Electrosensibility and electromagnetic hypersensitivity
Norbert Leitgeb *, Jörg Schroettner
Department of Clinical Engineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering,
Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
email: Norbert Leitgeb (LEITGEB@BMT.TU-GRAZ.AC.AT)
*Correspondence to Norbert Leitgeb, Institute of
Inffeldgasse 16a, A-8010 Graz, Austria.
Electromagnetic sensibility, the ability to
perceive electric and
electromagnetic exposure, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS),
developing health symptoms due to exposure to environmental
electromagnetic fields, need to be distinguished. Increased
electrosensibility is a necessary, however, not a sufficient condition
for electromagnetic hypersensitivity. At an extended sample of the
general population of 708 adults, including 349 men and 359 women aged
between 17 and 60 years, electrosensibility was investigated and
characterized by perception threshold and its standard deviation.
By analyzing the probability distributions of the
of electric 50 Hz currents, evidence could be found for the existence of
a subgroup of people with significantly increased electrosensibility
(hypersensibility) who as a group could be differentiated from the
The presented data show that the variation of the
among the general population is significantly larger than has yet been
estimated by nonionizing radiation protection bodies, but much smaller
than claimed by hypersensitivity self-aid groups. These quantitative
results should contribute to a less emotional discussion of this
problem. The investigation method presented, is capable of exclusion
diagnostics for persons suffering from the hypersensitivity syndrome.
Bioelectromagnetics 24:387-394, 2003. © 2003
Received: 22 November 2001; Accepted: 2 December
Risk from electric current greater than
Leitgeb N, Schroettner J.
Abteilung fuer Krankenhaustechnik Institut fuer
Technische Universitaet Graz Inffeldgasse 16a A-8010 Graz.
Despite its importance for the assessment of the
effects of electric
current and for technical safety considerations, not only does the
electric perception threshold remain uncertain, but essential questions
are still unanswered and contradictions unresolved. Via measurements at
908 persons randomly selected from the general population, including 708
adults (349 men, 359 women aged between 16 and 60 years), the problems
of extrapolation to the general population and adequate statistical
representation have now been overcome for the first time.
The results show that existing assumptions about
perception need to be drastically corrected. It has been shown that the
assumed electric perception threshold has been too high by a factor of
10, and that women are substantially more sensitive than men. This means
that present gender-specific differences in electrosensitivity need
On the basis of the evidence of significant
underestimation of the
reaction variability in the general population, present assumptions on
safety limits and safety factors urgently need to be reviewed. By no
means can a relaxation of safety regulations be justified.
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2001 Nov;46(11):307-10.
J Med Eng Technol. 2002 Jul-Aug;26(4):168-72.
Electric current perception study
challenges electric safety limits
Leitgeb N, Schroettner J.
Department of Clinical Engineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering,
Graz University of Technology, Inffeldgasse 16a, A-8010 Graz, Austria.
Although a key parameter for safety regulations,
the electric current
perception threshold is not sufficiently established yet. Present
knowledge suffers from a lack of women's data, small numbers of data on
investigation of men and investigated samples non-representative for the
general population. With measurement at 708 adults aged between 16 and
60 years (349 men and 359 women) these deficiencies could be overcome.
The results are important. They show that the perception variability
among the general population is 100-fold higher than estimated so far
and that the currently used estimate of the threshold is more than
10-fold too high. Besides this, it could be shown that there are an
over-proportion of more sensitive women compared with men indicating the
need for revision of the present assumptions on gender-specific
differences in electrosensibility. The results show that the existing
assumptions on safety limits and remaining safety factors need serious
review. In any case, relaxation of safety requirements is not justified.
Publication Types: Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial
PMID: 12396332 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Informant: Reinhard Rueckemann
Cell Phones And Cancer
There has been anecdotal evidence for several
years associating use of
cellular phones, and other sources of electromagnetic radiation in the
microwave region of the spectrum, with brain cancers and other cancers.
From police officers who used radar guns to heavy
users of cellular
phones who have contracted cancer, there has been mounting evidence that
exposure to this kind of electromagnetic radiation may not be as safe as
advertised. A team of scientists funded by Telstra to investigate
claimed links between cellular phones and cancer has turned up probably
the most significant finding of an adverse health effects yet. When
presented to 'Science' magazine for publication the study was rejected
on the grounds that publication "would cause a panic". Three other
prominent magazines including 'Nature' also later rejected the report,
suggesting that they would not handle such important conclusions without
the research being further confirmed.
