Good to hear that you now finally can get some decent sleep! As for the buzzing, are you sure the transformer buzzing just doesn't just come from a worn cooling fan or ac compressor on the transformer? I would contact the company which owns it to make an expection of it.. It may just be something that simple and perhaps you suddenly got rid of the buzzing at the company's expense 
Or maybe since this thread is six years old he has since moved to a quieter locale.
Low frequency exhaust noise (<30Hz) from our neighbor's WRX STI wakes us up like clock work at 6AM six days a week. Really any LF can be irritating if continuous for more than a short period of time.
His bed issues may have contributed significantly as can stress from work or school.
My recurrent nightmare is waking up and thinking I haven't paid the rent (for many months) on my long ago 1 room efficiency. Then I always paid the rent in a timely fashion and moved out of that place nearly 33yrs ago.. No mortgage and no debt today so the nightmares are rooted in something else.. lol
Low frequency exhaust noise (<30Hz) from our neighbor's WRX STI wakes us up like clock work at 6AM six days a week. Really any LF can be irritating if continuous for more than a short period of time.
His bed issues may have contributed significantly as can stress from work or school.
My recurrent nightmare is waking up and thinking I haven't paid the rent (for many months) on my long ago 1 room efficiency. Then I always paid the rent in a timely fashion and moved out of that place nearly 33yrs ago.. No mortgage and no debt today so the nightmares are rooted in something else.. lol
Effect of electricity on the mind and body
Even though the start of this thread is very old, it is useful to post for others to read who may come across this thread.
If you don't think that external electromagnetic radiation does not affect the mind and body, read the Body Electric by Robert Becker. A very compelling read. Becker does a lot of cutting-edge research and eventually considers the effect of 60hz electromagnetic radiation on the human body. Basically, he makes the point that if electricity would have been studied before it was implemented, we likely would have many more precautions in place in how we expose ourselves to electromagnetic radiation. And it is not just the 50/60 hz stuff, but also that of many other frequencies (TV/radio waves, microwaves...).
Measuring your body voltage with a multimeter relative to ground is a good way to understand the magnitude of your exposure, although does not consider the voltage at specific frequencies. I feel concerned when I see that my exposure is above 1 volt AC, and try to get my exposure below 0.5 volt AC (this is my own preference which I cannot justify). Removing AC appliances/clocks from your bedroom (in particular), or moving them across the room are important steps to reducing your exposure. Preventing the installation or the removal of smart meters for your electrical meter is another step that some take, but people's reaction to such emission sources varies - some are more sensitive than others. We in fact have two smart meters at our house, but it is on the opposite side of our house from our bedrooms.
Another action that you can take is earthing yourself. You can ground yourself using a simple wrist band or similar conductive means to reduce your body potential relative to ground, and this is very effective to reduce your body potential to the low millivolt range. And yes, there is evidence that it affects your body's functioning, such as improved immune system, reduced blood viscosity, reduced stress hormone levels better sleeping patterns... I recommend going to the Earthing Institute website for more information.
There are multiple theories which could account for the positive impact that earthing has on the body and mind. One is that the earth has a negative charge and this is attributed to the effect of lightning storms. The negative charge means that the earth is rich in electrons, and when you ground yourself you avail yourself to all these electrons. A second theory is that the outside EMF radiation affects your body's own internal electrical signals and reduces your body's natural functioning, and grounding dramatically reduces the effect of those extraneous electrical signals on your body. A third theory is that the earth has its own natural frequency, which happens to be around 7 hz, and this happens to be a frequency that calms the mind.
I ground myself every night now and I will do so the rest of my life, and I advise others to do so. I used leftover parts I had laying around the house to solder up my grounding device so it did not cost me anything, and it likely facilitates a significant health improvement.
By the way, there are two other entirely different areas of study associated with electricity. One is microcurrent in which small electrical signals at specific frequencies is used to create positive health benefits and the other uses the toxic nature of electricity to your advantage to address diseases (i.e., to kill parasites and reportedly kill cancer cells or the viruses that cause cancer, also called zapping).
There is a growing body of literature which supports these various interventions - while the allopathic health system generally does not recognize their value and use.
Retsel
Even though the start of this thread is very old, it is useful to post for others to read who may come across this thread.
If you don't think that external electromagnetic radiation does not affect the mind and body, read the Body Electric by Robert Becker. A very compelling read. Becker does a lot of cutting-edge research and eventually considers the effect of 60hz electromagnetic radiation on the human body. Basically, he makes the point that if electricity would have been studied before it was implemented, we likely would have many more precautions in place in how we expose ourselves to electromagnetic radiation. And it is not just the 50/60 hz stuff, but also that of many other frequencies (TV/radio waves, microwaves...).
Measuring your body voltage with a multimeter relative to ground is a good way to understand the magnitude of your exposure, although does not consider the voltage at specific frequencies. I feel concerned when I see that my exposure is above 1 volt AC, and try to get my exposure below 0.5 volt AC (this is my own preference which I cannot justify). Removing AC appliances/clocks from your bedroom (in particular), or moving them across the room are important steps to reducing your exposure. Preventing the installation or the removal of smart meters for your electrical meter is another step that some take, but people's reaction to such emission sources varies - some are more sensitive than others. We in fact have two smart meters at our house, but it is on the opposite side of our house from our bedrooms.
