Who here can relate to EMF-handicapped

Puppy related raves and general interest that doesn't fit anywhere else
Message
Author
starhawk
Posts: 4906
Joined: Mon 22 Nov 2010, 06:04
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

#41 Post by starhawk »

Barkin, I respectfully disagree...

Might I point out that Charles Darwin himself was quite fervently religious? (Anglican, IIRC.) I can't find it in Wiki right this second, but I've heard that he actually delayed publishing On The Origin of Species because he knew that the Church wouldn't like it...

...but what I *can* find in Wiki is that the Church's reception was far less heated than he thought ;) I'll leave it to you to read up if you're interested.

Besides -- speaking purely as an unmarried marriage counselor here -- I'm pretty sure that the Bible doesn't actually spell out how long a day is for God Himself -- so it's extremely easy to say that evolution is His Way of moving things along. (Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.)

User avatar
Barkin
Posts: 803
Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2011, 04:55

#42 Post by Barkin »

starhawk wrote:Might I point out that Charles Darwin himself was quite fervently religious? (Anglican, IIRC.) I can't find it in Wiki right this second, but I've heard that he actually delayed publishing On The Origin of Species because he knew that the Church wouldn't like it...
My point exactly : his scientific discovery was incompatible with his religion.

The science bit and religion are mutually exclusive: there is no God in science.

starhawk
Posts: 4906
Joined: Mon 22 Nov 2010, 06:04
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

#43 Post by starhawk »

You know, I'd point out how you extracted less than half of what I wrote and used it by itself (to the complete and entire exclusion of the rest of everything else there, which is to say, my entire point itself) -- but I'd probably just be wasting my metaphorical breath...

So, instead, you get a remarkably insensitive picture.

Image

User avatar
Barkin
Posts: 803
Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2011, 04:55

#44 Post by Barkin »

starhawk wrote:You know, I'd point out how you extracted less than half of what I wrote and used it by itself (to the complete and entire exclusion of the rest of everything else there, which is to say, my entire point itself) -- but I'd probably just be wasting my metaphorical breath...

So, instead, you get a remarkably insensitive picture.

Image
To imply that anyone who disagrees with you is mentally-retarded, (rather than engage in rational debate to defend your opinion), shows the position you hold is untenable.
starhawk wrote:... you get a remarkably insensitive picture.
IMO this usage of the image of runner "197" is morally unacceptable , whether you are religious or not.
I very much doubt they or their parent / guardian have given consent to this usage of their image.
[ If "197" was a member of your family would you want their image used in this way ? ]

If you really are religious, runner "197" is one of God's creations, and you shouldn't be ridiculing them or their creator.

starhawk
Posts: 4906
Joined: Mon 22 Nov 2010, 06:04
Location: Everybody knows this is nowhere...

#45 Post by starhawk »

I was actually pointing out that rational debate would probably prove too frustrating to be worth pursuing, rather than stooping to the level of a personal insult.

It was also intended as a dig at myself for getting involved in the first place, since all I've gotten out of it so far is feeling stupid for opening my metaphorical mouth in the first place.

For the record, I am not religious, by choice. There are too many people who do many very bad things (in my opinion) in the name of God, and too many people (this is a particularly rampant problem here in the US) glorifying the concept of undereducation-to-the-point-of-near-idiocy, also in the name of God, for me to Believe in any sort of organized anything of that sort. Thanks but no thanks. I'm not an athiest, either. I'm what I call "undecided" -- I don't know what I believe in. When I figure it out, I'll let you (and probably a few others) know. Right now, it's actually not a high priority for me... one of the advantages of not having religion (at least in the traditional sense) is that one is far less susceptible to spiritual crises.

In any event, I recognize that I'm not likely to change your mind, and I'm quite certain you won't change mine, so what's the point? ;)

Thanks, it's been fun and all, but this is my stop so I'm getting off now.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#46 Post by Ted Dog »

No use jumping hoops for a skeptical persons million dollar prize. They are always the smartest guy in the room. They do not even need logic to believe the other guy point. Since the skepticism is not about answers, no point in playing their games. Its like trolling online no real value in being a skeptic. They are not striving for answers not worried about logic or improving the human condition. :P

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#47 Post by mikeb »

well since this seems to be more about believe than any scientific investigation its time for me to exit stage left too....

enjoy

Mike

User avatar
Smithy
Posts: 1151
Joined: Mon 12 Dec 2011, 11:17

#48 Post by Smithy »

Well don't you think it's time that we started building Faraday Houses?

