Electromagnetic radiation

I don’t know if this question was asked before or if seems stupid but for me seems important.
Together with the development of technologies from last years and the spread of its application in our daily life I see more and more the existence of electromagnetic field everywhere.
We know that there is an electromagnetic field “natural” created by the Earth and is good because prevent the solar radiation of the life extinction from our planet.
If we look only at the number of posts that carry the energy from generators to consumers through the air or cables trough ground and is a lot of electromagnetic field; but I refer here to what we generate additional with our technologies, especially communications.
In cities where most of the people live in high density, if we take a point in space, in their houses, there are a lot of electromagnetic signals, especially related with communications: from satellites, from terrestrial broadcasting, from cell phones, from your WiFi… and so on – not to mention that each piece of electric/electronic equipment in the house (besides the wires in walls) produces electromagnetic field “in the limits” but exists.
We are the Electromagnetic Force Generation or Civilization.
This is how we developed and how we oriented our civilization lately.
From all the forces that we know, the electromagnetic force we control and use better.
Nobody can tell now the effect on long term of such many artificial fields over our planet and especially over life, particularly us human beings.
Everybody knows or should know that are standards and limits for radiation.
I personally believe not all the time the limits are respected and the limits deal only with immediate effect or short term effect.
Expensive and sophisticated instruments, receivers, antennas and special rooms (Faraday cave) are used to measure such signals from the information that I red so far.
I am thinking particularly at antennas used for radio/TV transmission and lately at cell phones antennas.
Beside the dedicated towers with large areas surrounded by fence, sometimes in suburban areas or in very high towers I have seen blocs/houses or high building that have on their roof such antennas. The owner of the building makes money by renting that space on the roof.
What about people lining under or nearby on the same level, little bit low in neighbor buildings?
And sometimes they are installed in the cities 10-15m high only and the houses around not far 50m max.
How can we find if these situations are or not dangerous for the people living by?
How can we measure the level of radiation in certain point in space?
We really have no chance due to expensive instruments and we have no choice except to accept the measurements of the “rich” people that “are in charge and know the standards” and have such instruments?
Please so not suggest: move somewhere else or isolated your house as a Faraday cage, it is not about me, it is a general question about people living in the cities under the curse of technology.
And “don’t worry”, you exaggerate is not an acceptable answer for a simple reason: I want here to put under the question mark the limits that exist or if they are respected in reality in a certain point in space as your house.
After all: how do you know that the limits are respected? You just believe the other “guys” because you cannot verify?

The guy in the video is a bit of a conspiracy theorist type and perhaps a bit paranoid but the info on using the meter is fine.

"And “don’t worry”, you exaggerate is not an acceptable answer for a simple reason"
Unfortunately the unacceptable answer is the correct one.
-
TommySzalapski: has given you information on how to run checks yourself.
It is impossible to prove that low level radiation has no long term effects. One can just say that many studies have shown that there are no serious detectable effects. You can say that these studies are incomplete but you can say that to all studies on everything.

You have background radiation (depends on your location).  You have mankind induced radiation (medical tests, smoke detectors, nuclear reactors, etc).  Radiation from space (Sun, sun spots, black holes, etc).  You just cannot block it all and some is beneficial - like the sun.  We would die if the sun didn't radiate energy to Earth.

Unless you are sleeping with a smoke detector under your pillow, the radiation exposure just isn't there.

I would expect fungal spores, bathtub slips and maybe falling satellites to be more of a concern.

I know that sounds flippant, but it is a significant aspect.

Tom

>>it is a general question about people living in the cities under the curse of technology.

You need to very seriously put a proper perspective onto your modern living.

I would auggest that you go back some 160 years and read (or re-read) Elizabeth Gaskell's "Mary Barton", because that's about people living in cities with hardly any technology.

First answer from TommySzalapski is until now a direct answer to my question.
But also all other comments are welcome.
Seems that they keyword was “Emf meter” and google lead to a lot of websites.

The Emf meter recommended is only from 300Mhz up, but I found other meters too as here:
http://www.radmeters.com/RF-meters-detectors.html
http://www.aaronia.com/index.php?id=7


I red also some other info as here:
http://naturalbias.com/how-to-minimize-your-exposure-to-electromagnetic-fields/

Seems that some other people think about it seriously as here:
http://emf.mercola.com/sites/emf/emf-dangers.aspx
http://www.lessemf.com/emf-news.html

BigRat – I have no time now and no chance before to read that book, but would be interesting to hear some conclusions.

