I Have confirmed that earthing does improve HRV (and vagal tone) instantly.

Messages
12,724
Likes
28,992
Location
Second star to the right ...
Grounding as in laying on the ground (physical contact with the earth)?
I read @serg1942 's post differently. Not the theory that you can draw energy up from the earth thru the soles of your feet, or by just lying on the ground, but rather grounding as you would an electrical appliance.

Here's serg's post, just in case I got it wrong, which unfortunately has happened in the past. I'm told. By possibly reliable sources ....
After reading 2 studies where grounding (to the electric outlet) adults and preterm babies did clearly improve their HRV (heart rate variability), I decided to try it myself.
If I'm wrong here, I know my misapprehension will be speedily corrected :):):) ....
 

serg1942

Senior Member
Messages
494
Likes
977
Location
Spain
A lot of people, myself included, notice clear effects of earthing the body while asleep in bed. However, it is very common for the beneficial effects to reverse after a few nights earthing, and then earthing starts to make you feel worse. I have seen this reversal of benefits reported many times. It's a mystery why that happens.

So it will be interesting to see if you can maintain the HRV effects in long term.


When I tried earthing, the first night I slept so profoundly, I slept like a baby. And I felt refreshed when waking. I thought I had discovered the secret to a good night's sleep. The second night I also slept nicely, but not as good as the first night.

But on the third night of earthing, I slept terribly: agitated, tossing and turning in bed, and I kept waking up all night long.

The fourth and all subsequent nights were like that: very agitated sleep where I kept waking up. The nights actually became almost torturous, my sleep became that bad!

I was unable to reproduce the wonderful sleep I had on the first night.



The effects of earthing also seem location and house dependent: one person in this thread reported earthing put their POTS and dysautonomia into remission; but later when she moved house, she found she could not longer get these benefits from earthing.



Generally, the literature on earthing is a little dubious. People talk about the benefits of electrons, but as @Wishful pointed out, this is not really a scientific explanation, as the body is usually electrically neutral anyway (unless you are walking with rubber soles on nylon carpet, in which case the body can pick up a static electric charge).

I don't believe anyone has properly looked into why earthing has effects on the body, but I summarized some studies in this post.



My own theory is that connecting the body to the earth allows the main electricity 50/60 Hz hum to drive a small current in and out of your body at 50 or 60 times per second (as you mentioned earlier). I detail that theory in this post.

When I was earthed, I was able to measure this small current on a digital multimeter, it showed a 0.2 μA of alternating current was running between me and earth, when I was indoors.

And when I moved my body or limbs to within 30 cm or less of a power adaptor plug (power adaptors contain a transformer that creates an oscillating magnetic field in proximity of the adaptor), I found that the current flowing to earth from by body went up to around 1 μA. See this post.

So in effect, I think earthing might be a form of microcurrent therapy.



To test this theory, one could try sleeping with the mains electricity turned off in the house, and then observing whether you get the same benefits.

Hi Hip,

Thank you for your message and for all the information. I will read it when I can, as this is a very interesting topic.

I'd really like you to read my last reply to @Wishful , and have your opinion about it:

https://forums.phoenixrising.me/thr...agal-tone-instantly.85321/page-2#post-2363435

Especially I'd like to know why, if it has been described that a bacteria can adopt electrons from an external current and use them in the mitochondria to reduce NAD+, why couldn't we get electrons from the earth?

I'd also like to know what would be your explanation for the 2.7 fold increase in the Z potential of RBCs when grounding.

As for the body being neutral, this study disagrees:


"(...) It is recognized that electric charges (units of coulombs [C]) can build up on an insulated human body, thus increasing its potential (volts).13 Charge buildup is proportional to the voltage on a body, and the proportionality constant is given by the capacitance. The capacitance of a human body is approximately 100 pF,14 where the units of Farads are Coulombs/volt. If there is an electrical path to ground, the body will discharge to ground and its potential will go to zero. The rate at which the charges flow is described by electrical current, with units of amperes which equal 1 C/s.(...)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4241473/

I don't know much about electricity, but I think that what they are describing is just the following formula:

Q= VC

Where Q is the charge stored of the body, V is the voltage and C is the capacitance.

So if we have body voltage and capacitance, the body is charged, and only when the voltage drops close to cero does the charge drop as well...

What am I missing here?