There were reports quite a few years ago about children being more vulnerable to electronic radiation from mobile phones because their brain tissue was softer.

This was tested several times I think and the "report" was "INCONCLUSIVE" i.e the mobile industry expansion plans were too important (if one is a cynic) to be disrupted by paranoia about health.

But maybe the emf was too insignificant to be deemed a hazard to elfs.
I'm sure the truth is out there somewhere.

I've built a couple of Faradays round portable preamps and they are ace.
But then you come up against the laws of physics that says:

"Thou Shalt not get a signal to noise ratio any better than -89db or so in the analogue world, give or take a few saints or sinners".
And digital is so...boring, flat, perfect..ish.

I'm with Tarantino on film, get rid of this digital, get your 35mm out.


I reckon we are all suffering in some degrees from emf, but have learnt to adapt to the brain frying. But does this help Original poster..

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#49 Post by Ted Dog »

Faraday Houses are an idea there is another idea that peaked my interest and did seem to bave a calming effect is building to not cause eddys with earths natural ground currents. Should see if I can find that professors reports. Faraday houses are hard to make and cause an issue with ground currents disruptions. But earthen houses with out metal grids in roofs floors or walls allow the much stronger ground currents to envelope the structure. That with the mass dampers all forms of radiation not just EMF. And you do not have to worry about living inside of a microwave oven effect of your own cell phones computers and such.
I do n9t recall all the details some seems to go against regular views of shielding but he was good about addressing those rules.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#50 Post by Ted Dog »

http://www.udcinc.org/CEB%20PUB.html

found the reports storage location lots of interesting points not just EMF

Prof. John J. Morony
Biology Department

Texas.

I hope he published that I do have a copy some where.

User avatar
Barkin
Posts: 803
Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2011, 04:55

#51 Post by Barkin »

Ted Dog wrote: ... skepticism is not about answers ... They are not striving for answers not worried about logic or improving the human condition.
You could not be further from the truth. Humouring people who believe they have EMF-sensitivity , when it is demonstrably false, is not helping them improve their condition.

They have an illness, be it organic or psychosomatic, which could be treatable, but which cannot be treated whilst they are labouring under the misconception their problems are caused by electricity.
Smithy wrote:There were reports quite a few years ago about children being more vulnerable to electronic radiation from mobile phones because their brain tissue was softer.
The use of mobile phones has increased exponentially in the last 30 years , but the incidence of brain cancer during that period has not showed a corresponding rise ...

Image
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer- ... incidence/

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#52 Post by Ted Dog »

Barkin your helping by ridicule how does that work? Humouring people? Hardly!! There are many oddies of the human body, the complexity of interdependencies EMF effects humans body those interactions are routinely used for medical procedures. MRI most directly. CAT, EKG almost all sensors types. Pacemakers induction charged emplanted batteries etc.
Stands to reason some individuals will have reactions to things most people do not. Like Peanut Allergies life threatening to some to most a wonderful source of protein. As OP expressed its a irritation source.

User avatar
Barkin
Posts: 803
Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2011, 04:55

#53 Post by Barkin »

Ted Dog wrote:Barkin your helping by ridicule how does that work?

I have not ridiculed people who allege they have EMF-sensitivity , I have pointed out that double-blind studies show they are incorrect. I'm doing them a favour by pointing out they are barking up the wrong tree.
Ted Dog wrote: ...Stands to reason some individuals will have reactions to things most people do not. Like Peanut Allergies ...
Even if it was a one-in-a-million ability, someone would be able to demonstrate it.
Those self-diagnosed with EMF-sensitivity cannot demonstrate it.
Ted Dog wrote:...MRI...
I'll concede that transcranial magnetic stimulation, deep brain stimulation and the electric chair can be sensed by those subject to them, but we were taking about everyday EMF exposure : radio-transmission, power cables , EMI from computers , which no-one has demonstrated they can detect.

