• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To register, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Study links health risks to electromagnetic field exposure

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,770
Very interesting. The study is here:

Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A Prospective Cohort Study

The increase in miscarriage risk was quite large: they found women who had higher levels of magnetic field exposures (from sources such as electrical appliances, transformers, WiFi, smart meters, cell towers and mobile phones) were 2.72 times more likely to have a miscarriage.

Miscarriage is common: among women who know they're pregnant, it's estimated one in six of these pregnancies will end in miscarriage. 1 So that means a 2.72 factor increase in miscarriages will lead to a lot more miscarriages.
 

Sushi

Moderation Resource Albuquerque
Messages
19,933
Location
Albuquerque
I know you are discussing electomagnetic fields in general, but I wanted to ask if anyone has tried the Defender laptop shield to protect from electromagnetic radiation from their laptop? I have always been unable to tolerate having my laptop on my lap (after about 15 minutes a weird vibration feeling in my thighs and then my heart rhythm is affected) so I just bought one of these. They are well rated and tested and so far no problems.
 
Messages
69
I know you are discussing electomagnetic fields in general, but I wanted to ask if anyone has tried the Defender laptop shield to protect from electromagnetic radiation from their laptop? I have always been unable to tolerate having my laptop on my lap (after about 15 minutes a weird vibration feeling in my thighs and then my heart rhythm is affected) so I just bought one of these. They are well rated and tested and so far no problems.
I use a USB keyboard and mouse. And of course, no RGB or off, because it also generates a strong magnetic field. For electromagnetic radiation, I have some meters. You can also buy shielding from YSHIELD.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,770
I wanted to ask if anyone has tried the Defender laptop shield to protect from electromagnetic radiation from their laptop?

I can't see it working very well, because looking at the pictures, you place it under the laptop, but that's not going to stop any electromagnetic emissions traveling upwards to your head and torso.
 

antares4141

Senior Member
Messages
576
Location
Truth or consequences, nm
Very interesting. The study is here:

Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A Prospective Cohort Study

The increase in miscarriage risk was quite large: they found women who had higher levels of magnetic field exposures (from sources such as electrical appliances, transformers, WiFi, smart meters, cell towers and mobile phones) were 2.72 times more likely to have a miscarriage.

Miscarriage is common: among women who know they're pregnant, it's estimated one in six of these pregnancies will end in miscarriage. 1 So that means a 2.72 factor increase in miscarriages will lead to a lot more miscarriages.
I probably will want to see this and the lyme disease study I recently posted reproduced a few times by other researchers since they both fly in the face of the conventional wisdom.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,770
I probably will want to see this and the lyme disease study I recently posted reproduced a few times by other researchers since they both fly in the face of the conventional wisdom.

Yes, in the study itself it says that it's finding need to be replicated by larger and better controlled studies.
 

HowToEscape?

Senior Member
Messages
626
If you study something enough times you will get a study that shows whatever you were looking for at least once.

If EMR were totes deadly then everyone in New York city and Beijing who uses the subway ( just about everyone in the city) would be keeling over. The subway uses both AC and DC, in amounts massively greater than you can generate at home. Just one train can pull as much power as a few thousand homes.

It’s plausible that common levels of EMR could be causing some sort of deleterious effect, but when one has a conclusion in mind and then goes looking for evidence to support it what you’re doing isn’t science, it’s wish fulfillment. If you’ve already decided what you’re going to find, you’ll find it to your satisfaction.

TL;DR: Some sort of EMR effect may possibly have something to do with our disease, but there are about 200 other things far more likely to be the cause. A whole lot of time and effort has been wasted chasing this topic.
 
Last edited:

sb4

Senior Member
Messages
1,654
Location
United Kingdom
t’s plausible that common levels of EMR could be causing some sort of deleterious effect, but when one has a conclusion in mind and then goes looking for evidence to support it what you’re doing isn’t science, it’s wish fulfillment. If you’ve already decided what you’re going to find, you’ll find it to your satisfaction.
Are you sure you aren't doing the same?

There are hundreds of studies out there showing negative effects of nnemf, not just one or two. There even is a mechanism that doesnt envolve ionization of dna, which is the prime reason conventional science says emfs have no effect.

The scientific method is great however humans are in control of it and they have egos, financial interest , biases ,etc. I think because of this , mainstream science is wrong on this area and many others , despite their confidence and mocking of those who challenge them.
 

HowToEscape?