As for the microcurrents induced when grounding, the problems I see with this mechanism (I will read the post that you shared) are :

1. It is two low to have such an intense metabolic effect (note that Frequency Specific Microcurrent run at 100 micro amps, for example) ;

2. Their intensity depends on the intensity of the surrounding EMFs, and these are different in different studies showing similar results. For example, the preterm babies in the study showed a 67% increase of the parasympathetic tone, but the current they might have been drawing to earth we can assume was very low, given that the electric field measured around the ungrounded babies only induced a voltage of approx. 0.3 volts. And in my case, I have observed a similar increase in the vagal tone with a purposely induced voltage of around 10 V (by touching a wire!).

3. We did evolve grounded, but not with man-made EMFs (just with the low frequency Schumann waves). So I guess we didn't evolve running much current through earth...

Anyway, besides the specific unknown mechanism, it is very interesting the effects it has demonstrated. Of course the evidence is scarce, but I wouldn't say dubious. Having more than 20 peer-reviewed papers, some of them blinded, I think is an achievement given that the therapy is virtually for free. But anyway, this is why I decided to test it myself.

However, we have no idea if it could be useful for ME/CFS. So far it is giving me a terrible detox-like reaction...Perhaps a body ungrounded for 38 years needs sometime to adjust to the metabolic changes induced by grounding. There's a couple of studies showing increase in oxygenation and blood flow, what could imply a healing effect... Who knows!

Finally, I'm sorry it wrecked your sleep! The same has happened to me! But I am putting up with this effect in case it just takes time to adjust.

Anyway, thanks again for your input ! It's always a pleasure to read you!
 

serg1942

Senior Member
Messages
494
Likes
977
Location
Spain
Hi @Hip,

After reading your post from 2013 on your hypothesis about how earthing works, I just want to add to my previous post (where I give you my opinion on your theory) that there is a doctor called Laura Koniver that sells a grounding wire that blocks alternating currents and only allows direct current to flow from your body to the earth (actually the other way around!).

I have been racking my brains to try to find a way of doing this myself, but I don't find the way, as I am new to electronics.

So I decided to order her wire and I am waiting for it. And when it arrives I will dissect it and see what's inside. :)

But more importantly, I'll be able to test if it still improves my and my partner's HRV. So we'll be able to tell if it's just the earth giving off electrons or the microcurrents.

Take care!
Sergio
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
3,974
Likes
7,212
Location
Alberta
This study demonstrates that you can give electrons from an electric current to a bacteria, and that these electrons will be used as a source of energy by the mitochondria.
I skimmed the paper, but don't actually understand it yet. It seemed to involve a lot of assumptions rather than proven mechanisms. I'll have to think about it.

So, here we have a plausible pathway to actually take electrons from the earth and give them to free radicals, via glutathione.
No, there's a difference between changing the number of electrons on a person's skin and applying a voltage directly across bacteria. AFAIK, electrons on the skin will simply not travel into the body to engage in chemical reactions; electrostatic force prevents it.

1. Low and high frequency EMFs causes free radicals in the tissues, and because free radicals are positive ions (they lack an electron in the valence orbit), this means that EMFs cause oxidation of tissues, or in electric terms, we can say that EMFs induce an excess of positive charges:
No, because the 'missing' electron would still there in the aqueous solution. As I understand it, free radicals are not missing an electron, they simply have a broken covalent bond, which is available for making a new covalent bond. No extra electrons are involved; it's sharing of valence electrons.

3. The Earth has a negative voltage compared to us because it has more negative charges:
That's not true either. Our static charge varies throughout the day. We can gain or lose charge by rubbing against objects or touching something with a different charge. You can readily give yourself several megavolts worth of positive or negative charge ... and not notice much aside from your hairs standing up. Also, say rather than objects such as humans have a charge with respect to the earth. The ground itself has a net negative charge with respect to the upper atmosphere, or the atmosphere has a positive charge wrt the ground.

7. Now, I think that taking the above points into consideration, it makes sense to hypothesize that when grounded, positive charges of the body can get neutralized by the electrons coming from the earth, meaning that free radicals can be neutralized.
No, that does not logically follow. If your body has a net positive charge, grounding will add electrons to the outer skin, where they will remain. Inside the skin has a net charge of zero. For every molecule with a positive charge, there's another in the body with a negative charge. If there's an imbalance, it will show up as surface charge, since charges repel each other, and the outer surface is the furthest the charges can go.