>We really have no chance due to expensive instruments and we have no choice except to accept the measurements of the “rich” people that “are in charge and know the standards” and have such instruments?

Last time I checked, you didn't have to be rich to go to school.  There are plenty of scientists who were not born into money, nor make any significant income to be called "rich".  This general attitude just adds to the conspiratorial bent...and suggestions of tin foil helmets are sure to follow.

There are incredible amounts of "bad" things that exist without human creation.  Pointing at _only_ human contribution factors without understanding the natural baselines is a closed manner of thinking.

For instance, sitting on a granite boulder is "all natural', but would likely expose you to more radiation than sitting underneath an ionizing smoke detector.

Laying in the natural sun for 15 minutes will fry a fair-skinned person.  Talking for 15 minutes on a cell phone does nothing measurable.  In this case, it's all about repeat exposure and adaptation.  Humans have developed pigments to varying degrees that will delay sun damage.  We have barely two generations that have regular exposure to radio transmitters  & phones on a daily basis.  Even then, the population sample started very small.

So, did radio waves increase the reported illness, or was it the population boom, close proximity to industry, road pollution, and shared tainted water supplies?  Statistical study has a lot of "maybe"s, but at least has more footing as scientific study when compared to a beeping or blinking meter with which can trace ghostly EMF signatures.

Is it bad?  Well...you can burst cells of live vegetation with the magnetron removed from a microwave.  That doesn't mean that a glowing neon bulb placed 1-inch away from a microwave door is an indication of impending doom.

There's more to study than random and arbitrary samples.

It is a very good topic to think about.  As you indicate, our production of RF is only increasing.  Our consumption of wireless services (in close proximity to our bodies) is on the rise as well.  New cars surround us with wireless, as well as the local coffee shop and library.  It's a new world.

I would focus on known dangers, such as radon gas in basements, than ones which we cannot correlate to causes.  Contamination of water supplies is another issue with more serious consequences than EM radiation.

Sometime I feel sorry that I opened the subject I have no time to read and reply.
Only because I am traveling and I have some free evening time at hotel I can write few things, but in rest is not time for that.


@aleghart
“
Last time I checked, you didn't have to be rich to go to school.  There are plenty of scientists who were not born into money, nor make any significant income to be called "rich".  This general attitude just adds to the conspiratorial bent...and suggestions of tin foil helmets are sure to follow.”

Well, I am not the weird person obsessed about the present subject or foils or things like that.
In fact I use mobile phones since when they appeared in our market in acceptable sizes, meaning before year 2000.
I worked and work with electromagnetically fields, I worked with sophisticated instruments.
I need to see the opinion of the some smart guys.

First, what has the school have to do, so knowledge, with the fact that higher than normal intensity fields are around you and you do not know, you cannot measure?
You could know all the theory in physics and that’s all – it is nothing practical.

Let me give you my examples, from my experience – some of them…

Once I worked in industrial field with big machinery.
One of the machinery was a high frequency machine. We speak here about oscillators at 3.5Mhz, 10000V and some good KW.
The entire oscillator was good grounded and enclosed in metal frames – something like 1.5cubic meters.
Sometimes I had to check this machinery and for testing purpose only few minutes I had only some sides of the protective covers off and the oscillator running.
The radiation was strong enough to make fluorescent tube lighting in my hand at 50cm away of the machinery. It was like in Star Wars or when some people have hobbies with Tesla coils and his tower of sending energy without wires (TED has a interesting presentation about this)
I had the chance to become a good friend with the man who installed such machinery more than 20 years and I asked him what can happen with such radiation for an operator.
This was in 1998.
He said that they rotate the operators and many times they use women, because along the years they received feedback that long working times with such machinery (where radiation was measured and in standard limits) the sexual organs is strong influenced and to the limit that person become impotent.

We can consider the above experience a rare case and not everybody in big town is exposed to such thing. But is good to understand the extremes or what may happen when the limits are not respected.

Regarding the towns, my specific question was in fact addressed to antennas, especially for mobile phones, many times on the high buildings or neighborhoods.
Or a big radio stations with its antennas for broadcastings.

By the way I rember, that oscillator some years ago was made with a triode that cost around 4000USD and is used generally for radio station broadcasting.