The study looked at 200 mice, half exposed and
half not, to pulsed
digital phone radiation. The work was conducted at the Royal Adelaide
Hospital by Dr Michael Repacholi, Professor Tony Basten, Dr Alan Harris
and statistician Val Gebski, and it revealed a highly-significant
doubling of cancer rates in the exposed group. The mice were subject to
GSM-type pulsed microwaves at a power-density roughly equal to a
cell-phone transmitting for two half-hour periods each day; this was
pulsed transmission as from a handset, not the steady transmission of a
A significant increase in B-cell lymphomas was
evident early in the
experiment, but the incidence continued to rise over the 18 months. The
implications of the B-cell (rather than the normal T-cell) lymphomas
here, is that B-cell effects are implicated in roughly 85 percent of all
cancers. The experiment was conducted as a blind trial, using absolutely
identical equipment and conditions for two groups of 100 mice. The only
difference between handling the two groups was that the power to one
antenna was never switched on. Over the 18 months, the exposed mice had
2.4-times the tumour rate of the unexposed - but this was later
corrected downwards to a more confident 2-times claim to remove other
According to Dr Alan Harris from the Walter and
Eliza Institute in
Melbourne: "This is important because up until this, there was no
convincing evidence that radio fields (in contrast to X- and Gamma-rays,
ultraviolet and atomic radiation) can directly cause the changes in
genes responsible for cancer development." This experiment also raises
questions about the potential for cell-phone handset radiation to effect
people nearby (passive exposures) than just the user him/herself.
Increased tumours began to be recorded after about 9 months. The total
exposure period is very much less than can be expected from human use
over a lifetime, so while one of the scientists downplayed the
importance, saying, "humans are not rodents" another pointed out that
"DNA is DNA". There has been evidence accumulating over many years that
the long-term effects of radio-frequency exposures may have serious
consequences for a certain percent of the population, but this has been
ignored by the industry, by the media, and by the government.
Dr Henry Lai and Dr Singh at Washington State
enormous increases in double-strand DNA breaks in rat-brain tissue
following cell-phone type microwave exposures of only two hours. The
media, the government, and of course the cell phone industry all ignored
these findings. The media is essentially silent on this issue now,
because they have been bought and paid for by the BIG money behind the
cell phone industry. Every attempt has been made to hose down the
significance of these reports, and others like them. However, the facts
are clear, that people have an increased risk of cancer from the use of
digital mobile phones, and there is a deliberate attempt by the
industry, media, and government to keep people in the dark about this
Who owns your mind, your brain or just plain
As the fast protest for Human Rights and Choice in
continues in Pasadena, CA, http://www.mindfreedom.org/ archived
31/7/03), it seems apt to call attention to the illusionary nature of
the self-autonomy average people think they have in matters concerning
their brains and minds.
Take shopping, for instance. Who would have
thought that neuroscientists
of all people are now guiding market researchers on how to covertly
manipulate our responses to various products and get us to buy and buy
and buy! In a brief article in THE SUNDAY TIMES ("Admen seek 'buy
button' in our brains," August 17, 2003, page 2) Robert Winnett writes:
"Market researchers have come up with a new
brainwave: looking into the
minds of consumers to see which of our grey cells are most vulnerable to
the hard sell. Camelot, the lottery firm, and Ford, the motor
manufacturer, are among those who have hired teams of neuroscientists to
carry out the analysis. They attach electrode-studded caps to their
human guinea pigs and measure their responses as they watch
advertisements on a television screen. The ultimate goal is to identify
a 'buy button' in the brain which can be targeted and triggered by
Researchers, using multi-million pound brain scanners, have established
that a section of the brain just behind the top of the skull could hold
the key to higher profits. This area of the brain is linked to
excitement. Brands which are able to stimulate activity in this area are
more likely to make a sale."
Winnett concludes by observing that "A trip to the
local supermarket or
car showroom could soon become a psychological challenge with shoppers
fighting subconscious urges that are manipulated by the marketeers."
Eleanor White in a postscript to her 94 page study
entitled "The State
of Unclassified and Commercial Technology Capable of Some Electronic
Mind Control effects" (2001; www.raven1.net/uncom.htm)
refers to an
article in NATURE MAGAZINE, January 22, 1998 which cautions against
threats to Human Rights posed by neuroscience.
In this Jean-Pierre Changeux, then chairman of the
bioethics committee and a neuroscientist at the Institut Pasteur in
Paris, observed "that understanding the working of the human brain is
likely to become one of the most ambitous and rich disciplines of the
future." He cautioned that neuroscience may be a risky business for
humanity because "advances in cerebral imaging make the scope for
invasion of privacy immense." He also predicted that the equipment could
become more easily available and used from a distance and this could
lead to "invasion of personal liberty, control of behaviour and
brainwashing." How prescient were his words five years ago in the light
of neuroscientists current collaborations with market researchers to get
us to buy ad nauseum.