I did read the paper about RBC clumping. I admit I don't understand the mechanism of clumping or how valid their science is. What got my attention was that they applied electrodes to both soles, when if they really understood electricity, they should have known that one contact point anywhere on the body would be sufficient. To me that implied that they were believing in mystical 'energy points' from ancient Asian beliefs rather than in modern science. That made me skeptical of anything else in their paper.
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
3,974
Likes
7,212
Location
Alberta
Where Q is the charge stored of the body, V is the voltage and C is the capacitance.
Q is the charge stored on the body, as in 'on the surface'. It's the same with metal plate capacitors: the charge is stored on the outside, not the inside of the conductor.

So if we have body voltage and capacitance, the body is charged, and only when the voltage drops close to cero does the charge drop as well...
No, if voltage drops .99701, the charge drops .99701 too. If the body is one electron less than zero, the voltage will be one electron times C. Again, this is surface charge, which AFAIK isn't changed by chemical reactions inside the body.

Hmmm, the experiment with bacteria was not simply feeding the bacteria extra electrons; it was also drawing electrons out the other side. There was a current flow across the bacteria. The equivalent of grounding would be to connect only one wire from ground to the plate with the biofilm, which would then show no difference in metabolic rates.

I thought of one other example to consider. Imagine a metal cylinder of chlorine gas. Chlorine wants (has a lower energy state) to form a chemical bond with another atom, preferably one with fewer electrons in its outer shell, an alkaline metal being idea. By the common theory of grounding, (free radicals being neutralized by free electrons) connecting the chlorine tank to ground would neutralize the chlorine. Try it and see. It doesn't not work that way. Ions want to form chemical bonds, not bind free electrons.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
16,434
Likes
35,406
After reading your post from 2013 on your hypothesis about how earthing works, I just want to add to my previous post (where I give you my opinion on your theory) that there is a doctor called Laura Koniver that sells a grounding wire that blocks alternating currents and only allows direct current to flow from your body to the earth (actually the other way around!).
An electrical device which hinders alternating current but allows direct current to pass is an inductor, also called a choke. It's basically just a coil of wire. You can buy these as separate electrical components.

The higher the inductance (measured in henries) of your choke, the more the alternating current is reduced.

So if you want to block more alternating current, then you would want a choke with a high inductance.


You can calculate what is called the impedance (the electrical resistance measured in ohms Ω) of an inductor for a given alternating current frequency by using an online calculator like this one.

Unfortunately, the impedance of an inductor is high for high frequencies (eg kHz or MHz frequencies), but the impedance is low for low frequencies like the 50 Hz mains frequencies. So for such low frequencies, you do not block much current.

Even for a large choke with 10 henries of inductance, the impedance would only be 3140 Ω. That is not very much, and to put it into perspective, many commercial earthing bedsheets already contain an electrical resistor in series of around 20 kΩ to 100 kΩ. This resistor is just used to prevent electrocution if an accident happened, and the earth connection (which is usually an electric socket earth connection) became live.

Electrical resistors (which are very cheap electrical components costing just pennies each) will equally block both DC and AC currents.

So if you have an earthing bedsheet that already contains a 100 kΩ resistor, adding a choke with around 3140 Ω resistance is not going to do anything.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
16,434
Likes
35,406
Especially I'd like to know why, if it has been described that a bacteria can adopt electrons from an external current and use them in the mitochondria to reduce NAD+, why couldn't we get electrons from the earth?
An electric current is different to a static electric charge.

If you pass an electric current through water, for example, it can split the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen: you will see these gases accumulate as bubbles at the two electrodes placed in the water.

But a static electric charge on a flask of water will not do anything to the chemistry. Static electric charge does not affect chemistry, to my knowledge.

You can charge up the human body to a millions volts, and nothing much will happen (apart from your hair standing up).

But as little as 100 to 200 milliamps of current sustained for a few seconds is enough to kill a human being.



You can think of it also in energy terms: to cause chemical effects, like neutralizing free radicals, you need energy. An electric current supplies energy, but there is no energy available when the body is earthed (except when the mains hum drives current in and out of the body, or the heart beat does likewise). And there is no energy available in a static electric charge (unless that charge in neutralized to earth, but then a current flows).