Another action that you can take is earthing yourself. You can ground yourself using a simple wrist band or similar conductive means to reduce your body potential relative to ground, and this is very effective to reduce your body potential to the low millivolt range. And yes, there is evidence that it affects your body's functioning, such as improved immune system, reduced blood viscosity, reduced stress hormone levels better sleeping patterns... I recommend going to the Earthing Institute website for more information.
There are multiple theories which could account for the positive impact that earthing has on the body and mind. One is that the earth has a negative charge and this is attributed to the effect of lightning storms. The negative charge means that the earth is rich in electrons, and when you ground yourself you avail yourself to all these electrons. A second theory is that the outside EMF radiation affects your body's own internal electrical signals and reduces your body's natural functioning, and grounding dramatically reduces the effect of those extraneous electrical signals on your body. A third theory is that the earth has its own natural frequency, which happens to be around 7 hz, and this happens to be a frequency that calms the mind.
I ground myself every night now and I will do so the rest of my life, and I advise others to do so. I used leftover parts I had laying around the house to solder up my grounding device so it did not cost me anything, and it likely facilitates a significant health improvement.
By the way, there are two other entirely different areas of study associated with electricity. One is microcurrent in which small electrical signals at specific frequencies is used to create positive health benefits and the other uses the toxic nature of electricity to your advantage to address diseases (i.e., to kill parasites and reportedly kill cancer cells or the viruses that cause cancer, also called zapping).
There is a growing body of literature which supports these various interventions - while the allopathic health system generally does not recognize their value and use.
Retsel
The true story I like is about the dairy farmer. Seems they ran high voltage lines across his farm Shortly thereafter his cattle began losing weight and producing less milk. Well of course he associated the new High Voltage line with the problem. After trying everything he could think of, the next step was to sell off the herd and replace it entirely.
The old cattle became healthy once off his property and the new cattle lost weight and stopped producing milk.
The dairy farmer lost his farm and ended up driving a school bus.
The next owner noticed the same problem with the cattle. He also noticed that they pretty much avoided drinking water from the watering trough. His investigation showed that the water pump feeding the trough had failed insulation so every time the cattle drank they got shocked. As a result the cattle avoided drinking as much as possible, lost weight and stopped producing milk. Replacing the pump solved the problem.
Thus proving that electricity can be bad for you!
The old cattle became healthy once off his property and the new cattle lost weight and stopped producing milk.
The dairy farmer lost his farm and ended up driving a school bus.
The next owner noticed the same problem with the cattle. He also noticed that they pretty much avoided drinking water from the watering trough. His investigation showed that the water pump feeding the trough had failed insulation so every time the cattle drank they got shocked. As a result the cattle avoided drinking as much as possible, lost weight and stopped producing milk. Replacing the pump solved the problem.
Thus proving that electricity can be bad for you!
Last edited:
It is important to have a tight ground connection to the foil lining in your hat.
Review of health effects of electricity
The document I copied in below if from the following website (https://www.osha.gov/dts/hib/hib_data/hib19900207.html - note that it is from 1990, which shows that we have known about this for many, many years).
I like the story about the cows and electricity. Not that it somehow disproves any impact by electricity on human health, but that does illustrate a large potential problem with population-based studies (those that study health effects in large populations and which cannot control for all, or even many potentially conflicting factors). This is why proving the health effects of electricity is so difficult. The study does acknowledge the cancer cluster and was serious enough to warrant a memorandum to OSHA offices. The memo readily acknowledge that humans are beings of electricity and that electromagnetic radiation does impact the human body, so there is cause and effect - the health effects, a more difficult proof.
By the way, we do know now that exposure to the radiation of cell phones does increase the rate of brain tumors (likely caused by the increased cell turnover in the brain). Yet another data point....
OSHA Hazard Information Bulletins
The Effects of Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Radiation
February 7, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR:
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS
THRU:
LEO CAREY
Director
Directorate of Field Programs
FROM:
BARRY J. WHITE
Director
Directorate of Technical Support
SUBJECT:
Hazard Information Bulletin - The Effects of Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Radiation
The purpose of this bulletin is to present a review of health effects data associated with extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic (em) radiation exposure as found in current publications. Findings addressed in this bulletin do not reflect any Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) position on em hazards.
Recently, public and employee concerns have been expressed about ELF exposure as a result of media coverage over the last few years. An example of such coverage is the detailed evaluation of em publications published by Savitz in 1987. Savitz's analysis deals with potential adverse effects of ELF fields, but it is probably equally applicable to the entire em field-cancer case study literature1. The issue of ELF bioeffects is very controversial with few safety and health organizations having adopted exposure limits. ELF radiation, a part of the em spectrum, discussed in this bulletin is confined to the nonionizing frequency range up to 300 gigahertz (GHz). Of particular interest is the 50 to 60 Hz range which is associated with electrical power distribution, and equipment utilizing alternating current.