And how does the person who has been
brain-tweeked/manipulated to buy
and buy and buy end up? A shopaholic, of course. And would you believe
it? This condition has now also become a lucrative market with a smug
little corner reserved in it for more neuroscientists!
Last week I read in an Irish broadsheet that
shopping disorder--will be included as a valid disorder in the next
diagnostic manual of the American Psychiatric Association. Indeed this
disorder according to Standford University researchers engaged in
finding suitable medication for its sufferers has reached epidemic
levels. Most lucrative epidemic levels for scientific researchers,
neuroscientists, psychiatrists and other mental health specialists but
sublimely lucrative of all for pharmaceutical companies!
In his online article "Selling the Cure for
Chris Berdik writes: "It
seems that the pharmaceutical companies' quest to cure the effects of
excessive marketing may itself be little more than a cleverly-disguised
marketing scheme. The Standford study, like many of its kind, is being
funded by a pharmaceutical company. The undisclosed drug is an
FDA-approved antidepressant, specifically an SSRI--a selective serotonin
Berdix notes that of course profit is the big
pharmaceutical interest in shopaholism. The anonymous pharmaceutical
company which is sponsoring the Standford study "presumably hopes to
carve a unique slice out of the mental-disorder pie in order to market
it together with a ready-made treatment. This is not at all a new
strategy for the world's mammoth pharmaceutical firms, as David Healy, a
professor at the University of Wales College of Medicine, explains in
his book 'The Anti-Depressant Era.' Healy's book describes a process by
which companies seek to 'educate' both patients and clinicians about a
new disorder, to sell the disorder in preparation for selling its cure.
Funding clinical trials is a crucial part of that process."
Clever marketing of "shopaholism" to ensure good
sales for its
pharmaceutical "cure" is also essential, Berik adds. If the Stanford
research for a suitable shopaholics pill proves fruitful the "chances
are we'll hear a lot more about compulsive shopping disorder. The extent
of this 'hidden epidemic' will be revealed through well-publicized
studies, clinical papers, and journal articles. The disorder may even
make the pages of the next diagnostic manual. And shopaholics everywhere
will be encouraged to make just one more purchase: a little pill to make
it all better."
The date of Berdix's article is May 23, 2000. And
neuroscientist Jean-Pierre Changeux, quoted above, how prescient were
Berdix's words too: just a mere three years later "shopaholism" is
making it into the next edition of the diagnostic manual of the American
Psychiatric Association! And, as usual, some pharmaceutical companies
and their esteemed research employees can laugh all the way to the
Just to end on a cheerful note I'll mention two of
the many electronic
devices that covertly can play havoc with your brain. One of these costs
just under a hundred dollars. It's available for purchase "for
non-government sales for the first time" from a Law Enforcement and
Military Equipment" website. It's described online as follows: "It
provides serious, substantial capability to disrupt and disperse
gatherings. Speeches, demonstrations, crowd dynamics--this device has
been used to 'influence' more of these in recent years than you might
suspect. Or, if planted near the podium, you might just have a case of a
speaker with diminished clarity and concentration, or perhaps is even
unable to complete his presentation 'due to illness.' This 'illness'
might even be contagious, as some of the VIPs up there with him also
seemed to have caught the same bug . . . Use with extreme discretion."
Its poorer cousin comes at the bargain price of 39
dollars. And its
accompanying blurb reads: "It's a small electronic device which can
really turn one's stomach. It generates a unique combination of
ultra-high frequency soundwaves which soon leads most in its vicinity
to quesiness. It can cause hedaches, intese irritation, sweating,
imbalance, nausea, or even vomiting. Hiding this device in your
inconsiderate neighbour's house might put an end to their late-night
parties. The abusive bureaucrat's office, the executive lunchroom . . .
the possibilities are endless for that small portion of inventive
payback. The unique soundwave characteristics make directional source
determination difficult." And, of course, being ever the moralist, the
blurb hack advises: "use with extreme discretion."
Of course these two sonic-harassment items barely
make it into low-tech
when it comes to mind-control technology!
Would like to know what diagnoses doctors could
come up with for
victims of the above sonic weapons should they seek medical help.
