ADVERSE REACTIONS TO RF/ EMF, ENVIRONMENTAL STRESSORS

[Guest guest]

>>

>> Hi Bruce,

>>

>>BG I did go through your entire e-mail, regarding the spark gap.

>>

>>BG The only reason I would add a spark as an OPTION is because some

>> people have been reported to benefit from this. People reading

>> your post need not be very concerned, since they don't have to

>> use the option (and they can even request that it not be included

>> in their model).

>>

>>BG If there are too many people who are electro- sensitive I will not

>> add the spark function to any models. I do appreciate your

>> advice.

BKS: Recent figures (2002?) in the U.S. are that about 15% or more of the people

are presently having electro-sensitivity problems to the extent that it affects

their quality of life; the trend is that this is increasing steadily, and it may

well already be substantially above that by now. This should be disturbing to

everyone.

In contrast, in about 1930, Nikola Tesla was the only one I've heard of who was

ever reported to have developed electro-sensitivity from his research

experiments. [source: Dr. L. Oschman's book, " Energy Medicine- the

Scientific Basis " .]

The factor to understand is the ANYONE may begin to be far more sensitive

quickly due to unrecognized factors that are added into their living / working

environment- things beyond their comprehension or control; I have come across a

lot of people who " didn't used to be bothered by those things " that now find

life far more challenging.... and more challenging each month, each year.

And in light of today's 'advancing technology', the 'environmental stressors'

which people are exposed to will only continue to increase. (The 1930s slipped

away 66 years ago, and with it, the substantially unpolluted environment in

which Tesla, Lahkovsky, Abrams, and Rife first did research... the game has

changed radically...)

>>BG I don't recall in your recent posts your mention of just

>> how many sick people are very sensitive to very low levels of RF.

BKS : By the time I hear from some of the people who have had their conditions

aggravated or their health condition deteriorate from using equipment with spark

gaps (or other added RF / chaos /noise generators), they invariably have dropped

out of communication on any of the lists. Why might this be?

Maybe many of are disillusioned that they may have been misled by those seeming

to claim some 'authority', but who themselves disregard the reports and cautions

which have been offered. They simply no longer trust the advice or veracity of

what they were told.

Some of them, like Bill M. in B.C. and in Toronto, have followed the advice

of some, only to find themselves to severely affected that the can no longer

tolerate being near a computer, so they drop out of communication- out of a

basic need for self-preservation. (It took Bill M. over ten months of moving

outside and sleeping in his old tent before he got back in touch with me via an

email; it's still rare to get a message from him, but he was still surviving

about 6 to 8 months ago when I last head from him- still hyper-sensitive after

all of these years, but able to occasionally communicate. But he has not

recovered to where he had been prior to using the EMEM-2 and the " Enhancer " MWO.

Because I have had the MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity / Environmental

Sensitivity information, and the

http://www.stenulson.net/althealth/es-disc.htm

precautionary page on the adverse reactions to EMF / RF - [Electro-Sensitivity]

on my web site since back in the 1990s, I'm someone who hears from others with

environmental and electrical / EMF / RF sensitivity... and some of the

situations I hear about make me both sad for how their lives have been

devastated, and also angry at those who, in their rush to exploit what they see

as an 'easy market', will ignore cautions. from California gave me her

promise that she would carefully write out the details of how a very few brief

exposure sessions to an EMEM7DV with spark gap 'totally messed her up'... but

she never followed through on that promise, so I can not pass along her story in

her words. Her brain fog and sensitivities had become a major challenge to her,

on top of the Lyme she was trying to deal with, so it seems that she was either

diverted by other concerns, or simply lost the ability and willingness to follow

through on her promise.

Cary in Texas could not tolerate using the early 1998 model EMEM2+ which I had

built for her (with the spark gap included) for her battle with Lyme; she was

already too hyper-sensitive. Once I told her later how to eliminate the spark

gap, she began to be able to use it on the lower output power level settings for

limited times on a limited number of frequencies per session, so she has begun

to make gradual progress. She reports that if the power level is set up above a

certain level, she experiences what we are now recognizing as " collateral

adverse reactions " - reactions that are not experienced by those sensitive Lyme

sufferers when the power level is kept within their 'window of positive

response'.

Yes, that's what is being reported: when a helpful frequency is run at too high

a power level, these sensitive Lyme sufferers instead begin to have 'adverse

collateral reactions'. With too much exposure at too high a power level, they do

not see their condition improving, even though they are using the same

frequencies which other researchers fighting Lyme have used to become totally

free of symptoms- some for many years now.

Unfortunately, I now expect that this " Over-Powered " approach is an all too

common situation- especially among Lyme sufferers- an ever expanding portion of

the population.

" Quality, not Quantity, IS the Key! "

After 8-1/2 years of this research, I am more convinced of this than ever. All

of the evidence is really there- that people without sensitivities to EMF / RF /

Environmental factors *also* respond most positively to modest power levels when

using the EM+ systems I designed. And no, Herx' reactions are rarely a part of

their experience- the health challenges simply disappear. So if people do not

respond that way to other equipment, then you should really be curious to find

out what's not working in those designs.

And it may become more obvious by now to many researchers that *MORE* - more

voltage, more current, more RF, and more chaotic noise- might be exactly the

wrong way to go. It's most obvious with the people with the most severe health

challenges- the ones closest to the edge; for them its very likely that *MORE*

can be that last straw... the straw that breaks the camel's back, that tips them

into that descending spiral of ever increasing environmental sensitivity,

decreasing quality of life...

Maybe, in light of this information, the people who have been competitively

marketing equipment based on this misguided clamor of " MORE POWER!- MORE POWER!-

MORE POWER! " will begin to re-evaluate what they are advocating, and actually do

some thorough in depth testing with quality test equipment, as well as using

some of the available body response testing techniques to observe how a wide

variety of individuals actually respond to their latest 'brain-child'. Initial

responses are not as revealing as evaluating how they respond after extended

periods of repeated use...

It might be time for some of this extensive re-evaluation before the litigators

jump in.... at that point, what happened to Forrest after he violated

the specific terms of the agreement he signed with the Federal Trade Commission

will possibly seem rather mild by comparison. Let's work together to see if we

can keep the situation from progressing to that level.

I wish each and every one of you the best of results and insights in your

research!!!

Be Well- and *Be Careful!*

Bruce