ELF radiation is comprised of both electric and magnetic fields and occur naturally in the environment2. The generation of em radiation is often unintentional as in the case of motors and fluorescent light or deliberate for a specific application such as television equipment. Irradiation of biological systems with em energy under certain conditions leads to temperature elevations when the rate of energy absorption exceeds the rate of energy dissipation3. Biological changes that occur during ELF exposure (which is not readily absorbed, and therefore does not normally cause significant temperature elevation) have not been well documented.
The human body contains free electric charges (largely in ion-rich fluids such as blood and lymph) that move in response to forces exerted by charges on and current flowing in nearby conductors, such as power lines and the wiring of appliances (see figures 1 and 2). The processes that produce these body currents are called electric and magnetic induction. In electric induction, charges on a power line or appliances attract or repel free charges within the body. Since body fluids are good conductors of electricity, charges in the body move to its surface under the influence of this electric force. The nature of magnetic fields are greater near the periphery of the body and smaller at the center of the body. Because magnetic fields have only recently become a human health concern, data on the detailed distribution of magnetically induced currents in human and animals are quite sparse compared to the information available on electric induction.
Human exposure to em radiation from natural sources is often considered small by comparison to that of industrial sources. Recently some research has shown a potential risk of cancer due to exposure to em radiation. For example in one of many conflicting research efforts, higher incidents of cancer were observed among children who lived in the vicinity of high voltage electric power lines. These lines surrounded by fields of extremely low frequency electromagnetic energy were statistically linked to clusters of cancer among children. Research also indicates that em radiation can have varying effects on the human body dependent upon wavelength, intensity, and length of exposure.
As a result of our review of existing publications on em radiation, we have concluded that most research on occupational exposure to em radiation has been conducted using small laboratory animals. Controlled research studies on human exposure was also conducted. Most of the studies on human exposure to em radiation suffer from limitations: (1) Exposure for therapeutic purposes, namely partial body irradiation at high-intensities for relatively short periods of time is not representative of occupational exposure conditions. (2) Differences in methodologies used in different states make a comparison difficult if not impossible. (3) Errors in estimating field strength to which personnel were exposed due to the lack of adequate instrumentation. Nevertheless these studies show that the chief organs formerly thought to be at risk from exposure to em radiation, the skin, eyes, and ears, may not be the only ones effected. The roll em radiation plays in causing cancer is not yet defined.
For your information, an article by Slesin indicated that a 1988, epidemiological study by Dr. Marjorie Speers and others, showed the potential risk of brain tumors among workers exposed to electromagnetic fields5. This work seems to support earlier studies conducted by Dr. Samuel Milham, Jr. (Washington State Department of Social and Health Services in Olympia) and Dr. Ruey Lin (National Taiwan University in Taipei)6 Another example is a June, 1988, Seattle, Washington, court case in which an electronic technician diagnosed with leukemia filed a suit against his employer claiming that his condition was a result of exposure to electromagnetic radiation7. A third example is presented in a research conducted by Doctors Harry Brown and Swaraj Chattopadhyay (Rutgers University) concluding that exposure to nonionizing radiation can play a role in cancer.
On the other hand, in 1987, the Hazard Evaluation and Technical Assistance Branch of the National Institute for Occupation Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted a field investigation into possible health hazards at an acceleration laboratory9. NIOSH's report addressed both radio frequency (rf) and static magnetic fields. The report at its conclusion indicates that evidence that rf radiation alone can produce cancer was weak but it might act as a cancer promoter in animals.
As you can see, there is no consensus on the potential hazard of exposure to em radiation. Additional human exposure research should help in understanding the transmission, and interaction mechanism of em radiation with the exposed worker as well as, how to detect and quantify this field, and how to protect workers from em radiation effects. Most experts agree that more research on human exposures to this type of radiation is needed.
In conclusion, it is clear that further epidemiological studies and research into biological effects of em radiation and magnetic field (including chemical reaction in the body) is needed to fully understand and determine all health effects resulting from exposure cases. Cases involving exposure to em radiation should be considered on a case by case basis taking into consideration the circumstances surrounding it. It is premature to enforce specific guidelines for exposure to ELF radiation. However, a program which addresses ELF hazards identification and training is encouraged.
For your information, we are attaching a bibliography of the health effect publications on em radiation published since 1980. Please distribute this bulletin to area offices, state plan states and consultation projects.