Now, regarding the measurement instrument, the one indicated above, first time I thought is OK, but then I remembered few things and I think such instrument is more or less a joke.

Did any from you have the chance to look in the standardization for EMC, the regulations?

I am not allowed to put them online, but you can find them on internet. We speak here about international standards IEC.

It is well described how to measure it and what type of instruments to use.

Some years ago, 2008-2010 I made some measurements for EMC, particularly EMS, conductivity test, so not radiated.
We used an expensive instrument from Rohde & Schwarz, which is a leader in such kind of instrumentation on the market.
All important test houses, third party independent bodies, use such instruments and the dedicated rooms.
One factory from our company has such kind of room too, but I did not use that one.
Looking at a real receiver, not spectrum analyzer which is cheaper and not so good, I found the good normal instruments around from 70000 euro up to 500.000 euro for instance.

That is not for everybody.

http://www2.rohde-schwarz.com/en/products/test_and_measurement/industries/aerospace_and_defense/emc_expertise/

That’s why I said “reach people”.

There is one more story.

The last response from hdhondt I like it very much, but I have some things to comment.

First the photoelectric effect shows effects, behavior at the atoms level, electrons, and photons – no live matter.
It explains nothing at the live cell level, or at the life level, or in other words influence over life.
We can all say that the cell is made of atoms and the effect applies too, but no one proved yet how to make life from matter. Even more the effect over the live organisms is not the same as for “dead” matter and the extremes shows that.

Another view over the subject is the light.
The light is known to be an electromagnetically field too with a specific range of frequency.
What other prove than lasers is needed – intense light can destroy, cut materials.

Here I have interesting experience regarding radiations of the light – real things in the lab and interesting “limits” from standards.
Hopefully some other time.

> First the photoelectric effect shows effects, behavior at the atoms level, electrons, and photons – no live matter.

What do you think our bodies are made of, if not atoms? If emf does not affect the atoms that make up my cells, just how is it going to affect me?

> no one proved yet how to make life from matter

The fact that we can't at present show how life started from non-living matter (although we have some good, but unproven, ideas) does not mean that there has to be something unknown that causes life. What happens to that something when an organism dies, where does it go? Why can't we see it? For that matter, when does life finish? Over the years it appears that death has been pushed further and further back. People that would have been irrevocably dead 50 years ago can now easily be revived. And, if you're looking for an extreme, please tell me at which moment a plant dies. You can destroy just about all of it, cut it down, burn it down, and still regenerate the plant.

Even if it were true that life requires that matter is imbued with some ethereal "life force", that force would be completely different from electromagnetic radiation, and hence emf radiation would still not affect it.

@hdhondt:
“What do you think our bodies are made of, if not atoms? If emf does not affect the atoms that make up my cells, just how is it going to affect me?”

The answer is split in few points of view:
1)      Generally speaking, but not as general rule, in a system with a fix number of variables/parameters when we introduce a new one the behavior of the entire system may change dramatically. Meaning, if individual parts in a system are not affected by some external influences does not mean that an entire system made of those parts cannot be affected. It is not always “yes” and not always “no”. What may be the factor that moves from “no” to “yes” is the relations between parts.
2)      The specific discussion here is related with electromagnetic fields. We humans have our own electromagnetic field. We have iron in our blood and is moving. A strong electromagnetic filed has influence over us up to death. Less intensity has all kind of unwanted effects.
3)      If you think how atoms are made as structure: protons and neutrons in nucleus and electrons around then the “the bricks”, the material for all the atoms is the same only the quantity, their number and the way how they are structured make different types of atoms and from here substances. Thinking at the next “macro” level is enough to have in mind the crystalline structure from some substances: for instance diamonds and graphite. That shows that the same parts, but in different order, structure, design – ultimate we may say relation behave different. That’s why the example with photoelectric effect does not yet convince me, especially when we jump from dead matter to live organisms with complex orders, structure between their parts – even of everything is reduced in the end at atoms or strings.

This is an interesting subject anyway, especially when you related with the “life force”, but I do not want to go here in details.

We have a limited range for our eyes to see the electromagnetic radiation. Sometimes I asked myself how it would be to have the chance to “see” in the same way as we see colors from the visible spectrum, to see in another range of frequency, especially in those ranges used by us for all kind of radio communications – just supposing that would other “colors”.

