Our population has grown extremely worried regarding electromagnetic pollution over the past few years. There is real issue about how ElectroMagnetic Fields (EMF) affect people's health. Currently, the main reason of anxiety regarding EMF is the consequences of cellular phones, specifically the development of cell towers near residential areas.
In the world of science, there is a great deal of disagreement over how low-level EMF affects people. There seem to be scientific studies that suggest the possibility of health consequences for humans as a result of the body reacting with electromagnetic waves, whereas other study refutes this data and says that the initial studies are biased and unreplicable. This article's objective is not to provide scientific data in favor of either claim, instead it seeks to "articulate" both viewpoints quickly and to assist readers in determining the most likely indoor EMF sources.
Health Effects of EMF
Research that relate the consequences of electromagnetic fields on people's health are based on the generation of tiny currents that alter the body's normal ionic balance. For instance, researchers claim that a 2.5 kV/m electrical field operating at 60 Hz generates around a billionth of an amp per square centimeter.
This current level is less than the human perception threshold, which is considered as the smallest amount of current that humans can experience flowing through their bodies. Nevertheless, many experts believe that these incredibly tiny currents have the potential to interact with human cells, changing their normal protein synthesis and thus elevating the risk of contracting many illnesses.
On the other hand, many researchers claim the conclusion is purely baseless because the results have not been verified by laboratory testing as required by science. The latter scientists think that there is no need for concern because there is no plausible and testable theory for how low-level EMF affects human cells (referred to as bioeffects in scientific literature).
In either scenario, various research organisations believe that, even if there is no scientific evidence associating low-level EMF with health impacts, it is advised that we strive to avoid electromagnetic fields wherever necessary.
Some Hard Evidences
There will be additional material available as the research go forward.
Here is a brief list of incidents that have been documented and illustrate the dangers that ELF fields may pose:
Soviet scientists made the connection between electromagnetic fields and minor health issues including weariness and headaches in 1972.
The New York State Public Service Commission heard testimony from Robert Becker, a physician, and biophysicist Andrew Marino in 1977 on the findings of their investigation, which demonstrated adverse health effects from exposure to ELF fields.
A 1979 research by epidemiology Nancy Wertheimer and physicist Ed Leeper demonstrated a statistical association between paediatric malignancies and the presence of particular types of high-current power lines close to the residence.
A Washington State study conducted in 1982 looked at the statistics for the 438,000 worker fatalities that occurred there between 1950 and 1979. The study's findings indicated that leukaemia mortality were more common in 10 of 11 professions when employees were subjected to ELF fields.
Dr. Bernard Tribukait, a scientist of radiobiology at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, discovered in 1986 that rodents exposed to sawtooth electromagnetic fields during pregnancy had a higher incidence of congenital malformations than rodents not exposed to the fields. Typical waveforms produced by monitors and TVs include sawtooth shapes.
The Maryland Department of Health and Hygiene reported in 1988 that males working in electrical jobs had a disproportionately high prevalence of deadly brain cancer.
John Hopkins University discovered in 1989 that New York Telephone Company cable splicers had a higher chance of developing malignant tumors.
In 1990, David Savitz, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina, found through research that infants of pregnant women who used electric blankets had a 30% higher chance of developing cancer than kids whose mothers did not.
In a related manner, Dr. Nancy Wertheimer has conducted studies on people who use electric blankets. Dr. Wertheimer was the author of the epidemiological study that first established a link between 60 Hz power lines and a spike in paediatric cancer in this nation.
Pregnant women who use electric blankets experience more miscarriages than pregnant women who do not, according to her research.
We can suggest the following things to electric blanket customers. First, use normal blankets instead. If you enjoy using electric blankets, warm your bed before bedtime, but disconnect the blanket before you lie down.
Simply turning off the blanket is insufficient since many blankets continue to emit an ELF field as long as they are plugged into a socket.
I have focused my attention so far on the drawbacks of 60 Hz ELF waves. However, you should be aware that ELF fields have beneficial medicinal applications also.
ELF fields can stimulate healing and therapeutic responses in body when used properly at a particular frequency and amplitude, as Robert Becker had demonstrated. The ELF fields seem to be a two-edged blade, having the ability to both cure and damage.
Radiation from Computer Monitors
There has long been concern about the radiation from computer and television monitors, which operate and use similar technologies.
A lot of years ago, there was uncertainty over whether the radiation emitted by color televisions may be harmful to human health. This worry was mostly based on low-level X-rays that were ionizing radiation, but they turned out to be inconsequential when they were a few inches away from the TV.
However, a menace that has gone unseen until very recently is more pernicious than this explicit one: the low-frequency magnetic fields produced by the coils on the TV's CRT (Cathode - Ray Tube).
Doctors Marilyn Goldhaber, Michael Polen, and Robert Hiat from the Kaiser Permanente Health Group in Oakland, California conducted the most recent investigation on cluster miscarriages in 1988. There were 1,583 pregnant women in the research.
The study's findings revealed that women who had used computers more than 20 hours per week experienced a miscarriage risk that was twice as high as women who performed identical tasks without computers.
The issue of the high ELF fields generated by computer displays affects the whole profession; except otherwise noted, nearly all CRT monitors produce high amounts of ELF radiation.
In the July 1990 issue of MacWorld Magazine, ELF tests on ten well-known monitors were recently conducted. At close proximity, all of the tested monitors released an excessive amount of ELF radiation.
The only advice they or I can provide you right now is to put more space between yourself and the monitor. A two-foot working distance is advised.