If you think of a flowing river, that is like an electric current, and you can obtain hydroelectric energy from that. But you cannot obtain energy from a static lake of water, which is the equivalent of a static electric charge on a material body.


EDIT: I just realized that what I said above about energy may not be true: in the case of free radicals, these may yield energy when you neutralize them (some chemical reactions require energy, other chemical reactions release energy).

I am a bit brain dead today, so not thinking very clearly.



3. We did evolve grounded, but not with man-made EMFs (just with the low frequency Schumann waves). So I guess we didn't evolve running much current through earth...
I think even in the absence of mains electricity, an earthed human being might pass some alternating current to the ground, because of the electrical pulses of the heartbeat. This I don't think will be a strong as the mains 50/60 Hz hum though.
 
Last edited:

serg1942

Senior Member
Messages
494
Likes
977
Location
Spain
Hi again @Wishful

Thank you very much again for your thoughts and for the debate. I can tell that you have a good knowledge on electricity, so I really appreciate it. Plus you are challenging my assumptions, and this is what I'm looking for!

I guess that your main objection to the proposed mechanism of earthing is that you think that earthing doesn't change the electrical potential of the organs and tissues, but only the potential of the skin.

Ok, here is a study showing that grounding decreases the potential of the bloodstream from 1 mV to - 280 mV (this is measured with a catheter inserted in a vein):

(...) alternations in electric potential of venous blood and mucous of the tongue reflect alternations of electric potential in the extracellular environment. (...) Recorded action po- tential from the surface of the tongue can be referred to the water environment of the organism (...) In determin- ing the voltage in venous blood, an intravenous cannula with a sterile copper conductor (EE) (diameter of 0.2mm) inside (to insulate it from the skin) was used (...) Earthing the human organism evokes a rapid fall in po- tential in venous blood and other examined points. The effect is immediate and general. (...) coupling of the human body with the moistened surface of the Earth evokes a rapid fall in values of electrostatic potential in venous blood, tongue, nails, and teeth in the lying position. (...) is suggested that transmission of the Earth’s potential has a direct impact on the density of negative charge in this electrical environment (...) Under earthing, the charge does not merely remain on the surface and neutralize surface positive charge but also enters the tissues. In a wire conductor, a mobile negative charge is re- presented by electrons. In the aqueous environment of the human organism, which is a dielectric, the role of mobile negative charges is played by OH- groups.(...)


https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22420736/


If grounding decreases the voltage of the blood, it means that the inner body is charged positively and grounding reduces the number of positive charges in the body, hence increasing the number of electrons.

This, together with the studies showing increase of RBCs membrane negative charges, and the study showing that electrons from an external current can be taken up by the mitochondria of bacteria to reduce NAD+, I think is at least compelling that the theory of the defenders of grounding might be corrent.

Please try to give me a different explanation for these findings. I really want to get to the bottom of this mechanism, as I want to be as much sure as possible that I am doing the right thing by earthing myself with this terrible disease.

Again thank you for your opinion and for the time!

Sergio

PS. Find attached the diagram depicted in this study showing the electrical pathway formed by the body and the earth, with the air as a resistance. I don't have the knowledge to know if this approximation could be accurate or not.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
3,974
Likes
7,212
Location
Alberta
Again there's a confusion between voltage across cells and the electrostatic voltage between ground and the surface of the body. In this experiment, they are changing the location of 'skin' by inserting a probe into the body. I'm not quite sure what they are actually measuring, but it's probably deviations from a perfect sphere of perfect aqueous conductor. It's been a long time since electrostatic theory, so I can't remember what the interior of that perfect object would be wrt ground. It's mathematically zero wrt the outer surface. Poking a probe into the conductive interior would still register the surface charge wrt ground.

If grounding decreases the voltage of the blood, it means that the inner body is charged positively and grounding reduces the number of positive charges in the body, hence increasing the number of electrons.
No, in an aqueous solution, the total charge is zero. If you break an ionic bond, you have a positive and negative ion, so you still have net zero charge. Likewise for covalent bonds. Free radicals are not missing electrons, and free electrons will not reduce them.

and the study showing that electrons from an external current can be taken up by the mitochondria of bacteria to reduce NAD+,
If electrons are entering the mitochondria, electrons are also leaving somewhere else from the mitochondria, so if I'm thinking properly (I'm brainfogged), some other molecule is being oxidized.

