I"m still using the b-caryophylene topically, and it continues to help me.
Thanks very much for sharing those! I've tried a few, some help a bit. I tried Magnesium chelate, not sure if that's similar.
Yes, that's true. Molecules interacting involve electromagnetic fields. Electric fields are involved with fatty acids positioning themselves to form a membrane. The problem is when people try to extend that beyond its appropriate limits. Electric fields arranging molecules does not mean that the field from house wiring is also arranging those molecules. If you solved the equations for it, you'd find that the electric field experienced by the molecules would be too low to affect them. Marketing scams like to leave out that sort of detail.
Yes, but "sufficiently large" is probably way higher than most people expect. A recent MRI machine uses an 11.7 Tesla field, which is ridiculously much higher than anything we experience in daily life, yet there was no report of the patients complaining about nerve stimulation or involuntary muscle movement. Again, if you solve the equations governing field interaction with bodies, cells, and molecules, you'd get the actual forces applied, which will probably be much lower than necessary for noticeable effects.
A quick search didn't show up any studies supporting that claim.
I didn't find any support for that claim either. I'm not claiming it's false, just that I couldn't find any studies supporting it. As with the other cases, solving the equations for static magnetic fields on cells, molecules, or electrical currents in the body will probably show the forces are too small to have an effect.
I live offgrid and need to go outside in the dark often (outdoor kitchen). I tried a couple of headband mounted lights, but found they flopped around too much. My solution is a small flashlight with a plastic case which I hold in my mouth when I need use of my hands. It's easy to direct the light where I need it.
My most-used flashlight uses one low-power LED (from one of those solar outdoor nightlights) powered by two AA cells. I've been using batteries other people threw out (because one battery in their stack got weak first) and I swap them only when the light gets too dim to be useful. I have another much brighter light I use when a task requires more light.
I'm not arguing that turning your router or main breaker off doesn't make someone feel better. I'm arguing that without proper double-blinding, the reason why it works may not be due to the EMF signal. I've been convinced of various things affecting my ME which on better experimenting, proved to be wrong. I'm really bad about knowing which tooth is the cause of pain. Whenever I'm convince that it's one tooth, it turns out to be a tooth next to it. Humans are great at totally convincing themselves about things that are actually false.
I don't mean to misapply the argument to all diseases. However, it might be valid for some situations. Yesterday was nice and sunny and not snowing, so I went out to do some chores. I found that my leg aches and flu-like symptoms prevented me from concentrating on doing tasks. Instead I went for my first bike ride of the year. That didn't make the symptoms go away, but pedaling is a kind of mindless activity that isn't affected by those symptoms. The mind is actively balancing, watching for hazards, etc, which doesn't seem to allow room for those distractions that would affect me if I was trying to tidy up my yard.
Nope. In this argument I'm saying "What you're sensing may not be due to the theory you believe is responsible." Turning off your router makes you feel better: no argument. That it's due to the wifi signal is still debatable. It could be psychological, it could be an ultrasonic signal from the device, it could be the light from the LED on the router that you are subconsciously aware of, or some explanation I can't even think of. The lack of (properly done) studies that prove that humans can sense or be affected by wifi signals makes me think that other explanations are more likely. I'm skeptical about claims about biological effects that are strong enough to for people to notice, yet somehow can't be verified in a lab. If humans can sense wifi signals, that should be easy to verify in a lab setting using double-blinding.
No, the first time was a complete surprise. I took some cumin because it helped the first few times years ago, so I kept testing it a few times a year just in case it started working again. It wasn't until my expected PEM following strenuous activity I had to do didn't show up that I looked back in my journal to see what might have blocked the expected PEM. I did several tests of exertion with and without cumin before posting the results in a thread about a possible PEM blocker. Benefits after that could have been psychological, but there were plenty of incidents when I simply forgot to take my scheduled cumin and was reminded by getting PEM. The same occurred with T2: it was easy to forget when the 21 days was up, but I'd start feeling lousy, and when it occurred to me to check my journal, sure enough the symptoms started 21 days after my previous dose. I think it's highly unlikely that my subconscious mind was keeping track of the days since my last dose and gave my psychosomatic symptoms.
I expect that they were well aware of the danger of higher doses. The residue was small and no effects were noticed at those levels. They missed bioaccumulation in the food chain. Likewise asbestos was proven safe by the studies at the time. We have learned lessons about the need for longer-term studies. That doesn't invalidate the lack of studies showing short-term effects of wifi signals. If normal levels of wifi signals cause significant symptoms in people within minutes or hours, that should be fairly easy to prove in a proper dobule-blind study ... but we're still waiting for such a study with that result.
I am not saying your responses are psychosomatic. I'm saying that the theory behind the responses is unproven and unsupported by known science. The latter doesn't disprove the theory, but it does require more evidence than a theory that does have an explanation supported by known science. For my "proven to me" responses, I don't have theories for why/how they had their effects.
The nearest powerlines are ~4 miles away. I bought the property for the lack of neighbours and the natural beauty (surrounded by trees, and a creek next to my cabin), not for expected health benefits from reduced EMF levels. I didn't notice any improvement in my ME due to the change in environment. I didn't notice a change when I switched from wired internet to wifi linked.
If you ever find your EMF meter or get a new one I'd be curious to know what kind of EF reading you get from your keyboard/mouse. Even if they are low voltage they can carry EF from other devices connected to your computer. It could also be proximity to other devices near your computer setup or the computer/monitor itself.
I agree, even with EHS, it's a bit like groping around in the dark trying to find what helps and what doesn't. If there was a one size fits all solution we wouldn't be here discussing it.
People also report sightings of ghosts and flying saucers, so "lots of people reporting x" doesn't necessarily mean that x is real. I certainly support studies to see whether there are any health effects from EMFs of various frequencies and power levels, but the rise in claims of EMF sensitivity might correlate better with the rise in scientifically unsupported health scare magazine articles.