Senior Member
Messages
626
Are you sure you aren't doing the same?

There are hundreds of studies out there showing negative effects of nnemf, not just one or two. There even is a mechanism that doesnt envolve ionization of dna, which is the prime reason conventional science says emfs have no effect.

The scientific method is great however humans are in control of it and they have egos, financial interest , biases ,etc. I think because of this , mainstream science is wrong on this area and many others , despite their confidence and mocking of those who challenge them.

Am not scientifically trained enough to evaluate all such studies, nor do I have time if I was. Yet I rather doubt that researchers who found no effect all had shares in the power company, radio manufacturers or Samsung. It seems more likely to me that there was motivated reasoning in the studies which did find an effect, as the few i’ve looked into did not hold up under further scrutiny.
I can’t state great certainty one one way or the other, I’m not qualified to do that. About the best I can say is that exposing people to ~1000 times the weak fields we are speaking of seems to do nothing, while several million times does have an effect: Enough microwave power will cook flesh, as will enough of their close cousin IR.
If I’m going to worry about EMF it’ll be UV, which is a known health problem.
 

wdb

Senior Member
Messages
1,392
Location
London
The dose response does not at all suggest electromagnetic field exposure being the causal factor, the group who experienced the second lowest levels had a quite significantly higher miscarriage rate than the group exposed to the very highest levels.

I would put my money on something else correlated to exposure being the culprit, those with the lowest exposures probably live in rural areas with far fewer other hazards such as air pollution, traffic, ill people sneezing on packed public transport, etc.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-16623-8/tables/4
 

HowToEscape?

Senior Member
Messages
626
“the group who experienced the second lowest levels had a quite significantly higher miscarriage rate than the group exposed to the very highest levels.”

AHA! proof that not enough EMF causes miscarriage ;-)


Or perhaps it’s proof that picking through piles of studies to find a tidbit or two that agrees with what you wanted to hear is not science.
 

sb4

Senior Member
Messages
1,654
Location
United Kingdom
Am not scientifically trained enough to evaluate all such studies, nor do I have time if I was.
Neither am I.

Yet I rather doubt that researchers who found no effect all had shares in the power company, radio manufacturers or Samsung. It seems more likely to me that there was motivated reasoning in the studies which did find an effect, as the few i’ve looked into did not hold up under further scrutiny.

I am by no means suggesting that all those who found no effect are in the pocket. There are many factors to this. Bad science, not looking long enough, not using the correct frequiencies, looking at modulated instead of non modulated. Bias, if you go in to the study thinking one thing, you might just confirm it. Establishment, there seems to be 2 ways to get funding, private (which is dodgy as you are in the pocket) and through unversity/government grants. People who sit on these panels have presumably got there by agreeing with the scientific establishment view on the subject, thats how they will have got promoted or they will be the ones that came up with the theory so they are now the expert, this creates obvious massive bais and financial and ego dependence on the theory. Are these people more likely to grant funding to people who are trying to prove there lifes work wrong? Or are they more likely to actively try to shut down the work you are doing (this happened to Robert O'Becker, Gerry Polack, A Marino, and many more). Also Big buisness has a WAY bigger financial inscentive to get studies saying this has no effect (the telecoms industries alone are worth billions) than some company who sells anti emf products. These big buisnesses have massive influence due to lobbying etc.

I can’t state great certainty one one way or the other, I’m not qualified to do that. About the best I can say is that exposing people to ~1000 times the weak fields we are speaking of seems to do nothing, while several million times does have an effect: Enough microwave power will cook flesh, as will enough of their close cousin IR.
I agree, I am also not qualified to say one way or the other, but at the very least I will say this is NOT a settled issue. There are dozens of papers coming out every year showing negative effects even at normal dosages (not 1000 times).

If I’m going to worry about EMF it’ll be UV, which is a known health problem.

I hate to be a contrarian but I have to disagree with you again. I think we are getting FAR too little UV light these days as opposed to far to much. I'll throw this out there, office workers get 4 times more skin cancer than outdoor workers. People who sunbathe regularly have far less cancer overall than people who don't. 100+yrs ago there was no suncream sunglasses and 95% of jobs were outdoors yet skin cancer was not an epidemic.

Or perhaps it’s proof that picking through piles of studies to find a tidbit or two that agrees with what you wanted to hear is not science.

There are hundreds that say EMFs are a problem and hundreds that don't, its not one or 2 on either side.