What is Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) and why is it a problem?
What is Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) and why is it a problem?
Electromagnetic Radiation is the commonly used to describe all the electromagnetic frequencies that are produced, primarily from man-made electrical devices. As the name suggests, there are 2 components to; an electrical field and a magnetic field that cannot be dissociated from each other.
This article covers.
- WHO considers EMR possible carcinogens.
- Why is there such disagreement?
- What health symptoms can be caused by EMR?
- Why do Governments deny the danger?
- Is there any proof of adverse effects?
- What are some of various solutions to EMR?
The whole spectrum ranges from Extremely Low Frequencies at the bottom end of the non-ionising radiation division right through to Gamma rays at the top end of the ionising radiation. Nobody questions whether ionising radiation, that includes X-rays, are harmful, and human exposure is limited and controlled by law.
Whether non-ionising radiation is harmful is still hotly debated.
In general, those scientists who have allegiances to the Telecommunications Industry deny that there are any dangers, whilst most independent researchers consider that there is no longer any doubt as to whether non-ionising radiation is harmful or not, and consider that it’s more a question of how much harm they do.
WHO considers EMR possible carcinogens (that's not good!).
Whilst the debate about EMR has been more commonly voiced in recent years over the deployment of 5G, EMR from past 2-4G, WiFi and even the electricity pylons and ring mains has been implicated for many years.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organisation, classified EMR as a Class 2b possible carcinogen in 2011.
Recent research investigating the association between cell phone use and a type of brain cancer called a glioma found a more consistent association. This has resulted in many of the independent scientists and Drs who recognise the dangers calling for EMR to be reclassified as a Class 2a probable carcinogen, or even a Class 1 definite carcinogen.
Why is there such disagreement?
The permitted “safety” levels are set by each country’s relevant Authority. Most base this on the recommendations of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) who scientists maintain that only EMR that causes a heating effect can induce biological changes that could be harmful.
Many of these scientists are linked to the Telecoms Industry. It has been categorically proven that EMR does not have to induce a thermal change in order to influence how our cells function.
Disruption of the normal functioning of our cells has the ability to adversely impact the body resulting in physical and mental symptoms. Dr Martin Pall has demonstrated that EMR well below the permitted “safe” power levels can disrupt the voltage-gated ion channels that determine the concentration of ions in our cells, and in particular the calcium channels.
He proved that EMR can have these effects when he gave people who are hypersensitive to EMR a heart medication that influences these calcium channels and their symptoms stopped.
What health symptoms can be caused by EMR?
Whilst the dangerous cancers such as gliomas are still thankfully fairly rare, their incidence, especially in children has been steadily rising. Most people however suffer very much milder symptoms that are generally regarded as non-specific, meaning that they can be caused by multiple different causes and can manifest in a number of different ways. They include but are not limited to
- Sleep disturbances, including insomnia
- Headaches and eye strain
- Depression and depressive symptoms
- Tiredness and fatigue
- Lack of concentration
- Changes in memory
- Loss of appetite and weight loss
- Restlessness and anxiety
Clearly, not all headaches in all people are caused by EMR alone, and they can be, and often are due to one or more other stresses.
This inability to specifically differentiate a headache caused by EMR from a headache caused by a different stress is what has enabled those with a vested interest in profiting from the beneficial properties of EMR for telecommunications the ability to deny the adverse effects from EMR.
In reality, they mostly contribute in an additive fashion to other causes of these non-specific symptoms, but that doesn’t make them inconsequential, and for a significant number of people it will be a very significant factor, whether they realise it or not.
The problem is that because the official narrative has always been that EMR used for 2-4G and WiFi etc is safe, people have believed this and failed to draw the link between their symptoms and EMR.
Why do Governments deny the danger?
Basically, it comes down to money and the national economy. Governments see progression in telecom and internet connectivity as crucial to how business functions and thus the economy.
There is a link there of course, but Government and industry has chosen to discount the adverse effects on individuals who they perceive are very much in the minority. In other words, they’re prepared to sacrifice the few individuals for what they perceive as the greater good.
What they don’t realise is that there are far more people impacted than they realise, and that this low level but widespread reduction in health costs the economy far more than they’re prepared to admit.
Is there any proof of adverse effects?
Until very recently, those who suffer from severe symptoms to the point of debilitation, termed electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), were frequently considered to be suffering from some sort of psychological disorder.
Doctors don’t have a medication that’s licensed to relieve EHS symptoms, and the official instruction was very much that EHS isn’t a real medical condition.
If the medical authorities acknowledged that people could be severely adversely impacted by EMR, then they couldn’t deny lower level adverse impacts either, and then the Governmental health and safety authorities would have to reassess permitted safety levels.
Reducing permitted levels would be perceived as putting the country at a business and financial disadvantage if technology was restricted.
In 2020, a paper was published that showed definitive changes in the brain of those suffering from EHS. It means that Doctors can no longer blame symptoms on psychosomatic causes.
It hasn’t been well publicised because it could well lead to a flood of legal claims against employers and Telecoms companies, although since 2015 Lloyds of London insurance no longer cover health insurance claims for EMR-related illness which rather hangs employers out to dry.
The fact that Lloyds of London saw fit to ring-fence their financial risk in this respect a few years back says it all. They aren’t the only international insurance company to have identified EMR as the next potential “asbestos” insurance claim. They have now probably given themselves enough breathing space since 2015 to be able to deny any liability.
Employers have no such defence given that they are choosing to ignore the warnings of the independent scientists who are calling out the dangers. It means that there are wider political considerations as to why EMR has been so vehemently denied for so long.
What are some of various solutions to EMR?
There are a number of solutions to EMR, the simplest of which is to not use so much wireless technology and distance yourself from transmitters and relays. Hardwiring connections is another option, but it’s difficult to introduce such changes without it being recognised as an admission that EMR has potential dangers at previous exposure levels.
Compensating Magnetic Oscillating technology (CMO) is a more flexible and attractive solution. There are a number of products in the range that all utilise the same proven principle that research has shown helps normalise those biomarkers in the body that EMR disrupts. CMOs aren’t complicated to install and use either, enabling businesses to deploy them in the workspace without making it obvious what they’re doing.
The Precautionary Principle says that where there is sufficient doubt then precautions should be taken even if the evidence is not yet definitive. Independent scientists would argue we have gone well past this point, but businesses that take precautions prior to being legislated to do so will be far more likely to successfully defend any claim for EHS damage should an employer take them to an industrial tribunal.
When children are more at risk from EMR and more adults are now working from home, necessitating more technology in the home then the risk to businesses are that much greater.
When CMO mitigates for the adverse effects of EMR, it is likely that the reduction in non-specific symptoms amongst workers and the resultant increased productivity with reduced sick days etc will more than likely mean that the CMO technology pays for itself and more over time.
Electromagnetic Radiation is the commonly used to describe all the electromagnetic frequencies that are produced, primarily from man-made electrical devices.
Most independent researchers consider that there is no longer any doubt as to whether non-ionising radiation is harmful or not, and consider that it’s more a question of how much harm they do.
Are we supposed to be living in these constant fields?