomas Stanley: exhibit-a

And to Richard Tell: litigation

TM More info on the School being sued in Massachusetts. school sued


TM Watch the video, it is well-done: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/01/12/bay-area-radiation-cell-towers-wireless-industry/

TM “It will be interesting to see Google's response to this warning, as Google would seem to be legally exposed to lawsuits from parents of students, since Google provides the wireless devices to the Schools, and they are not tested as safe in this usage. I suspect at the very least Google will immediately notify the schools that eminent Physicians have raised question about the safety of the 'Expeditions Pioneer Program'. Schools don't really want any more worries on the WiFi front, so it will be particularly interesting to follow this development.” Children as guinea pigs

Shielding brain

Former Clinton administration health and disease prevention adviser Dr Devra Davis told the program that for many years she believed mobile phones were harmless but began questioning the science behind this belief several years ago.

Now she believes they are carcinogenic.

“My colleagues and I since then, some of whom have worked at the World Health Organisation with me in the past, have just published an article saying mobile phone radiation is a probable human carcinogen with newer studies showing that people who begin to use cell phones regularly and heavily as teenagers have four to eight times more malignant glioma — that’s a brain tumour — 10 years later,” the US cancer epidemiologist says in the program. “The Interphone study was carried out from 2000-2004.

“The results were supposed to be released in 2005. It took five years to release the results of the Interphone study, and it was not because the science wasn’t clear, it was because of the intense politics that took place between members of the team, some of whom had been heavily sponsored by industry, and others of whom were more independent.

“The bulk of the study said the results were inconclusive. The actual findings, in technical appendix 2, showed there was a significantly increased risk of brain cancer in the heaviest users.”

Shielding the brain and brain-stem is the most important remediation we can do.

Trevor Marshall, PhD


So, the most important thing is to pop a protective cap on before you answer the cellphone.

When planning to make a call, use the best headset available, Anti radiation earphone or if none is available, the cap pictured of protective metallic thread

inside the skull

As far as the brain goes, the skull cavity is resonant between 1GHz and 3.5GHz. I once saw an attenuation vs frequency curve (for TEM) which showed attenuation through the brain rising rapidly beyond 3.5Ghz, and falling below 1GHz, but you can calculate the structure size to anticipate something going on there.

As the frequency drops it is hard for the body to intercept so much signal as at microwaves. TV and FM are still a problem, but a different problem. AM? Well, the amplitudes are so high around a 50,000 watt transmitter…

I am sure that peak pulse amplitude is important, as well as a continuous nature for the pulses, so as to reduce the ability of our body's signaling to squeeze a signal in between the pulses.

The body's sensitivity changes as the IP is dealt with.

The analysis is simple for an RF engineer. You have the shape, roughly spherical, and you have the size, roughly 1 wavelength at 2.4 GHz, and you have a dielectric constant for the brain. This has been worked on before by the radar people, decades ago, who concluded that the frequencies currently used by 3G, 4G and WiFi were too dangerous to be used for Radar :)

- Trevor Marshall

Mike, I am hoping that the sleeping caps provide enough protection to trigger symptoms in most who are sensitive. 'Felling something' is key to beginning a personal understanding, IMO.

I do think the 'winter hats' will protect pretty well. Just on case I need extra protection, I carry my 'sleeping hat' in my pocket when traveling (the new lightweight #78 fabric is really compact).

What I am seeing is that sleep is key. I am interested in replicating your sleeping bag in the heavier (stronger) fabrics. I am exploring an idea similar to wearing a sleeping cap, a hoodie over the top of the cap and protecting the upper body, and a bag protecting the torso and legs. We have to find something that is rugged, as well as effective, and I think that would do the job. Now to find a seamstress that can design and sew a good comfortable sleeping-hoodie together :)

..Trevor.. ps: I think the reason you needed gaps in your clothing was because the IP really ramps up as the shielding becomes more effective. We have now put Aluminum on the other end of our attic space, and the lowered levels, even in the bedroom (currently below -70dBm) really causes an IP spike. It is all quite amazing, really… I built an amplifier to boost signals in front of the Cornet, and am reading down to about -80dBm now.