Related with this subject, the light, not the lasers light, but the UV light from UV lamp it is a subject that I had the chance to enter into.
I worked some years ago for another company that made these UV lamps, particularly for the Sun beds.
The UV levels were always measured and were under the max. values from IEC standards.
It was a long time business.
Then after some years it was a continuous campaign on TV from doctors side with studies on different patients, warning regarding the skin cancer higher probability when people goes to Sun Studios.
As result, the UV business went down and even more: the new limits for UV lamps were adopted. I think it was 2008-2009.
One of my colleagues, with more than 30 years experience in business, had to go in different European countries where we had customers and check the new values of radiation in sun beds.
Up to that moment it was not compulsory to have a certificate for the UV level radiation made a by a trusted test house. It was enough a self declaration, eventually sustained by the value of radiation in different points of the sun bed, data extracted partially form the lamps datasheets – meaning nothing precisely.
After that moment everything became very serious, the companies had to have real certifications and they have to pay enough money for that – and this change was not long time ago.

So, the question after all is: what does it mean the present limits for a radiation?

> A strong electromagnetic filed has influence over us up to death. Less intensity has all kind of unwanted effects

Such as??

> If you think how atoms are made as structure, etc

So you're saying that, even though emf will not affect the individual atoms, it can still affect crystals & living matter. How??

Re UV lamps. While UV is a form of electromagnetic radiation, it is very different from the "radio" radation we have been talking about. The reason is that, as UV has a much higher frequency, it also has a much higher energy per photon, and it is indeed able to affect atoms (end hence crystals, cells and living matter). UV has enegies between 10 eV and 100 eV per photon but only about 1 eV is enough to excite electrons in atoms. As we learned more about the effects of UV, allowable levels were (and are still being) changed.

As for "radio" emf, remember what I said earlier: if one photon does not have enough energy to affect an atom, then trillions of them, whether in a second or spread over many years, cannot have any effect either.

even though emf will not affect the individual atoms, it can still affect crystals & living matter. How??

A collection of atoms can have different energy states and absorption bands than isolated atoms.

Which does not affect the truth of

if one photon does not have enough energy to affect an atom, then trillions of them, whether in a second or spread over many years, cannot have any effect either.

> A strong electromagnetic filed has influence over us up to death. Less intensity has all kind of unwanted effects

Such as??

I have some friends doctors that had the chance to study and work in different countries and different hospitals. I still wait some answers.
One of them said: it is a controversial subject. In the books is only a limited literature sustained by real studies. Teachers and doctors try to avoid the subject, it was not too much presented and not too much discussed., because the effect is not clear- different persons have different symptoms and everything is related more with a hypersensitivity to the emf.

Then I searched by myself a bit on internet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivity
http://www.tldp.com/issue/179/emf179.htm
http://drsundardas.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/electromagnetic-toxicity-and-illness/

and somebody that has to said loud in public http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/medical-director-of-switzerland/

But I believe also that are also situations as this one http://relationshaping.com/2010/01/15/is-electromagnetic-radiation-illness-the-new-fibromyalgia/


So you're saying that, even though emf will not affect the individual atoms, it can still affect crystals & living matter. How??

The example with crystals was only a suggestion for thinking: I want to say that depending by persons will affect complex live systems as us by interfering with our own electromagnetic field. The relation between our parts, from simple cell functionality up to the global ordered systems inside of our body.
If I have time I will search/ask for studies on such theme.

The same was the example with UV radiation - to see that are limits in standards and then is coming a moment when will be changes because will be considered too high.

I have a particular example for EMC - some good years ago was an important change, maybe I will show you later a "nice" graphic from one of the standards. Not to mention that also the limits for EMC receivers had to be extended in the last years due to requirement of wider bandwidth compulsory measurements.
Next time I will bring some clear evidences for that and also I think is time to close the subject - people around start to think I am one of those weird obsessed guys...

Let’s have a look what does it mean to be under the required limits imposed by technical „laws“ – I speak about compliance with EMC tests.
Some free test reports can be found on internet and illegal the standards free to download.
Some free test reports:
http://www.ftdichip.com/Support/Documents/Approvals/ChiPi_CE.pdf
http://search.icpdas.com/PM_online/product/large/Certification/CE%20Certification/E930080%28CE%29.pdf
http://wiki.laptop.org/images/d/d7/CL1_EMC_Report.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart1.pdf

Is not simple and not for everybody.

