Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 8/Plus How can one protect self from emf?
- Thread starter Ucshade
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Metal underwear and/or avoid placing cell phone in pocket near family jewels.
No…tinfoil might work though
Only when worn as a hat
EMF? It's a phone, receiving EM waves is kind of the deal.
The only way to avoid EMF from a phone is to not use a phone at all. However, I don’t think it’s been established that the low amount of EMF “around” a smartphone is dangerous. (see https://www.who.int/news-room/quest... research, to date,is harmful to human health.)
Ionizing radiation is what damages tissue. That's stuff like nuclear radiation. Even then, standards for acceptable levels of ionizing radiation have been determined and set by nuclear authorities.
NON-ionizing radiation, of which EMF consists of, does not damage tissue. But the NIMBY and Tin Foil Hat brigades want you to think that it does.
NON-ionizing radiation, of which EMF consists of, does not damage tissue. But the NIMBY and Tin Foil Hat brigades want you to think that it does.
And the amount of EMF from the sun and from lightning completely overwhelms the tiny amount from a phone. But the industry that profits off of people’s fears of this stuff don’t want you to think about that.
Wrap yourself in tinfoil and stay in your basement.
EMF is everywhere.
EMF is everywhere.
Different phones have different levels of EMF
Generally the newer phones that use 5G give off the most EMF.
3G and 2G phones have less EMF.
I was using a Samsung Galaxy 2 phone cause it gave off the least EMF
BUT all the cell phone companies have been Banning 3G and 2G phones from their network.
So your stuck radiating yourself with a 5G phone and possibly a future Cancer patient so Now The hospitals and the medical industry can take all your hard earned money.
Generally the newer phones that use 5G give off the most EMF.
3G and 2G phones have less EMF.
I was using a Samsung Galaxy 2 phone cause it gave off the least EMF
BUT all the cell phone companies have been Banning 3G and 2G phones from their network.
So your stuck radiating yourself with a 5G phone and possibly a future Cancer patient so Now The hospitals and the medical industry can take all your hard earned money.
I met a graduate student from Spain who traveled to the U.S. to a speciality clinic which treats EMF sensitivities because of problems with cellular transmissions. They installed a cell tower close to his living quarters in Spain which resulted in disabilitating migraines.
Unfortunately correct. Everything electrical around you produces frequencies. There is no easy way to avoid them completely unless you move to some of those special places where sensitives live in shielded accommodations.
Unfortunately correct. Everything electrical around you produces frequencies. There is no easy way to avoid them completely unless you move to some of those special places where sensitives live in shielded accommodations.
Easy! Don't go to their concerts and don't buy any of their old used CDs.
Even sunlight is a form of EMF that is far more energetic than anything a radio transmitter or electrical circuit emits. Research that has been done on sensitive people has shown that the effects are essentially entirely psychosomatic. In blind tests, people experience symptoms even in the absence of EMFs when led to believe they are being exposed. Clearly people are having real experiences, but EMFs are not causing them.
It's a little more nuanced that most people realize.
The real issue is that roughly within the last 100 years, we are no longer getting enough trace minerals, magnesium, etc in our diet because of how we made the switch to modern day agriculture, which produces extremely nutrient depleted plants and animals, we then consume depleted plants and animals, hence we are now on the 4th and 5th generation of depleted humanity. (We get everything we need nutrient wise from our mother when we are born, but if she was depleted, then we are born depleted right off the bat.)
There is a huge difference between harmful EMFs and EMFs that are actually beneficial for the body. That's a distinction that needs to be made, and EMFs from phones, cell towers, routers, ect. are actually harmful to the human body when the human body does not have what it needs to be healthy and resilient. These would all fall into the category of negative EMFs.
If you have what your body needs, EMFs from your phone shouldn't really be that big of an issue, (the effects are very minor and your body is able to withstand and heal from the barrage of frequencies without a problem.) However, since 99.999% of humanity is extremely depleted in basic minerals and vitamins without knowing it, EMF exposure then becomes an issue because our body loses its ability to heal, manage ATP, stay strong, and stay resilient, (especially when exposed over decades and decades while being depleted.) What wouldn't really have been an issue is now a big issue because of how depleted we are. We don't have an incredibly disease ridden society for no reason at all. I would recommend for pretty much anyone with any concern for taking care of themselves to start on a bioavailable form of magnesium like magnesium bicarbonate, a trace mineral supplement, a source of copper, fulvic acid, humic acid, vitamin k2, and selenium. All of these things allow your body to properly manage the cellular respiration process, which is the foundation to physical health.
Supplementing these will not only allow your body to be around your phone and other sources of negative EMF without it being an issue, it will also allow your body to heal from the silent damage that has already taken place over decades of exposure.
There has been a ton of fear and propaganda spun around EMFs and I would recommend not buying into any of that either, but that's a discussion for a different day.