- Trevor Marshall


The body's response to low levels of RF seems to occur in steps. As we quieten our environment, the immune sensitivity increases down to below -90dBm (the value on my slides in St Petersburg). There may be steps below this, I don't know yet. But I am getting firmer in setting -65dBm (on a Cornet) as the target level below which the immune system first starts to reactivate…

What I think is happening to the Biology is that any level of environmental RF above about -80dBm (measured at your brain) incrementally shuts down parts of your immune system. By the time you get to -60dBm that immune capability is fully shut down. Then there is no further change until about -35dBm, where the immediate, disorienting, effects start to occur.

- Trevor

The reason that Science has found it difficult to measure any specific threshold at which Biology becomes affected by microwave radiation is that there is no real 'threshold'. Damage begins at the very low levels near Boltzmann thermal noise - lower than we can easily measure - and the interference with protein and molecular interactions increases as the photon flux increases (as the field strength increases). At an Electrosmog level equal to the Bioinitiative 2012 recommendation of -47dBm, a flux of around 5 million microwave photons is passing through our bodies. Each microwave photon only carries an energy of a few micro electron Volts (ueV), but cumulatively they have enough energy to upset nearly all human metabolism.

Human proteins are resonant, this paper shows that this resonance is what is most easily disturbed by the microwave photon flux. This resonance explains why certain types of signals with fast-varying frequency content (such as pulsed 4G signals) are more disruptive than continuous wave signals. This is why the therapeutic microwave medical devices (from Eastern Europe) often use a noise-based millimetre signal source rather than continuous waves. Our CWS uses continuous waves. Maybe that is why it seems to be not so immune-disruptive, with primarily a neurological impact?

- Trevor Marshall

EM energy is proportional to frequency. Is this true for the bioeffect as well? I think the answer is probably 'yes'. FM and TV were present for decades without the really dangerous surges in chronic disease which we have seen in recent decades.

If we adjust just for the frequency component of EM energy, then 10log(f1/f2) would be the most likely factor (IMO). So an FM radio signal at 100MHz would require 14dB extra signal strength to be the same energy as WiFi at 2450MHz, for example.

So if -65dBm is your WiFi bio-sensitivity threshold, -51dBm would be the FM radio threshold. A station at -58dBm should not present a major problem.

Please tell me if I am wrong, based on your own personal observations of bioeffect :)

- Trevor Marshall

Based on my model for “moving charges=waves” both the instantaneous exposure, and the accumulated exposure, do harm to the body's proteins. You should seek to minimize both.

Human proteins are continuously in motion. Hydrogen bonds articulate particularly energetic motions, in the picosecond time range. The count of hydrogen bonds in a typical protein varies as a function of time, with 'resonance' down to the GHz microwave range. Moving charges give rise to waves. The principle of reciprocity says that moving charges will be responsive to waves they create. The only issues under dispute are what sensitivity is the response to external waves, and how do waves reach the molecules inside a human body. Since the motions of hydrogen bonds are underdamped, the sensitivity is likely high.

- Trevor Marshall

From: Prof Trevor Marshall Date: 2015-12-02 22:23:15 Respond here to MP Study site

'Healthy' people (40% of the population) really don't notice any effect at amplitudes below -20dBm. There are slips in cognition, balance, etc, but until the level gets really high their bodies can repair the damage pretty quickly. Those who have mild disease cannot correlate the additional symptoms with the presence of the waves, but they are being affected. There is a heck of a lot of Ambien being prescribed at the moment :) Obesity is epidemic. The elderly have balance troubles.

Now does it affect 'healthy' folk (and especially children) nevertheless? Yes, I think so. If we look at the rising incidence of chronic disease these past 60 years it is tough to tie the steady increase with any one factor - antibiotic use, for example, vaccine use, nothing really jumps out of the timeline except a steadily increasing influence of something since TV and FM started in the 1950's. Take a look at this 2004 study and see what you think

Making the case for ongoing care

Remember that the graph in section 6 has to be cumulated - to find the number with at least one chronic disease you have to add all the columns.

- Trevor Marshall

No, I see that the body is just trying to survive while its metabolism is being attacked by the radiation. It is a very simple problem – by their very nature (being underdamped) proteins can easily be diverted from what they were doing by stray electromagnetic fields.