Attachments:
Alternating Current:
Figure 1: A schematic representation of the pattern of currents induced in the body of a person standing under a transmission line by the alternating magnetic field set up by the current flowing in that line. A 60 Hz magnetic field with a flux density of one gauss will induce currents in the periphery of the body with a current density of about 100 nanoAmps per square centimeter. The current density at the center of the body is zero. (From: Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields. U.S. Congress Report No. OTA-BP-E-53)
Figure 2: A schematic representation of the surface charges and internal currents that are electrically induced by the charges on an overhead powerline in a person under the line whose feet are well-grounded. The total current induced to flow from each foot to ground is about 8 microamps per kV/m of applied field (1 microamp is 1 millionth of an ampere). The density of electrically-induced current is the amount of current that passes through a body cross-section perpendicular to the direction of current flow. The current density induced by a 1 kV/m vertical electric field is about 30 nanoamps per square centimeter averaged over the entire volume of the body. One nanoamp is 1 billionth of an ampere. (From: Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields. U.S. Congress Report No. OTA-BP-E-53)
Bibliography
AU - Author TI - Title SI - Source NIOSH Computerized Index Number SO - Source
AU - Servanties B TI - Damase criteria for determining microwave exposure. SI - TOXBIB/89/213413 SO - Health Phys; vol 56, iss 5, 1989, p781-786 (ref: 15)
AU - Kolmodin-Hedman B AU - Hansson Mild K AU - Hasbers M AU - Jonsson E AU - Andersson M-C AU - Eriksson A TI - Health Problems Among Operators of Plastic Welding Machines and Exposure to Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields SI - NIOSH/00181953 SO - International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, Vol. 60,No.4, pages 243-247, 16 references, 1988
AU - Knave B AU - Floderus B TI - Exposure to Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields A Health Hazard SI - NIOSH/00181593 SO - Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, Vol. 14, Supplement 1, pages 46-48, 11 references, 1988
AU - Aldrich TE AU - Easterly CE TI - Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health SI - NIOSH/00179613 - SO - Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 75, pages 159-171, 13 references, 1987
AU - Anonymous TI - Guidelines on Limits of Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields in the Frequency Range from 100 KHz to 300 GHz SI - NIOSH /00179608 SO - Health Physics, Vol. 54, No. 1, Pages 115-123, 34 references, 1988
AU - Bowman JD AU - Garabrant DH AU - Sobel E AU - Peters JM TI - Exposures to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Fields in Occupations with Elevated Leukemia Rates SI - NIOSH/00180633 SO - Applied Industrial HYgiene, Vol. 3, No. 6, pages 189-194, 38 references, 1988
AU - Castillo M AU - Quencer PM TI - Sublethal Exposure to Microwave Radar SI - NIOSH/00177338 SO - Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 259, No. 3, pages 355, 3 references, 1988
AU - Smith JM AU - Conover CL AU - Cox C AU - Murray WE AU - Grajewski B TI - Limitations of Field Strength Parameters For Measurement of Radiofrequency Radiation exposure SI - BIOSIS/88/36757 SO - Thirty-third Annual Meeting Of the Health Physics Society, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, July 4-8, 1988. Health Phys; 54 (Suppl. 1). 1988
AU - International Labour Organization Radiation Protection Association TI - Occupational Hazards From Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation SI - The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Technical Data Center SO - Occupational Safety and Health Series No. 53.,1985
AU - Kolmodin-Hedman B AU - Mild KH AU - Hagberg M AU - Jonsson E AU - Andersson M-c AU - Eriksson A TI - Health Problems Among Operators of Plastic Welding Machines and Exposure to Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields.
SI - BIOSIS/88/19834 SO - INT ARCH OCCUP ENVIRON HEALTH; 60 (4). 1988. 243-248.
AU - Jammet HP AU - Bernhardt J AU - Bosnjakovic B FM AU - Czerski P AU - Grandolfo M AU - Harder D AU - Knave B AU - Marshall J AU - Rapacholi MH AU - ET AL TI - GUIDELINES ON LIMITS OF EXPOSURE TO RADIOFREQUENCY Electromagnetic FIELDS IN THE FREQUENCY RANGE FROM 100 KHZ TO 300 GHZ SI - BIOSIS/87/29258 SO - HEALTH PHYS; 54 (1), 1988. 115-124.
AU - Indira Nair AU - Granger M M AU - Florig H K TI - Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields.
Background Paper SI - U.S. Congress Report no. OTA-BP-E-53 SO - Office of Technology Assessment Washington, D.C 20510-8025 May, 1989
AU - PAZ JD AU - Milliken R AU - Ingram WT AU - Frank A AU - Atkin A TI - Potential Ocular Damage From Microwave Exposure During Electrosurgery: Dosimetric Survey.
SI - BIOSIS/87/29258 SO - J OCCUP med; 29 (7). 1987. 77-80
AU - Miller TM TI - Results Of Microwave Oven Radiation leakage Surveys At Fermilab SI - BIOSIS/87/O8739 SO - AM IND HYG ASSOC J;48 (1). 1987. 77-80.
AU - Wertheimer N AU - Leeper E TI - Electrical Wiring Configurations and Childhood Cancer SI - SO - AMER.J.EPIDEMIOL.1O9:273-284. 1979
AU - Wertheimer N AU - Leeper E TI - Adult Cancer Related To Electrical Wires Near The Home SI - SO - INT.J.EPIDEMI0L.11:345-355 1982
AU - Savitz D.A AU - Wachtel H AU - Barnes F A AU - John E A AU - Tvrdik J G TI - Case-control study of Childhood Cancer and Exposure to 60-Hz Magnetic Fields.
SI - SO - AMER.J.EPIDEMIOL.128:21-38. 1982
AU - MILHAM S TI - Mortality From Leukemia In Workers Exposed To Electrical and Magnetic Fields SI - SO - New England J.Med.307:249. 1982
AU - Savitz D A AU - Calle E E TI - Leukemia And Occupational Exposure To Electromagnetic Fields:
Review Of Epidemiologic Surveys. SI - SO - J. Occup. Med. 29:47-51. 1987
1Savitz, D.A. and Calle, E.E., Journal of Occupational Medicine 29 "Leukemia and Occupational Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: Review of Epidemiologic Surveys," pages 47-51, 1987.