Still, if electric currents are able to affect our mitochondria, Hip's theory of induced currents might apply, but not electrostatic grounding.
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
3,974
Likes
7,212
Location
Alberta
An electrical device which hinders alternating current but allows direct current to pass is an inductor, also called a choke.
I agree that it isn't practical for Hz. However, if Serg1942 simply wants to allow electrons to flow onto the body but not back, a simple diode will do the trick. A diode costs pennies, or you can just take one out of most electronic junk.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
16,434
Likes
35,406
However, if Serg1942 simply wants to allow electrons to flow onto the body but not back, a simple diode will do the trick. A diode costs pennies, or you can just take one out of most electronic junk.
That's a good idea, although I am not entirely sure a diode (an electrical 1-way valve) would fully block the AC current, because it might still allow one half of the mains AC sine wave cycle to flow through your body and down to earth, while blocking the other half of the cycle.

But one way to block the mains hum current might be just to use a high enough value resistor. Most earthing bedsheets already contain a resistor of around 100 kΩ, so you could just increase this by 10 times, using a 1 million ohms resistor (1 MΩ), and this would reduce the mains hum current by 10 times, but I would think the resistance should still be low enough to earth the body (discharge any static charge in the body).

I actually tried this, I tried sleeping while earthed, but with a 1 MΩ resistor placed in series in the circuit, and that led to a loss of effect (the effects I get from earthing I no longer noticed).

Which then suggests that the effects of earthing do come from the mains hum current.
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
3,974
Likes
7,212
Location
Alberta
That's a good idea, although I am not entirely sure a diode (an electrical 1-way valve) would fully block the AC current, because it might still allow one half of the mains AC sine wave cycle to flow through your body and down to earth, while blocking the other half of the cycle.
Right. I misunderstood his goal. If the goal is to block induced currents, I suggest a Faraday cage. Hmmm, blocking 60 Hz magnetic fields might require more than thin conductive sheets. A bit of searching might turn up a suitable space surrounded by thick steel. Bank vault (not in use, obviously), storage tank, battle tank :wide-eyed:, ship; there must be lots of possibilities for well-shielded spots for such an experiment. I know there are research facilities that have such cages for this purpose. If they're not booked constantly, they might be available for use for rent or just a good cause.
 

LINE

Senior Member
Messages
361
Likes
736
Location
USA

I read @serg1942 's post differently. Not the theory that you can draw energy up from the earth thru the soles of your feet, or by just lying on the ground, but rather grounding as you would an electrical appliance.

Here's serg's post, just in case I got it wrong, which unfortunately has happened in the past. I'm told. By possibly reliable sources ....

If I'm wrong here, I know my misapprehension will be speedily corrected :):):) ....
You are correct!
 

Mary

Moderator Resource
Messages
16,132
Likes
36,490
Location
Southern California
@serg1942 , two years ago I read about grounding supposedly helping with sleep. I don't have any bare earth or grass where I live, but I read that unsealed cement would work. So I sat outside with my feet on the cement for an hour or 2 (I can't remember the time exactly) but sure enough, I slept much better. It was amazing - I was like @Hip , thinking I'd found the holy grail for sleep.

My results didn't wear off as quickly as his did, I think it helped me for a few weeks. But I've been doing it again, with almost no results. I'm not getting agitated like @Hip did, but the very nice sleep it gave me initially just isn't there.

It seems that our bodies are determined to return to their ME/CFS homeostasis of horrible sleep, etc. and won't permit anything to disrupt that homeostasis!

I am wondering, however, if this result is peculiar to persons with ME/CFS. In other words, if a "normal" person tried grounding and noticed benefits, would they disappear like ours apparently do?

I've had various supplements give me an initial really good result, only to stop working usually after a week or so - most notably NAD which stopped me crashing for 10 days, calcium pyruvate boosted me for about 5 days and l-carnitine gave me a good 10 days or so. (I remember them so well! )
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
3,974
Likes
7,212
Location
Alberta
I am wondering, however, if this result is peculiar to persons with ME/CFS. In other words, if a "normal" person tried grounding and noticed benefits, would they disappear like ours apparently do?
That should be easy to test. It's not like there's a shortage of 'normal' people who have trouble sleeping.