Guest guest Posted October 18, 2000 Report Share Posted October 18, 2000 In the latest " Progressive Health News " Mark Konlee (of Keep Hope Alive fame) reports that after an hour's exposure to the magnetic field, the effect actually became counterproductive. Before recommending his $500 magnetic mattress pad to AIDS patients, he used it himself and said " that overexposure to a magnetic field had personally lowered my eneregy levels and it was my opinion that one hour at a time was the maximum time to obtain the best results. " He does mention using the North pole only. He also cites a letter from a woman withh CFIDs who slept on one for 5 years with no benefit other than she thought her muscle spasms were helped a bit. He talks about the " Bell curve " also, and makes sense. Just passing it on...... Sharon Jim Lambert wrote: > > Kat, > > Keep using the magnetic pad. It is doing other good things even if it > doesn't affect the symptoms you are focusing on. My mom & I swapp it > back & forth every 2 weeks for a rest. I think the body needs a rest > from it occasionally. It feels that way to me, that's all. > > jim > > Angelkat wrote: > > > > I too, suffer with a form of fibromyalgia, along with CFIDS. I sleep on a > > magnetic mattress pad I got from Dr. Whitaker. It has done nothing to help > > my pain. I thought the magnets would help me, but so far, they haven't. > > Maybe his pad isn't strong enough, I just don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 I'm suffering from what I can only guess is a reaction to magnetic fields. I bought 2 meters from LessEMF but they picked up nothing of note. After further enquiries I got some infromation from a gent in Sweeden who told me that the meters available today are not much use. " (We used to have a good EMF-meter for sale in Sweden that reacted more like hypersensitive individual do, but unfortunately it is no longer in production. It measured the rate of change (the dB/dt of the magnetic field = uT/s in one scale and the displacement current induced by the dE/dt of theelectric field in nA...) " Also magnetic fields today come in very high frequencies which meters do not detect. This is something that was started by (appliance) companies about 15 years ago. " Your Tri-Field meter is of limited use as it contains no frequency information; for most people the 35kHz fields of a fluorescent light is much worse that a 50Hz incandescent lamp ( a meter like the one I described above would show 35000/50=700 times stronger deflection for a 35kHz field than for a 50Hz field of the same strength) ... " My first post - hope it works! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 > > I'm suffering from what I can only guess is a reaction to magnetic > fields. I bought 2 meters from LessEMF but they picked up nothing of > note. > After further enquiries I got some infromation from a gent in Sweeden > who told me that the meters available today are not much use. > > " (We used to have a good EMF-meter > for sale in Sweden that reacted more like hypersensitive individual > do, but > unfortunately it is no longer in production. It measured the rate of > change > (the dB/dt of the magnetic field = uT/s in one scale and the > displacement > current induced by the dE/dt of theelectric field in nA...) " > > Also magnetic fields today come in very high frequencies which meters > do not detect. This is something that was started by (appliance) > companies about 15 years ago. > > " Your Tri-Field meter is of limited use as it contains no frequency > information; for most people the 35kHz fields of a fluorescent light > is much > worse that a 50Hz incandescent lamp ( a meter like the one I > described above > would show 35000/50=700 times stronger deflection for a 35kHz field > than for > a 50Hz field of the same strength) ... " > > My first post - hope it works! > The TriField is frequency weighted, calibrated at 60 hz. So higher frequencies do show stronger readings. Eli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 > > i bought a cheapo GaussMaster to begin to get an idea of the mag fields > near my place. It measures from 0-1 miligauss. > 1 milligauss is equivalent to 0.1microtesla. (yes?) > 1 micro tesla is what i know the Swiss say is the max allowed for > people to live in there. > > The meter doesn't register at all in my general home environment, so > the mag fields in my house are at the very most 0.2milligauss. (away > from electric objects, obviously) > > i'm not niave enough to think that even what the swiss say is anywhere > near a safe level from humans to live in let alone an ES. So i'm > trying to find out what a reading of 0.2milligauss means to someone > with ES.??? > An ambient field of 0.2 mili gauss is on the borderline of being tolerable for several hours of exposure. I can feel 3-5 mg within seconds/minutes. Unfortunately there are fields not picked up by such meters that the ES can sense. Eli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 > > > The TriField is frequency weighted, calibrated at 60 hz. > So higher frequencies do show stronger readings. > Eli > Not the very high ones. Modern equipment uses frequency converters to change frequency from 50 or 60 cycles/second to thousands, millions and beyond c/s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 > > > > > > The TriField is frequency weighted, calibrated at 60 hz. > > So higher frequencies do show stronger readings. > > Eli > > > > Not the very high ones. Modern equipment uses frequency converters to > change frequency from 50 or 60 cycles/second to thousands, millions and > beyond c/s. > Correct, the magnetic and electric modes of the Trifield meter measure up to 100k hz, and the RF mode of the TriField meter is rather impotent. That's why it's important to have a quality RF meter to complement the general purpose TriField meter. Eli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 > I recently was told that the Large TV station tower, 2 blocks from my house, and broadcasts > all over the state, is magnetic, not RF, and there is nothing that would shield from this, > except moving of course....Just wanted to confirm this was true? No, I think that person doesn't know what they are talking about. TV station frequencies range from 54Mhz (VHF channel 2) to 890Mhz (UHF channel 83). This is within the range of what is known as " RF " . Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 I don't think that's true. There are antennas that are primarily magnetic in the near field, but those are at lower frequency than TV. If the antenna is tall the frequency may be fairly low and that would make it harder to shield... the worst case is that the tower shares with AM radio which goes down to about 600kHz. While microwaves can be shielded with foil or metal fly screen, a low frequency like that you'd need thicker metal. The magnetic field from power lines at 60 Hz is pretty hopeless to shield. Here's a graph http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skin_depth_by_Zureks.png You want a few times the delta shown, so at 60 Hz that's a few centimeters thick of aluminum! But for AM, 0.1 mm, which would mean several thicknesses of extra heavy duty foil, or very thin sheet metal. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 8:26 PM, debbie4god39 <Debbie4God39@...> wrote: > ** > > > I recently was told that the Large TV station tower, 2 blocks from my > house, and broadcasts all over the state, is magnetic, not RF, and there is > nothing that would shield from this, except moving of course....Just wanted > to confirm this was true? and wondered what other types of things have > magnetic radiation? > > Also, is everything else, such as cell towers, antennas, etc, except > household electricity, from a RF type of wave? thanks so much! > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Bill thanks for this!? If I called the station, do you suggest who I might talk to who might give me this info on the fields?? It is a tall tower.... Re: Magnetic fields I don't think that's true. There are antennas that are primarily magnetic in the near field, but those are at lower frequency than TV. If the antenna is tall the frequency may be fairly low and that would make it harder to shield... the worst case is that the tower shares with AM radio which goes down to about 600kHz. While microwaves can be shielded with foil or metal fly screen, a low frequency like that you'd need thicker metal. The magnetic field from power lines at 60 Hz is pretty hopeless to shield. Here's a graph http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skin_depth_by_Zureks.png You want a few times the delta shown, so at 60 Hz that's a few centimeters thick of aluminum! But for AM, 0.1 mm, which would mean several thicknesses of extra heavy duty foil, or very thin sheet metal. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 8:26 PM, debbie4god39 & lt;Debbie4God39@... & gt; wrote: & gt; ** & gt; & gt; & gt; I recently was told that the Large TV station tower, 2 blocks from my & gt; house, and broadcasts all over the state, is magnetic, not RF, and there is & gt; nothing that would shield from this, except moving of course....Just wanted & gt; to confirm this was true? and wondered what other types of things have & gt; magnetic radiation? & gt; & gt; Also, is everything else, such as cell towers, antennas, etc, except & gt; household electricity, from a RF type of wave? thanks so much! & gt; & gt; & gt; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 > Bill thanks for this!? If I called the station, do you suggest who > I might talk to who might give me this info on the fields?? > It is a tall tower.... I'd guess that if you call the station, NOBODY will know anything about it, and will tell you that it's all perfectly harmless, and there's nothing to worry about... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 The engineer, who may not be there on site most of the time, will know the frequencies used. The FCC probably knows most of them too. Wikipedia lists radio and tv stations, so if you know the local call letters, you can find out. Antennasearch.com may have info too. On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Marc <marc@...> wrote: > ** > > > > Bill thanks for this!? If I called the station, do you suggest who > > I might talk to who might give me this info on the fields?? > > It is a tall tower.... > > I'd guess that if you call the station, NOBODY will know anything > about it, and will tell you that it's all perfectly harmless, > and there's nothing to worry about... > > Marc > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.