2National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields, Properties, Qualities and Units, Biophysical Interaction and Measurement, page 19, March, 1989.
3Suess, M.J., Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe: Non-ionizing Radiation Protection, page 104, 1982.
4Brown, H. D and Chattopadhyay, S.K., Cancer Biochemistry Biophysics, "Electromagnetic - Field Exposure and Cancer," page 297, May, 1988.
5Slesin, Louis. Microwave News: "A Report on Nonionizing Radiation," Page 1, July / August, 1988.
6 & 7Siesin, Louis. Microwave News: "Support for Radio Operator Cancer Risk," page 2, January / February, 1989.
8Brown, H.D and Chattopadhyay, S.K., Cancer Biochemistry Biophysics, "Electromagnetic - Field Exposure and Cancer," page 297, May, 1988.
9National Institute For Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Cincinnati Ohio, Health Hazard Evaluation Report number HETA 87-329, page 5, 1989.
The document I copied in below if from the following website (https://www.osha.gov/dts/hib/hib_data/hib19900207.html - note that it is from 1990, which shows that we have known about this for many, many years).
I like the story about the cows and electricity. Not that it somehow disproves any impact by electricity on human health, but that does illustrate a large potential problem with population-based studies (those that study health effects in large populations and which cannot control for all, or even many potentially conflicting factors). This is why proving the health effects of electricity is so difficult. The study does acknowledge the cancer cluster and was serious enough to warrant a memorandum to OSHA offices. The memo readily acknowledge that humans are beings of electricity and that electromagnetic radiation does impact the human body, so there is cause and effect - the health effects, a more difficult proof.
By the way, we do know now that exposure to the radiation of cell phones does increase the rate of brain tumors (likely caused by the increased cell turnover in the brain). Yet another data point....
OSHA Hazard Information Bulletins
The Effects of Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Radiation
February 7, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR:
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS
THRU:
LEO CAREY
Director
Directorate of Field Programs
FROM:
BARRY J. WHITE
Director
Directorate of Technical Support
SUBJECT:
Hazard Information Bulletin - The Effects of Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Radiation
The purpose of this bulletin is to present a review of health effects data associated with extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic (em) radiation exposure as found in current publications. Findings addressed in this bulletin do not reflect any Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) position on em hazards.
Recently, public and employee concerns have been expressed about ELF exposure as a result of media coverage over the last few years. An example of such coverage is the detailed evaluation of em publications published by Savitz in 1987. Savitz's analysis deals with potential adverse effects of ELF fields, but it is probably equally applicable to the entire em field-cancer case study literature1. The issue of ELF bioeffects is very controversial with few safety and health organizations having adopted exposure limits. ELF radiation, a part of the em spectrum, discussed in this bulletin is confined to the nonionizing frequency range up to 300 gigahertz (GHz). Of particular interest is the 50 to 60 Hz range which is associated with electrical power distribution, and equipment utilizing alternating current.
ELF radiation is comprised of both electric and magnetic fields and occur naturally in the environment2. The generation of em radiation is often unintentional as in the case of motors and fluorescent light or deliberate for a specific application such as television equipment. Irradiation of biological systems with em energy under certain conditions leads to temperature elevations when the rate of energy absorption exceeds the rate of energy dissipation3. Biological changes that occur during ELF exposure (which is not readily absorbed, and therefore does not normally cause significant temperature elevation) have not been well documented.
The human body contains free electric charges (largely in ion-rich fluids such as blood and lymph) that move in response to forces exerted by charges on and current flowing in nearby conductors, such as power lines and the wiring of appliances (see figures 1 and 2). The processes that produce these body currents are called electric and magnetic induction. In electric induction, charges on a power line or appliances attract or repel free charges within the body. Since body fluids are good conductors of electricity, charges in the body move to its surface under the influence of this electric force. The nature of magnetic fields are greater near the periphery of the body and smaller at the center of the body. Because magnetic fields have only recently become a human health concern, data on the detailed distribution of magnetically induced currents in human and animals are quite sparse compared to the information available on electric induction.
Human exposure to em radiation from natural sources is often considered small by comparison to that of industrial sources. Recently some research has shown a potential risk of cancer due to exposure to em radiation. For example in one of many conflicting research efforts, higher incidents of cancer were observed among children who lived in the vicinity of high voltage electric power lines. These lines surrounded by fields of extremely low frequency electromagnetic energy were statistically linked to clusters of cancer among children. Research also indicates that em radiation can have varying effects on the human body dependent upon wavelength, intensity, and length of exposure.
As a result of our review of existing publications on em radiation, we have concluded that most research on occupational exposure to em radiation has been conducted using small laboratory animals. Controlled research studies on human exposure was also conducted. Most of the studies on human exposure to em radiation suffer from limitations: (1) Exposure for therapeutic purposes, namely partial body irradiation at high-intensities for relatively short periods of time is not representative of occupational exposure conditions. (2) Differences in methodologies used in different states make a comparison difficult if not impossible. (3) Errors in estimating field strength to which personnel were exposed due to the lack of adequate instrumentation. Nevertheless these studies show that the chief organs formerly thought to be at risk from exposure to em radiation, the skin, eyes, and ears, may not be the only ones effected. The roll em radiation plays in causing cancer is not yet defined.