Best, Imelda, Cork, Ireland
From San Diego
You all talk about cell phones try looking up, there's the key to the
EMF and EMR. Its not the cell phones that just a cover first let me
state I am not mental although, the sick people in charge would like
that, loving dad loved by a lot of people, in the past 2 years and it
all started with the ear ring which is not in your ears, but in your
head. And it is the same freq as your electromagnetic fields that you
have in your brain, EEG most of the time its fake tinnitus. Try looking
up mind control and look at some sites and see if any of you find
similarities, Cheryl Welshs listing of mind control effects, or just
I live with these effects and it goes on. In their
eyes anybody will do,
even children will work. Most of the time it will not be noticed, like
all the sudden, someone has cancer or a brain anurizium. These are the
same effects that can be caused, if it fits right in, especially in
children, because they don't know there body yet, not as much as a 39yr
old, which, if your are in the rang of 35-45, and things just don't add
My 14 year old daughter is also part of this. I
captured a tape, it sees
from thin air with a parabolic mic, that has voices, but its not the
voices, its the effect. My daughters friends wanted to hear it, so I let
them, 2 of them got headache and their temporal sounds heard lasted
about 2 min.
Is there anyone who can help? Night after night,
day in day out.
My ordeal with this technology that is being used
on us began in the
Summer of 2000. We're targeted by satellite I believe, and I also
believe mobile phones are in some way used to draw the signal.
But for this to happen I believe we must have
something on us (implant)
to draw the signal. I underwent prolonged dental surgery with deep root
fillings which an x-ray show a small triangular shape at the top of one.
I believe condoned experimentation is one reason for what we suffer.
Gaining knowledge at the price of our suffering which is nothing less
It's hard I know and painful. You could try
wearing a baseball cap lined
with thick aluminium foil see if that helps. But as this targeting from
my own experience is at different times of the day and night it's
difficult. I also believe that electricity grid lines and the way these
are being set up can affect us too.
There seem to be a number of things involving
electricity one way and
another along with radio frequency waves that are being used.
All the best... and prayers for you and your
M. A. Norman
Microwave hearing affect
I've researched microwave hearing (which can be caused by pulsed RF in
about the 300 MHz to 10 GHz range), and there is no chance that the Frey
phenomenon could be used to transmit normal speech or music. Thus, the
writer is in error above, at the beginning of his message. I have a
paper in prep on this, but it is not published yet, so I can't
Microwave hearing seems to involve direct
stimulation of the inner ear,
and not sound either propagating in air or in the head.
Microwave hearing might be used to transmit very
but it could not be mistaken for normal speech and probably the
individual words would not be distinguishable. It would sound like
someone trying to talk through a kazoo.
However, RF at longer wavelengths has been
reported to cause auditory
effects, including clear speech, because of being received by house
wiring and converted, by unlucky chance, to sound by attached
appliances. These appliances may include electric irons and other non
communications gear. If RF is responsible, I would guess that this is
the cause. There were complaints a few years ago from people living in
Rome, that the powerful transmitters at the Vatican could be heard by
Three other possibilities are:
Receipt of RF by poorly installed metallic tooth
fillings, which may act
as semiconductors (diodes).
Malicious use of ultrasound beaming of audible
sound. This could only
occur in the open air, with no obstruction (even a window pane would
Imagination. Some people, normal as well as
psychotic, can image words
quite vividly. However, the airline message above would not support this
John Michael Williams
EPIC Accountability Campaign
August Congressional Action Days
We need your help. The situation in Iraq is
getting worse. Several
months after President Bush declared combat operations in Iraq over,
troops and civilians are dying with unsettling frequency. Chaos and
insecurity still rule the streets. Water and electricity have not been
restored. The perilous post-war situation, increasing death toll and
rising cost of conflict implore us to question the administration's rush
to war. The world deserves answers.
Join us over the next several weeks to hold the
EPIC has partnered with United for Peace and
Justice (UfPJ) for
Congressional Action Days. During the next few weeks, your members of
Congress are in their home districts to meet with constituents like you.
Schedule a meeting with them. The power to hold the administration
accountable is yours.
Go to our Accountability Campaign webpage for
instructions on how to
schedule a meeting, important resources and more information on what you
THANK CANADA FOR PROTECTING RIGHT WHALES
Here's your chance to recognize and appreciate
stewardship by thanking the Canadian government for changing the
commerical shipping lanes in the Bay of Fundy, where most of the world's
remaining North Atlantic right whales spend the summer.
The move marks the first time shipping lanes have
been altered to
protect an endangered species.
The change was made after a 4-year effort by World
Wildlife Fund and
other conservation groups to convince decision makers that moving the
lanes would reduce the risk of ship-whale collisions by 80 percent and
would not compromise ship safety.
The lane-change effort was bolstered when Irving
Oil, which owns the
largest tanker fleet using the bay, threw its support behind the move.
HEAT IS ON IN ALASKA
Human Rights Chief Discusses Prisoners
Informant: George Paxinos
Support Proper Protections for Airline