Now, look at the curve from page 83 from next file http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/ra/topics/research/topics/emc/8056cr2.pdf 
Or page 9 from next file http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr_34_4_05.pdf
There is a “window” at 2-3Mhz.
Do you know why is like that?
I can tell you. It is an exception made for an important manufacturer to “help” him to sell some products some years ago.
Do you know who makes the standards? particularly for EMC if you want…
And in the end, after everything is agreed between technical bodies the business comes.
Do you know how a certain product obtains a certificate? By submitting one sample (can be gold sample) and nobody knows if the rest of thousands are in the limits – is just of question of trust and luckily sometimes controls…but statistical they cannot cover the real production for many products on the market.
And that applies not only to EMC, but to a lot of other safety concerns.
That’s why there is in Europe this site RAPEX: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/dyna/rapex/rapex_archives_en.cfm 

I've looked at some of your links, and here are my comments

The first paragraph of the Wikipedia link talks about " a set of claims of adverse medical symptoms purportedly caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields". Note the word "purportedly". It also syas that "EHS is not a medical diagnosis, nor is it clear that it represents a single medical problem", and "it has not been established that these fields play any role in the cause of these symptoms". In other words, it seems more likely that the sufferers are people who feel stressed by the presence of mobile towers and the like. The stress affects them and causes the symptoms.

The TLDP site includes links about homeopathy and spiritual healing. I gave up after seeing that.

As for Dr Sundartas, the heading of his blog states that he is into "Naturopath, Homoepath, Alternative Therapies". Need I say more?

Dr Rau and the Paracelcus Institute also appear to be into alternative medicine. Their website is very vague about what they do, but one of their statements is that their medicine "is safe and does not cause any side-effects". Just about any real medicine will have side effects, so it sounds as if they may be using things like homeopathy - which is indeed safe as it has no medicine at all. Note that this is just a gues from their vague statements.

All in all, I would stick with real medicine instead of quackeries like homeopathy. And if you want to prove that EMF has an effect, you need double-blind studies - which, according to Wikipedia, have not shown anything. Just claiming that "it affected my brother" does not prove anything.

Your last post arrived while I was typing mine. I'll reply tomorrow, but I just had a look at the OFCOM link. It talks about electromagnetic interference, i.e. the effect EMF can have on other electronic systems. The page you mention is about "Mains conducted emissions" and "Radiated emissions in the 2m loop". Nothing to do with cells or bodies.

The link that you commented above had the only purpose to enumerate possible effects.
I just found them in 10 min, they cannot prove anything indeed. And Wikipedia is not a reference in therms of science, was just as a base for discussion.

The EMC links had the purpose to show the complexity in EMC measurements. Particularly I can point out in radio interference measurements at 10m if is needed. They are just examples.
We have to keep in mind that we have our own emf field and interferences exits with it.

A real study has to involve the medical side.
On serious side we can look here at basic info for research:
http://www.emfservices.com/article.htm
and some links from here where is was proved that emf has no effect, but still is unclear:
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/ieee/ieee27.htm

Interesting is first link with a study from this page http://www.powerlinefacts.com/EMF.htm

It is definitely not clear said, because even some studies were made, different parts did not agree over effects.
Would be the same with your good explanation re-mentioned by ozo when you would have to explain it to a group of doctors. Many of them will look probably with square eyes at you asking in the end: and where are the studies on persons?

In the end of the next file there are some interesting links towards studies to be checked:
http://www.emfservices.com/RF_intl_guidelines_secure.pdf

Many of the links you mention are to sites that peddle the emf fear. As I pointed out in my previous post, many of them also peddle other pseudo-science things like homeopathy. Others relate to EMI testing, which is not really relevant to what we're talking about.

The link to Louisiane State Uni is about how fear of something leads to litigation. It even says that the courts "have recognized that the potential risk is very small, if there is any risk at all, and that the potential harm from regulation is very high."

The effects mentioned in the BMJ article are very weak and the authors admit theire results are not conclusive. In fact, their final sentence is "We emphasise again the uncertainty about whether this statistical association represents a causal relation." They tested one possible mechanism (ions caused by power line corona) but ruled that out by further testing.

As you say, emi measurements are complex, but that does not invalidate my main point: emf cannot affect the cells in our body because the photon energy is way too low. Unless you can explain how radio frequency photons can affect cells, measuring the strength of the radiation is irrelevant.