For your information, an article by Slesin indicated that a 1988, epidemiological study by Dr. Marjorie Speers and others, showed the potential risk of brain tumors among workers exposed to electromagnetic fields5. This work seems to support earlier studies conducted by Dr. Samuel Milham, Jr. (Washington State Department of Social and Health Services in Olympia) and Dr. Ruey Lin (National Taiwan University in Taipei)6 Another example is a June, 1988, Seattle, Washington, court case in which an electronic technician diagnosed with leukemia filed a suit against his employer claiming that his condition was a result of exposure to electromagnetic radiation7. A third example is presented in a research conducted by Doctors Harry Brown and Swaraj Chattopadhyay (Rutgers University) concluding that exposure to nonionizing radiation can play a role in cancer.
On the other hand, in 1987, the Hazard Evaluation and Technical Assistance Branch of the National Institute for Occupation Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted a field investigation into possible health hazards at an acceleration laboratory9. NIOSH's report addressed both radio frequency (rf) and static magnetic fields. The report at its conclusion indicates that evidence that rf radiation alone can produce cancer was weak but it might act as a cancer promoter in animals.
As you can see, there is no consensus on the potential hazard of exposure to em radiation. Additional human exposure research should help in understanding the transmission, and interaction mechanism of em radiation with the exposed worker as well as, how to detect and quantify this field, and how to protect workers from em radiation effects. Most experts agree that more research on human exposures to this type of radiation is needed.
In conclusion, it is clear that further epidemiological studies and research into biological effects of em radiation and magnetic field (including chemical reaction in the body) is needed to fully understand and determine all health effects resulting from exposure cases. Cases involving exposure to em radiation should be considered on a case by case basis taking into consideration the circumstances surrounding it. It is premature to enforce specific guidelines for exposure to ELF radiation. However, a program which addresses ELF hazards identification and training is encouraged.
For your information, we are attaching a bibliography of the health effect publications on em radiation published since 1980. Please distribute this bulletin to area offices, state plan states and consultation projects.
Attachments:
Alternating Current:
Figure 1: A schematic representation of the pattern of currents induced in the body of a person standing under a transmission line by the alternating magnetic field set up by the current flowing in that line. A 60 Hz magnetic field with a flux density of one gauss will induce currents in the periphery of the body with a current density of about 100 nanoAmps per square centimeter. The current density at the center of the body is zero. (From: Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields. U.S. Congress Report No. OTA-BP-E-53)
Figure 2: A schematic representation of the surface charges and internal currents that are electrically induced by the charges on an overhead powerline in a person under the line whose feet are well-grounded. The total current induced to flow from each foot to ground is about 8 microamps per kV/m of applied field (1 microamp is 1 millionth of an ampere). The density of electrically-induced current is the amount of current that passes through a body cross-section perpendicular to the direction of current flow. The current density induced by a 1 kV/m vertical electric field is about 30 nanoamps per square centimeter averaged over the entire volume of the body. One nanoamp is 1 billionth of an ampere. (From: Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields. U.S. Congress Report No. OTA-BP-E-53)
Bibliography
AU - Author TI - Title SI - Source NIOSH Computerized Index Number SO - Source
AU - Servanties B TI - Damase criteria for determining microwave exposure. SI - TOXBIB/89/213413 SO - Health Phys; vol 56, iss 5, 1989, p781-786 (ref: 15)
AU - Kolmodin-Hedman B AU - Hansson Mild K AU - Hasbers M AU - Jonsson E AU - Andersson M-C AU - Eriksson A TI - Health Problems Among Operators of Plastic Welding Machines and Exposure to Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields SI - NIOSH/00181953 SO - International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, Vol. 60,No.4, pages 243-247, 16 references, 1988
AU - Knave B AU - Floderus B TI - Exposure to Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields A Health Hazard SI - NIOSH/00181593 SO - Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, Vol. 14, Supplement 1, pages 46-48, 11 references, 1988
AU - Aldrich TE AU - Easterly CE TI - Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health SI - NIOSH/00179613 - SO - Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 75, pages 159-171, 13 references, 1987
AU - Anonymous TI - Guidelines on Limits of Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields in the Frequency Range from 100 KHz to 300 GHz SI - NIOSH /00179608 SO - Health Physics, Vol. 54, No. 1, Pages 115-123, 34 references, 1988
AU - Bowman JD AU - Garabrant DH AU - Sobel E AU - Peters JM TI - Exposures to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Fields in Occupations with Elevated Leukemia Rates SI - NIOSH/00180633 SO - Applied Industrial HYgiene, Vol. 3, No. 6, pages 189-194, 38 references, 1988
AU - Castillo M AU - Quencer PM TI - Sublethal Exposure to Microwave Radar SI - NIOSH/00177338 SO - Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 259, No. 3, pages 355, 3 references, 1988
AU - Smith JM AU - Conover CL AU - Cox C AU - Murray WE AU - Grajewski B TI - Limitations of Field Strength Parameters For Measurement of Radiofrequency Radiation exposure SI - BIOSIS/88/36757 SO - Thirty-third Annual Meeting Of the Health Physics Society, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, July 4-8, 1988. Health Phys; 54 (Suppl. 1). 1988
AU - International Labour Organization Radiation Protection Association TI - Occupational Hazards From Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation SI - The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Technical Data Center SO - Occupational Safety and Health Series No. 53.,1985
AU - Kolmodin-Hedman B AU - Mild KH AU - Hagberg M AU - Jonsson E AU - Andersson M-c AU - Eriksson A TI - Health Problems Among Operators of Plastic Welding Machines and Exposure to Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields.