Regards,
-Dave
Last edited:
It's a little more nuanced that just a psychosomatic repsonse. This is a combination of nervous system dysfunction, metabolic dysfunction, mental projection, and trauma response from previous exposures. The body doesn't know when to shut off its response because it's become so disregulated, and its extremely depleted of nutrients and vitamins which it needs to be resilient to negative and positive EMFs. If it doesn't have these nutrients it is very likely to develop an acute hyper sensitivity. In addition there is the psychosomatic response thrown into the mix, which often originates as a trauma response, but not always. The person is already dealing with a real hypersensitivity, but then they project that reponse into situations where it doesn't apply, and because the nervous system is so disregulated, and because the person has likely developed a huge amount of fear and anxiety over the situation or response in the first place, they are now projecting into a situation what they are already feeling and experiencing, even if what they are experiencing isn't caused by something currently present.
Just a note on the sun. It may produce beneficial EMFs, but most people still cant be outside all day long without getting sunburnt or sun sick. Our ability to manage and metabolize sunlight is also governed by our mineral and nutrient foundation, cellular functioning, enzymatic balance, hormonal balance, as well as the other current health factors of the body. This is the primary reason why some people burn very easily and some dont burn easily at all. We all have a different level of metabolic health, the root of which is cellular respiration and functioning. (There are nuances and genetic factors at play but the primary issue is metabolic health.) Funny enough, metabolic health is the primary factor for all EMF resiliency and sensitivity.
Last edited:
I appreciate your input on this, but respectfully I think there is more information, nuance, and details needed in the EMF discussion to form an accurate assessment over "EMF is bad" or "EMF is good." I've written a couple of other responses on this post if you care to take a look.
The problem with these arguments is that there is no hard evidence that low energy EMF, such as radio waves, causes a negative physical response to the human body. Likewise, there is no evidence that people that claim hypersensitivity to EMF actually are affected by the radiation. It doesn't make sense to blame said hypersensitivity on malnutrition when there's no proof of it existing in the first place. As I already said, I'm not discrediting what people feel, but the cause.
I would suggest digging a little deeper into the scientific literature and studies on EMFs. There is a lot out there that suggests otherwise to what you are stating, from very well educated, very well known, very respected individuals or groups in their fields.
By the way, we can easily can poke holes in a lot of these huge, very well known organizations:
The CDC says: What causes sunburn, skin cancer, and sun sickness? Ultraviolet Rays.
The Mayo foundation says: What do Ultraviolet Rays consist of? Non-Ionizing Radiation
But that's funny. The FDA states: "there is currently no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk in humans."
Around and around we go.
So which reputable organization are we going to believe? They contradict each other all the time, and the science itself contradicts itself all the time. There's a lot of reputable science out there that suggests low energy EMFs are actually harmful. This suggested that between 1.5 to 5 percent of childhood leukemia can be attributed to ELF-EMFs: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412013002110
Another Source:
Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz
During the use of handheld mobile and cordless phones, the brain is the main target of radiofrequency (RF) radiation. An increased risk of developing glioma and acoustic neuroma has been found in human epidemiological studies. Primarily based on these findings, the International Agency for...
www.spandidos-publications.com
Sources not attributed to the low emf discussion.
UV Radiation Safety
Protect yourself and others from the sun with a hat, shirt, and sunscreen (SPF 15+) all year.
Sunburn - Symptoms and causes
Do Cell Phones Pose a Health Hazard?
The weight of scientific evidence has not linked exposure to radio frequency energy from cell phone use with any health problems.
Last edited:
Generally true, though some frequencies and power levels might cause issues. Most notably, RF operating near the resonance frequency of certain body parts can cause thermal damage. Burns and overheating, yes, cancer, not especially. As an amateur radio operator, I remember learning about this for the technician license back in the early 2000s (and the license guide I was studying from was back in the 1990s, and it still covered RF safety). The FCC on their FAQ about RF safety notes that eyes and testes are particularly vulnerable, due to their inability to readily disperse heat through the blood vessels (due to having fewer vessels connecting to them).
You probably shouldn’t be super worried about these effects, as the phones are engineered with RF safety in mind. As for cancer? There’s not much evidence of it, a few studies purport to show it, but it’s largely inconclusive, but if it’s something you’re concerned about, it’s probably sufficient to use speaker phone and have the phone not in the immediate vicinity of your body (especially your head) when calling or actively using a data connection. As for RF sensitivity, it’s a bunch of non-specific symptoms and it’s generally not supported by double blind studies.
In fact, relevant to this thread, the FAQ specifically states: “A number of devices have been marketed that claim to "shield" or otherwise reduce RF absorption in the body of the user. Some of these devices incorporate shielded phone cases, while others involve nothing more than a metallic accessory attached to the phone. Studies have shown that these devices generally do not work as advertised. In fact, they may actually increase RF absorption in the head due to their potential to interfere with proper operation of the phone, thus forcing it to increase power to compensate. The Federal Trade Commission has published a Consumer Alert regarding these shields on its website at: FTC Consumer Information - Cell Phone Radiation Scam. (Back to Index)”
You can check out the FAQ for more info:
https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-tec...ision/radio-frequency-safety/faq/rf-safety#Q7