Few more words before I will close this question:
- Only thinking that your blood contain iron (hemoglobin) moving, you can consider the blood in our veins as liquid wires. The information from nerves in the body or neurons in the brain is sent by electrical pulses.
- How cannot be that affected by emf fields?
Everything depends only by the intensity of fields. That’s why the sensitive persons are an extreme situation to be studied.
So far is shown “officially” that high intensity fields may induce heating effects – similar with microwave oven, that’s why limits in all the countries are for SAR (mobile phone):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation_and_health 

There are books that says is nothing:
http://books.google.com/books?id=1EMpRhTyK0kC&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=effects+of+strong+emf&source=bl&ots=LKO0-UeWA6&sig=WcqVbqQPcR8gFIRunA0Op3agOfs&hl=en&ei=_AqxTumpIc_2sgbjv_hJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=effects%20of%20strong%20emf&f=false

But there were not enough “official” and global accepted studies and explanations. European Union statement:
http://web.jrc.ec.europa.eu/emf-net/doc/efrtdocuments/EMF-NET%20EFRT%20EMF%20and%20ENV%2030SET2005.pdf

A serious approach seems to be done globally by WHO:
•  http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/index.html
•  http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/en/EMF_Risk_ALL.pdf
•  http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/riskenglish/en/index.html
•  http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/sci_reviews/en/index.html
•  http://www.who.int/docstore/peh-emf/EMFStandards/who-0102/Worldmap5.htm

And maybe here is a place where we can start reading more:
http://web.jrc.ec.europa.eu/emf-net/

>Only thinking that your blood contain iron (hemoglobin) moving, you can consider the blood in our veins as liquid wires.

The problem with that approach is that not all compounds containing iron are ferromagnetic, nor electrically conducting.  Basic chemistry tells you that table salt contains sodium, but you don't see sodium's characteristics in salt.

Good point, but the blood has good conductivity if you compare it only with drinking water for instance.

> So far is shown “officially” that high intensity fields may induce heating effects – similar with microwave oven, that’s why limits in all the countries are for SAR (mobile phone)

As I said in an earlier post, the heating caused by mobile phones is far less than the normal daily temperature fluctuation of the body.

> Everything depends only by the intensity of fields

As I said, check why Einstein got the Nobel prize

Yes, the WHO published a report that there "might" be some risk to mobile phones. However, it's so vague that sensible people will ignore it. All they can point to is some very tenuous statistical studies. Nobody has been able to give any mechanism that could possible.cause the problems.

And if you want to worry about the emf from power lines and similar things, to put it bluntly, you're deluded. Again, look up Einstein's Nobel prize.

>Good point, but the blood has good conductivity if you compare it only with drinking water for instance.

If you really think the human body acts like a collection of liquid wires, then strong magnetic fields such as found in MRIs would induce currents in people.  No one has reported detrimental effects of going through MRIs, and there are large samples to choose from.

Large numbers of people take subways in cities, which would place them close to electrical motors with large magnetic fields.  No one has reported ill effects of using the subways.

I was looking at some numbers and compared them:
for blood:
http://www.ehow.com/about_6501091_conductivity-blood_.html
http://www.jbc.org/content/59/1/33.full.pdf+html

and water:
http://www.lenntech.com/applications/ultrapure/conductivity/water-conductivity.htm

is just 10x higher conductivity for blood.

I need to understand what does it mean "strong fields". Your example may or may not make sense after that.
In my mind was the fact that we have our own (sensitive) emf field.
An interaction with another field should have some effects.

One thing is clear for me, from medical point of view there are not enough studies yet done:

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_007.pdf

>I need to understand what does it mean "strong fields".

For MRIs, " in the range of 0.2 - 3 T"
http://www.greenfacts.org/en/static-fields/l-2/3-static-magnetic-field-mri.htm#0

The magnetic fields used in MRIs are many orders of magnitude larger than anything you will get from power lines, mobile phones, or anything else in your house.

The only fields that are likely to hurt you are those in your microwave oven - but only if you disable the door interlock and stick part of your body in it while it's running. And even then, the effect will purely be heating, the same effect it has on food.

I found few more links:
small info to be checked: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/02/040219075606.htm

governmental sites:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/magnetic-fields
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/emf/

a study: http://www.imrser.org/PDF/8TVITALSIGNS.pdf

Reading Ozo's post came another idea: I have an old friend working for Siemens in medical electronics installing all kind of equipment since some good years - I will ask him too.