SI - BIOSIS/88/19834 SO - INT ARCH OCCUP ENVIRON HEALTH; 60 (4). 1988. 243-248.
AU - Jammet HP AU - Bernhardt J AU - Bosnjakovic B FM AU - Czerski P AU - Grandolfo M AU - Harder D AU - Knave B AU - Marshall J AU - Rapacholi MH AU - ET AL TI - GUIDELINES ON LIMITS OF EXPOSURE TO RADIOFREQUENCY Electromagnetic FIELDS IN THE FREQUENCY RANGE FROM 100 KHZ TO 300 GHZ SI - BIOSIS/87/29258 SO - HEALTH PHYS; 54 (1), 1988. 115-124.
AU - Indira Nair AU - Granger M M AU - Florig H K TI - Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields.
Background Paper SI - U.S. Congress Report no. OTA-BP-E-53 SO - Office of Technology Assessment Washington, D.C 20510-8025 May, 1989
AU - PAZ JD AU - Milliken R AU - Ingram WT AU - Frank A AU - Atkin A TI - Potential Ocular Damage From Microwave Exposure During Electrosurgery: Dosimetric Survey.
SI - BIOSIS/87/29258 SO - J OCCUP med; 29 (7). 1987. 77-80
AU - Miller TM TI - Results Of Microwave Oven Radiation leakage Surveys At Fermilab SI - BIOSIS/87/O8739 SO - AM IND HYG ASSOC J;48 (1). 1987. 77-80.
AU - Wertheimer N AU - Leeper E TI - Electrical Wiring Configurations and Childhood Cancer SI - SO - AMER.J.EPIDEMIOL.1O9:273-284. 1979
AU - Wertheimer N AU - Leeper E TI - Adult Cancer Related To Electrical Wires Near The Home SI - SO - INT.J.EPIDEMI0L.11:345-355 1982
AU - Savitz D.A AU - Wachtel H AU - Barnes F A AU - John E A AU - Tvrdik J G TI - Case-control study of Childhood Cancer and Exposure to 60-Hz Magnetic Fields.
SI - SO - AMER.J.EPIDEMIOL.128:21-38. 1982
AU - MILHAM S TI - Mortality From Leukemia In Workers Exposed To Electrical and Magnetic Fields SI - SO - New England J.Med.307:249. 1982
AU - Savitz D A AU - Calle E E TI - Leukemia And Occupational Exposure To Electromagnetic Fields:
Review Of Epidemiologic Surveys. SI - SO - J. Occup. Med. 29:47-51. 1987
1Savitz, D.A. and Calle, E.E., Journal of Occupational Medicine 29 "Leukemia and Occupational Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: Review of Epidemiologic Surveys," pages 47-51, 1987.
2National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields, Properties, Qualities and Units, Biophysical Interaction and Measurement, page 19, March, 1989.
3Suess, M.J., Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe: Non-ionizing Radiation Protection, page 104, 1982.
4Brown, H. D and Chattopadhyay, S.K., Cancer Biochemistry Biophysics, "Electromagnetic - Field Exposure and Cancer," page 297, May, 1988.
5Slesin, Louis. Microwave News: "A Report on Nonionizing Radiation," Page 1, July / August, 1988.
6 & 7Siesin, Louis. Microwave News: "Support for Radio Operator Cancer Risk," page 2, January / February, 1989.
8Brown, H.D and Chattopadhyay, S.K., Cancer Biochemistry Biophysics, "Electromagnetic - Field Exposure and Cancer," page 297, May, 1988.
9National Institute For Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Cincinnati Ohio, Health Hazard Evaluation Report number HETA 87-329, page 5, 1989.
SY,
I am sure your hat is too tight, otherwise you might have pointed out the biased interest in positive findings by OSHA and lack of any follow up.
Personally I like the EPA and radon exposure. Gave them a whole new field to regulate. Now my late cousin Bernie was the one credited with starting the whole field. So it got very interesting at one family gathering where one cousin's new wife was a ranking EPA attorney and she was introduced to Bernie. The dawning of recognition that Bernie was Dr. Bernard L. Cohen the often quoted guru was quite funny. Of course his final conclusion was that the linear damage model was not correct. (still being debated in some circles with less data than he used.) So if a lot kills many people a little doesn't kill fewer and even actually make make them healthier just didn't play well with increased funding.