Minni
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 05 Mar 2014, 05:28

reply

#54 Post by Minni »

Moat wrote:The older I get, the more I notice the shorter the stints at the computer I'm able to withstand (or doing anything that's sedentary, for that matter), before beginning to feel lousy. I step away and do something else that's more active, and soon feel better. When younger, I could sit sedentary for far longer (painting, detailed mechanical work, etc.)... no more. Part of getting old... we're only designed to last ~35-45 yrs., anyways - so beyond that age, such difficulties are par for the course. In some ways... even welcome! :)

Bob
Moat, I know this is long delayed, but just now (having read over again your above comment) here's mine:

I think you might enjoy reading the books Body Electric & Cross Currents by Dr.Becker. He was a genious who flew in the face of standard_care, similar to the way quantum-physicists fly in the face of standard physics. Ditto for Hutchinson Effect types of guys & gals (I heard the latter fled to the wilds of Canada to get away from govt. gangsters, as have others who wanted freedom to pursue their thing, at risk of what may have happened to Tesla.

Having read his books (albeit over my head) I tend to disagree with the assessment that it's solely due to aging.

I think it's more related to people who have a huge amount of neurological connections, similar to what happens to those who practice Kundalini.

If you read Becker's books, you'd see how he found out that:

At night, there's much more "electric action" going on in the head area, thus positive charge,
...whereas by day, the positive charge gets more distributed toward the lower part of the body - since that's when we're more active.

Which could explain why - when everyone exercises - they feel more refreshed. Because the positive charge gets drawn more to the rest of the body rather than the head-area.

The same principle applies to series of hot & cold showers. I believe some honcho somewhere used the term "flashing" to describe that.

I also read 2 interesting phenomena, in 2 separate places.

(1) somewhere online, I read someone chatting that whenever a particular programmer would be in proximity to a software program - the program would stop working.
(2) the book "The Field" mentioned a particular doctor/biologist who was a meticulous researcher - yet (consistently) homeopathic signals were wiped out whenever she was working with the homeopathic-Vials. It did not happen with others who were working there, just her. Proof to me, that that meticulous woman must have had SUCH intense/focused concentration, acting like a strong laser beam. Like Uri Geller. (Or - like Intense Intent AKA-prayer)
References re: Electric People:
http://www.amasci.com/weird/unusual/zap.html
https://usahitman.com/sai-electric/

Minni
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 05 Mar 2014, 05:28

reply

#55 Post by Minni »

mikeb wrote:Radiation might have been a factor with a CRT monitor but LCD only chuck out visible light.

What I do get is very sore eyes and eventually something resembling a sty if I have to deal with too many white background pages for too long.
mike
OK, finally responded to Moat,
now on to mikeb:

Guess what - I also get loads of skin tags directly correlated to computer use (but don't ever expect the med.system to believe anything that's not listed in their jargony-tomes. So I recently operated on myself. I.E. i've removed one of them from my neck/chest area with a nail-clipper, since that particular one was KILLING me - thereby obtaining relief. Also my ear lobe would get hot (where I used to wear screw-on earrings).

As for screen color, actually many sensitives find that white or lite grey or lite blue backgrounds are best.
And you might wanna try dark-magenta-purple sunglasses, if easy obtainable for you (I never did get around to it, but found it VERY pleasant at an eye-doctor's office.
He specialized in Irlen Syndrome, thus the glasses.

The reason many sensitives find light backgrounds best, is cuz we need to dim our screens to the UTmost, thus making such types of coloring most legible without eye strain (as opposed to light text on dark backgrounds. If you look up web-design advice, they too advise that dark text on light BG is best. It's not just me saying it.