Thinking at the explanation with photoelectric effect given by hdhondt: came into my mind one example:

If you use a mobile phone during incoming call or sms or a simple electromagnet connected to a dc voltage switching on/off near a TV for example then we can see the interferences in emf with TV.

During and after the experiment the components of the TV are not affected by being destroyed or defective. The TV very probable will work well after that long time. The only thing is that some parts of the TV pick up some parasitic emf signals.

The thing that is affected is the information presented by TV to us during the experiment.
That is the relation between components. Their original designed relation is affected and the way how they interact in a normal way is affected.

In the same manner I imagine the information in our body when electrical signals are used.

If such kind of experiment, external influence is presented for a long time then we can say:
-      the system and its components are not affected
-      the normal transmission of the info is affected all the time similar with a stress and if the components that constitute the system have a certain “intelligence” , a self-learning or adaptability capacity then they can be “re-programmed” and the way how the system or parts of it manifest can be different.
Maybe is too much said.

But one thing for sure:  the idea presented with the photoelectric effect in which the atoms are not affected is not enough because does not say anything about the relation between components in a complex system which rely on electrical signals to send information.


In lean time came the answer from my friend.
Here it is:

“Usual RMI is 1.5T, more sophisticated have 3T. For research we have 7T and 9.4T.
The stronger the field is the more beautiful and more detailed images are.
At 1.5T are not really side effects. At 3T we are slowing the table speed when the patient enters into the field. It is the same for the higher values of the field.
The problem is that current is induced in peripheral nerve (due to variation in the entry field device) can produce stimulation and the patient sudden moves involuntary and spontaneous (not dangerous, just unpleasant).
The SAR limit is 2W/kg similar as for mobile phones. The emission power for RMI is 15kW (at 1.5T) and 30kW at 3T. For 9.4T is almost 100kW! - Obviously only in short pulses, so the limit is not exceeding.
The limit is imposed to not increase the patient temperature with more then 1 degree during the investigation. Other effects were not observed.
My opinion is that if there are no side effects on patient at the power used on RMI then should be no problems in normal life. It is true that the patient does not stay forever in the device.
WiFi home is at 200mW, which is insignificant.”

I think the involuntary move of the patient due to induced emf is similar with the TV example above.

If you think that emf will affect our brain in a similar way to that in which it affects a TV set, then I'm giving up on this topic. I can only suggest you wear a tinfoil hat. That will also protect you from aliens.

of course I am not thinking that.
I am just trying to imagine what can be behind the claims of some people that got some illness.

People are worried and they try to understand. That's all.
How else can you explain the measurements, studies done so far. And is not over.

Just some examples in different countries:
(it is enough if we jump to the last page from each document with conclusion)

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_007.pdf
http://www.mmfai.org/public/docs/eng/080729_RF_safety_base2NL_final.pdf
http://www.icgst.com/DSP/Volume10/Issue1/P1180937859.pdf
http://www.istanbul.edu.tr/6internatwshopbioeffemf/cd/pdf/oral/ELF%20AND%20RF%20ELECTROMAGNETIC%20FIELD.pdf
http://www.naun.org/journals/communications/c-09.pdf
http://www.measurement.sk/2006/S2/Klima.pdf
http://www.wseas.us/e-library/conferences/2008/crete/communications/02-com.pdf
http://biblio.ugent.be/input/download?func=downloadFile&fileOId=562788
http://old.enea.it/produzione_scientifica/pdf_enea_attiivita/LaboratoryElectromagneticFields.pdf
http://www.iem.pub.ro/~mihaela/papers/ATEE_2004_Morega.pdf
http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/nr/rdonlyres/9e29937f-1a27-4a16-a8c3-f403a623300c/0/electromagneticreport.pdf

>what can be behind the claims of some people that got some illness.

There may be real causes behind it (not emf) or it may be just in their imagination or wishful thinking.

I'm sorry I will not read all your links. I looked at earlier ones you gave and there was nothing important there. If you think one of these links has some *real* information, let me know and I'll have a look.

However, you will always be able to find possible bad effects in just about anything you look at. If you can't get any real facts, then try statistics. Failing that, you can always fall back on word-of-mouth: it affected my sister, therefor it must be bad.

People are worried, and they have the internet to help them worry, by giving them scientific-sounding reasons for their worry

Thank you for participation.
It gave me the opportunity to learn or remember important things.

Thanks viki. Sorry I got a bit stroppy at times...