- Trevor Marshall

The body's response to low levels of RF seems to occur in steps. As we quieten our environment, the immune sensitivity increases down to below -90dBm (the value on my slides in St Petersburg). There may be steps below this, I don't know yet. But I am getting firmer in setting -65dBm (on a Cornet) as the target level below which the immune system first starts to reactivate

- Trevor Marshall

Patients' experiences

Marysue I've been experiencing problems with walking as you have described–and have also wondered how much of it is RF and how much of it is stimulation of IP from the exercise itself. Years ago I noticed that I was able to walk farther and had less severe reactivity if I walked inside a mall or large building rather than outside in a neighborhood. I always thought it was due to the indoor regulated temperature (which certainly helped) and reduced light/sun exposure, but now I think the shielding effect of concrete block was an important benefit.

In our current environment, that is no longer beneficial due to wifi/cellphone/computers inside the buildings. I can't walk anymore in most neighborhoods due to the increased RF/wifi smog.

Shielding with garments is certainly a big help, but the internal stimulation of body systems from the exercise is still too much for me. Recently I started wearing professional grade hearing protection while walking. I originally did it because of the noise of mowers and tractors, but then I noticed that I was able to walk farther with less reactivity if I wore them even when there was no “audible noise”.

There is still a threshold that I can't go beyond without negative repercussions, but I am able to recover more quickly with the 1-1.5 mile distances I typically walk here on the farm. My experience is that the additional auditory shielding allows the nervous system/brain to focus on it's own internal processes more easily without distraction or stress from external signals processed by the auditory cortex (which includes RF signals).

Mark “I am getting results that one would expect from exercising, simply from sleeping in a bag.”

April 2019 reports pilot projects to provide high-speed 5G wireless internet halted due to health fears.

Plans for a pilot project to provide high-speed 5G wireless internet in Brussels have been halted due to fears for the health of citizens, according to April 2019 reports.

In July, the government concluded an agreement with three telecom operators to relax the strict radiation standards in Brussels. But according to the Region, it is now impossible to estimate the radiation from the antennas required for the service.

In Brussels the Environment minister Céline Fremault (CDH) told Brussels Times

I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not. The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.

and in Rome a council action “Apply the precautionary principle sanctioned by the European Union” against mayoral approval of 5G passed with 11 votes in favor and 3 abstentions.

===== Notes and comments =====

pubmed links not showing correctly again (sigh) — Sallie Q 06.23.2017

Electromagnetic Fields, Oxidative Stress, and Neurodegeneration Claudia Consales,* Caterina Merla, Carmela Marino, and Barbara Benassi*

Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression Martin L. Pall. Author links open the author workspace.

===== References =====

Pall ML. Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat. 2016 Sep;75(Pt B):43-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
[PMID: 26300312] [DOI: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001]
Consales C, Merla C, Marino C, Benassi B. Electromagnetic fields, oxidative stress, and neurodegeneration. Int J Cell Biol. 2012;2012:683897. doi: 10.1155/2012/683897. Epub 2012 Sep 9.
[PMID: 22991514] [PMCID: 3444040] [DOI: 10.1155/2012/683897]
Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kyrylenko S. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2016;35(2):186-202. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557. Epub 2015 Jul 7.
[PMID: 26151230] [DOI: 10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557]
Yano K, Hirata M, Matsumoto Y, Mori M, Hano O, Ahmed R, Mitsuoka T, Hashiba K. Influence of collateral flow reduction on electrophysiologic properties of preexisting ischemic area and inducibility of ventricular arrhythmias in the dog. Jpn Heart J. 1987 Nov;28(6):899-911. doi: 10.1536/ihj.28.899.
[PMID: 3444040] [DOI: 10.1536/ihj.28.899]
Dieudonné M. Does electromagnetic hypersensitivity originate from nocebo responses? Indications from a qualitative study. Bioelectromagnetics. 2016 Jan;37(1):14-24. doi: 10.1002/bem.21937. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
[PMID: 26369906] [DOI: 10.1002/bem.21937]
home/special/emf/body.txt · Last modified: 09.14.2022 by
© 2015, Autoimmunity Research Foundation. All Rights Reserved.