Many of us find Matte best as well,
...and in fact, a computer sales-techie on this site:

http://www.squidoo.com/matte-vs-glossy-screens
testimonied:
  • I am a computer professional and have replaced many laptop screens. This really depends on WHO we are talking about. Most of my clients above 40 would prefer Matte and most of my younger ones would prefer glossy. My personal preference is Matte. I specifically order full HD Matte screens for all of my laptops and love them. When I sit by a window there is a LOT less glare and I can even take my laptop outside and use it there. Glossy has better color saturation and slightly better contrast but the glare and what they do to my eyes makes me always buy matte.

Minni
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 05 Mar 2014, 05:28

reply

#56 Post by Minni »

Smithy, thanks for the input - thing is - I haven't yet tried a Faraday cage. Be it the expense, effort, whatever. Probably stupid of me, what can I say...
Ted Dog wrote:Since the skepticism is not about answers, no point in playing their games. Its like trolling online no real value in being a skeptic. They are not striving for answers not worried about logic or improving the human condition. :P
:wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: Long-overdue - thanks, Ted Dog! :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:
To answer the first part of your long-ago response, I have DSL connection, no WIFI is connected. Soon due to get a replacement modem from ISP which can double as router, as mentioned in my other thread. I've a wired-mouse that's old-fashioned, non-optical. And wired 1990s keyboard that's a tough cookie. No, do not have a military type of toughbook that's encased in alloy. All such expenses can add up, and I'm ignorant re: electronics, physics & computers, as you've gathered.

Re: the mylar bag, I never yet got any of that to date.
See, I was wondering, what about the open areas, of head, hands, etc.
See this: http://5ocietyx.files.wordpress.com/201 ... arison.jpg
Isn't that sorta like a "hole-in-dyke" where trojan-emfs can enter?

BTW, there's actually a much more "primitive" albeit EFFECTIVE way for you and me & others to SORTA RESET OURSELVES if only I had the wherewithall to set it up.

See the below pic. - which flies in the face of all the jargon above & everywhere.
In fact, most jargony-electrosensitives & CFS'ers & other labelled conditions would scoff at it as well, and I'd not be surprised if you, Moat & Mikeb & everyone would join the crowd.

But IT WORKS so to me it makes no diff. how many scoffers there are. Truth is truth, whether ridiculed or not.

non-invasive alternative to plasmapheresis or chemo:
http://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/rw3qc0did9/infra_mud.jpg

http://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/260xiqaxs ... r_care.jpg

User avatar
Smithy
Posts: 1151
Joined: Mon 12 Dec 2011, 11:17

#57 Post by Smithy »

Hi Minnie, well I don't know enough about the condition, but I know that whenever I get out of a car I get a quite painful zap everytime, so much so that I now close a door with my shoulder because the zap is reduced a bit. It's a bit like getting involuntary ECT treatment. Anyways that's not important.

There's only ever been the same amount of water on the Earth, no more, no less. That's what I heard recently and that statement has stuck in my head for weeks.
But does that apply to EMF I wonder.

Barkin does have some interesting info there, as does Ted Dog.

Can you say what has helped you in the past? Clothing, equipment and what was the effect, even if minor?

User avatar
Moat
Posts: 955
Joined: Tue 16 Jul 2013, 06:04
Location: Mid-mitten

Re: reply

#58 Post by Moat »

Minni wrote: I think it's more related to people who have a huge amount of neurological connections, similar to what happens to those who practice Kundalini.
I can accept that. Ever notice how some people have a higher or lower threshhold of pain? Just as each of us has differing outward physical characteristics (size, build, eyes, nose, hair, etc...), we are all physically "wired" differently, as well - with neurons and receptors (as in pain receptors - amongst others). Some luck out when it comes to those... some don't, and can be overwhelmed suffering through some physical hardship/condition that might not be such a big deal to the average person.
Minni wrote:The same principle applies to series of hot & cold showers. I believe some honcho somewhere used the term "flashing" to describe that.
So too, acceptable. The transfer of nerve impulses across receptors (pain and others) involves the temporary "consumption" (i.e. - using up) of biochemical/electrochemical compounds created and stored by the body for just such use. Repeated/prolonged stimulation of those nerve receptors (like in a series of hot & cold showers) uses up the immediately available supply of those compounds, and the impulses diminish (i.e. - pain, discomfort) as does the concentration of those chemicals. Fight-or-flight - severe pain initially, so as to avoid injury or call notice to it... but soon after not so much pain as to prevent a functional escape from the unfortunate event (of course, adrenaline plays a role there as well!).
Minni wrote:...that that meticulous woman must have had SUCH intense/focused concentration, acting like a strong laser beam. Like Uri Geller. (Or - like Intense Intent AKA-prayer)
Yeah... I dunno. For me, a lifetime of hearing/reading/observing about such things has left me with the conclusion that it's likely entire nonsense. And even if there are/were some evidence or measurable effects from such activities (ESP, supernatural, paranormal, prayer, et al), those effects always end up being so negligible as to be essentially worthless in a real-world, practical sense of application. Not worth the effort, by a long shot.
Minni wrote: But IT WORKS so to me it makes no diff. how many scoffers there are. Truth is truth, whether ridiculed or not.