Using a multimeter in that way is not measuring the voltage in your body. It is measuring the trapped magnetic flux formed by the loop of the meter leads, your body, and the ground. It also does not distinguish between power line frequencies and any other frequencies it may be picking up, that depends on the DVM.
Actually, no. The line cords have very little coupling for e-fields, and the conductor spacing is such that half an inch away, the magfield is well below the earth's magnetic field.
Why is a smart meter important to this discussion? Are you saying it changes the 60 hz, or that it is generating hf signals which are communicating on the line?
Actually, that is the worst thing you could do. Without the grounding strap, your body will float at whatever potential it will, and as a result, there will be NO currents flowing in your body. By connecting yourself with a grounding strap, you are guaranteeing that currents will be flowing through you by capacitive coupling of a voltage gradient in the environment. That said, the only place you will see gradients of that level is directly under megavolt power lines. In your house, there are no voltage field gradients which can capacitively couple to your body. There are however, some low level stray magnetic fields which will fool inexperienced people into believing that they are measuring actual voltages.
BTW, is that wrist strap cord capable of strangling you? It would not be a good thing to accidentally do that while trying to stay healthy, that would defeat your purpose.
All I've seen is anecdotal evidence, as well as conjecture, speculation, and conclusions without scientific merit. I still worry, but to date, I've not seen any rigorous scientific studies that warranted action.
There is also a large and growing body of literature of those who shun the medical establishment, and instead seek out non medical solutions to problems the medical establishment has achieved increasing success with. I've attended the wakes of several friends who chose their medical care based on scientifically careless papers, conspiracy nuts, and other anti-medical establishment authors.
You seem to be overly concerned with something that nobody has shown to be dangerous, and as a result, do strange things like wiring yourself to the earth (despite the fact that it actually worsens the effect you speak of).
Oh, btw..that powerline vs cancer cluster stuff? I recall that started with a correlation between schools near power lines and cancer...eventually, it was realized that the power lines were run on contaminated soil, and nobody informed the school districts.
John
PS. Had a friend ask me about the health effects of some wonderful magnetic bracelets he purchased. My response to him was, do you feel better as a result of wearing them? If yes, keep them on. If not, then why bother. IOW, many times the psyche plays more of a role. If you feel better with all the things you mentioned, go for it. Who are we to stop you.. I only point out your E/M flaws in thinking.
Last edited:
Watering troughs for farm animals often have electrical problems. The soil around the trough is always wet. If the electric water pump leaks any voltage to the trough's water, the animal will not be happy drinking the water. This often happens far, far away from any high voltage power lines.
The AM radio detects radio frequency noise and interference. It has little to do with the 50/60 Hz electromagnetic field.
For the 50/60 Hz field use a legacy guitar.
My political writings appear elsewhere, I do not think they're appropriate for this forum.
@jneutron, drop me an email with updates, please.
Where I grew up if there wasn't mains pressure for the troughs farmers used windmills. Not seen any in farmland for years tho. Shame as there is now proof they increase milk yields
Well, I read whole thread.
First thought was why didn't the OP just move. Life is too short!
Second thought, why didn't the OP try placing his bed temporarily in another room as far away as possible from, what sounds like a rather large high voltage transformer. And then see if he could sleep at night. Or try sleeping on the couch in the living room. Any place as far as possible from the EMI emitting/magnetic field of the transformer
Or, LOL, if the OP really thought it may be the EMI emitting/magnetic field from the transformer that was keeping him up at night he could have invested in a faraday cage suite. Yes they make them. LOL, not sure how comfortable it would be to sleep in though. The suite would probably keep him up at night as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IT6_ItjDbE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tzga6qAaBA
>>
http://fms-corp.com/interferenceconcerns_acfields.php4
First thought was why didn't the OP just move. Life is too short!
Second thought, why didn't the OP try placing his bed temporarily in another room as far away as possible from, what sounds like a rather large high voltage transformer. And then see if he could sleep at night. Or try sleeping on the couch in the living room. Any place as far as possible from the EMI emitting/magnetic field of the transformer
Or, LOL, if the OP really thought it may be the EMI emitting/magnetic field from the transformer that was keeping him up at night he could have invested in a faraday cage suite. Yes they make them. LOL, not sure how comfortable it would be to sleep in though. The suite would probably keep him up at night as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IT6_ItjDbE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tzga6qAaBA
>>
http://fms-corp.com/interferenceconcerns_acfields.php4
Last edited:
There are lots of things we've known for many years:
The science myths that will not die : Nature News & Comment
And more directly on the topic, there's this:
FRONTLINE: previous reports: transcripts: currents of fear | PBS
The science myths that will not die : Nature News & Comment
And more directly on the topic, there's this:
FRONTLINE: previous reports: transcripts: currents of fear | PBS
Welcome back jneutron (member of the sanity-checker group)
Extremely Low Frequency Fields
Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.238
WHO | Extremely Low Frequency Fields<br>Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.238
Fact sheets and backgrounders
WHO | Fact sheets and backgrounders
George
Extremely Low Frequency Fields
Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.238
WHO | Extremely Low Frequency Fields<br>Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.238
Fact sheets and backgrounders
WHO | Fact sheets and backgrounders
George
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.