What we will Discuss
In this post, we'll discuss low-level EMF, as opposed to higher-level EMF, which may cause well-known consequences like electrocution when a live electrical connection is touched. We'll additionally look at the most typical EMF sources and provide some approximate EMF values that we could come across in our daily life. It is crucial to remember that the field strength detected in a typical American home is significantly below the safety standard set by many organisations.
However, if we become aware of the "hot spots" within the home, we may redesign the space to make it less vulnerable.
The electric and magnetic field strengths that are shown in this article were measured using a TriField metre, which also analyzes radio and microwave leaks and electric and magnetic field strengths individually.
It is crucial to note that the TriField metre is a basic, inexpensive device that most likely wouldn't meet the requirements established by regulatory bodies on acceptable exposure limits to EMF. In spite of this, the tool serves our needs much beyond expectations.
Technical Information Regarding EMF
Whenever there is a voltage difference across two conductors, electric fields are produced. On the contrary, when the amount of electrical current increases, larger magnetic fields are produced by the passage of electrons generated in electrical current.
Since we want to measure field strengths just around the EMF sources (such as a household appliance), we are within a region which is referred to as "near field". The electric and magnetic fields are distinct and function independently in "near field" (meaning, there can be a magnetic field in the absence of an electric field or an electric field in the absence of a magnetic field). In contrast to near field, electric and magnetic fields are interconnected together in far field.
Electric fields could be effectively insulated by a conductive material or even by the human body. Magnetic fields, on the other hand, can enter the human body and buildings.
Compared to electric fields, magnetic fields are more challenging to protect against, necessitating the employment of pricey ferromagnetic materials that are mostly not employed in building or everyday applications.
Magnetic fields are most frequently encountered in homes due to their difficulties in shielding and the fact that high-current consuming equipment produce them.
The units for measuring electric fields are kV/m or kV/cm (1 kV/cm = 100 kV/m). Teslas (T) or Gauss (G), are used to measure magnetic fields. The following equation represents their relationship.
1T = 10,000 G
Due to their relatively small magnitude, magnetic fields in residential areas are calculated in milligauss (mG). When electromagnetic fields produced by voltages and currents come into contact with conductive materials, they spread similarly to radio waves and cause currents to flow. Based on their wavelength characteristics, electromagnetic fields may be broadly divided into the following categories.
DC Static Fields
Static magnets or the magnetic field of the Earth, for instance, can produce static fields. Their association with the human body is believed to be safe at medium and even moderate strength levels since they are DC and operate at a zero frequency and therefore do not force electrical currents to flow in the body.
Examples of these fields include the Earth's magnetic field, which has a strength of 500 mG; industrial magnetic fields, where some workers can be subjected to fields of up to 500 G without harm for extended periods of time; and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), where patients can be exposed to fields of up to 40,000 G without harm, albeit for short time intervals.
Electromagnetic Fields with Low-Frequency
EMFs with frequency levels lower than 3 kHz are considered low-frequency fields. The electrical distribution network, which produces fields at 60 Hz as well as harmonics at 120 Hz, 180 Hz, etc., is the principal source of these fields in residential and industrial locations. These are the EMF fields which are monitored inside a house.
EMF Fields with High Frequency
High frequency EMF fields are those that have frequencies over 3 kHz. These are mostly produced through emissions across all spectral bands, including 2 -way radio, commercial AM and FM radio signals, etc.
Effects of Fluorescent Lighting in the Basement
The mudroom, which is often found in a basement, has a lot of electrical items and is vast, making it the place with the maximum magnetic fields. At the operator's shoulder height in the basement, the ambient magnetic field intensity was determined to be 2 mG, while it was 3 mG at the operator's head height (with all appliances switched off).
The electrical wiring arrangement in our home that connects the basement ceiling to the upper floor is really what enabled the magnetic field to grow when the detector was raised higher towards the ceiling.
Fluorescent lighting, which is frequently found in laundries, basements, and garages, is a strong generator of both electric and magnetic fields. After turning on the fluorescent lights, the background magnetic field in the same space was examined and found to be 2 mG at chest height (the very same reading as when the lights were switched off) and 5 mG at head height.
The extra current flow in the fluorescent lamps may have been what caused the second measurement to spike. The magnetic field is substantially stronger at a distance of 6 inches from the lighting system, despite there being only a slight background increase, as seen in Fig. 1 below.
The strength of the electric and magnetic fields across a 55 inch florescent tube fixture is depicted in Table 1 below. The concentration of the EMF produced by the fluorescent lamps is apparently very disproportionate when the numbers provided in Table 1 is compared to those shown in the graph of Fig. 1. However, the areas with larger magnetic fields also have powerful electric fields.
The area having the maximum electric field was found to be 10 inches from the fixture's end. The graph in Fig. 2 shows how the electric fields weaken as one gets farther away from the source.
Table 2 displays the magnetic field strength measured somewhere at washing machine's front at different elevations above its bottom.
Because the strength of the magnetic field completely depends on the operation of the machine, the former are maximum numbers, — meaning, the strongest magnetic fields observed. In any event, it demonstrates that magnetic fields produced by washing machines are powerful. When the electric dryer was turned on, the location where the power cable enters the device and the power cord itself produced the strongest magnetic fields, both measuring 100 mG.
As seen in Fig. 3, the most powerful fields are found on the sidewalls, where they may reach values of up to 100 mG before weakening as we move away from the iron. The essential magnetic field strength generated by an electrical light dimmer was observed to be 20 mG, with peaks that might reach higher than 100 mG depending on its orientation.
%20on%20Your%20Health.jpg)