non-invasive alternative to plasmapheresis or chemo:
http://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/rw3qc0did9/infra_mud.jpg

http://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/260xiqaxs ... r_care.jpg
Like I mentioned - activity/exercise! :) It's well known that - given the one-way valving of the body's veinous system - continuous expansion/contraction of the muscles (especially the legs!) actually aids considerably in the flow of blood (the reason for those folks bedridden and post surgery have those cycling, inflatable bags on their legs - keep blood flowing and prevent clots from forming while laying motionless). The older we get, the tougher time our heart and circulatory system has in in keeping blood flowing - especially away from tissue in the lower extremities, via veins, and back to the heart. Hence, prevalence of swollen ankles/edema, varicose veins with age.

Motion - it's all good!

But really, the argument over whether the more "esoteric" approaches are real or not, is a waste - as neither believers or sceptics have much in the way of formal "proof" (although evidence weighs heavily in favor of the sceptics).

It's all moot. Life is too short, and time is 'a wastin'. One has to use the limited time and available resources at hand (medicine, whether formal or not), and apply a good dose of common sense to discern the most realistic, practical approach to arriving at some kind of worthwhile, efficacious treatment. Otherwise, it's just banter/interest/etc. - or an avenue for wasted money, time, effort and days of existing with more illness than one needs to.

And then again, there are those of us for whom nothing much helps (CFS from Sarcoidosis, in my case... i.e. - been there, done that) and just have to suck-it-up and get on with what's left over, the best we can. :)

Bob

Bird Dog
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun 15 Jun 2014, 18:06
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Who here can relate

#59 Post by Bird Dog »

Hi Minni I use 5 foot ps2 extensions for my mouse and keyboard and just increase the zoom if needed. I thought it was the crt monitors as to why my eyes were blookshot but after using an lcd monitor I think I'll still keep my distance. I would be careful about removing things even moles, my Uncle got into some real trouble doing that.

User avatar
Barkin
Posts: 803
Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2011, 04:55

#60 Post by Barkin »

Minni wrote:Hutchinson Effect ... homoeopathic ... Uri Geller ... Irlen Syndrome
Mr Hutchinson is an incompetent magician ... http://www.skepdic.com/hutchisonhoax.html
Homoeopathy is a fraud: the "remedy" is pure water ... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Homeopathy
Mr Geller is a magician , not a physician , see ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJceUt59zn0
"Irlen Syndrome" , yet another medical-fraud ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irlen_filters#Criticism
Minni wrote: But IT WORKS so to me it makes no diff. how many scoffers there are. Truth is truth...
The truth would be demonstrable in a double-blind experiment , in such tests no-one has ever demonstrated the ability.
I am not denying the existence of the symptoms in people who allege they have EMF sensitivity,
but testing shows such persons cannot tell when an EMF emitting device is on or off so their symptoms cannot be due to electricity.
Smithy wrote:... I get out of a car I get a quite painful zap everytime, so much so that I now close a door with my shoulder because the zap is reduced a bit.
An "anti-static earthing strap" dangling from your car would solve that problem , when you stop it touches the ground and discharges the electric charge on your car, rather than have your body perform that task.
Last edited by Barkin on Tue 01 Jul 2014, 10:46, edited 4 times in total.

Post Reply