Dirty Electricity and EMF Filters: Truth of Fiction?

[Gumby]

In another thread, l82start mentioned "bio-hacker" Dave Asprey's blog. He specializes in some pretty interesting bio hacks that few people would attempt (sleeping 2-5 hours per night, brainwave monitoring, heart rhythm pattern training, etc.). While I would probably never attempt most of what he prescribes, it is interesting to read about his experiments and how his body supposedly reacted to them.

In any case, I noticed that on his blog he recommends (and sells) "EMF Filters" and claims that he noticed a difference in the way he felt from using them. My instinct tells me this is just a gadget that doesn't do anything. But it reminded me that MG mentioned something similar in another thread. MG said, "I felt it working instantly!"

So, I'm left wondering... Is "Dirty Electricity" for real? And if it is, do these EMF filters really do anything? Finally are there any scientific opinions on Dirty Electricity by individuals who aren't selling them?

[l82start]

are you referring to the inline beads that they put on wires? i saw him speaking about those in a Joe Rogan interview and wondered the same thing.
i also started noticing and was quite surprised by how many computer wires already have them...

i did download the brain workshop program (free) and have played with it a bit, finding the dedication to play the full dose of 20 rounds or advance past level 1 has so far escaped me, but i found it interesting and challenging...

edit to add -- i did a quick search and this is the one i heard him talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_bead

[Gumby]

are you referring to the inline beads that they put on wires? i saw him speaking about those in a Joe Rogan interview and wondered the same thing.

No, haven't seen that. Not even sure what you're talking about. I'm just curious about what this "dirty electricity" thing is all about. I really have no idea.

[l82start]

i found them.. see link in edit above .. i believe he was recommending adding them to any headset or wired device you put close to your brain..    
i don't know about the "dirty electricity" thing but i am interested in finding out..

[AgAuMoney]

The website and claims are bunk.  With a mix of fact and fantasy it is typical of a soft sell by those who have nothing but innuendo and testimonial.

The filters they sell might actually have components in them to filter noise and surges on the power lines, similar to, perhaps better (or worse) than your typical computer surge suppressor and noise filter. But I've never seen evidence that the noise being filtered will or will not have any biological effect unless millions of times stronger*, nor is there any evidence that their filtering is worth whatever price they are charging (assuming it is >$0) on its technical merits as a noise filter.

To compare what they say with reality, the field strength of the things they talk about are many times lower than the same stuff as emitted by a cell phone, a bluetooth headset, or your WiFi gadgets or WiFi router (or anything doing wireless communication).  Those devices should be much higher on your list of concerns both because of the strength but also the nearness as well as the duration of exposure and the body parts nearest the point of field emission.


More technical stuff...

Stray voltage is real.  It is caused by wiring problems and can be solved by correcting the wiring, not by some magic filter.

Electromagnetic fields are real, but no magic filter is going to affect those either.  They are generated whenever electricity flows.  Trying to shield against them is nearly impossible.

RF is real and is simply an abbreviation for radio frequency.  It's necessary for radio, television and everything wireless plus it is generated by anything with a microprocessor (which today is anything with a keypad or a display and a bunch of stuff without either) or that does switching of electricity every time it switches such as anything with a switching power supply (most modern power adapters and power supplies in electronic equipment including compact fluorescent and LED light bulbs) or many electric motors - every battery operated electric motor and more.  (E.g. tune an A.M. radio to an empty spot low on the dial and turn the volume up load and run your cordless drill nearby.)

RF is simply electrical or electromagnet impulses that vary with time (how often is known as the frequency) which occupies a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum at a lower frequency than light.  Generally also the frequency has to be high enough or they are not considered RF.  300hertz is a common lower bound (see ultra-low frequency).  It goes up from there to many gigahertz, e.g. WiFi is currently carried on frequencies as high as 5ghz but standards are currently under development for up to 60gigahertz.  RF can go thru the air (wireless) or over wires (like cable TV).  Any wire connected to anything using electricity or to the ground is an antenna and it emits RF to the air or can pick up RF from the air.

The high frequency impulses they talk about are RF on power wiring.  They could be RF picked up by the wire, or could become RF emitted by the wire or both.  They are (on the power wires), exactly what your computer surge suppressor and noise filter is designed to eliminate.  (They are the noise.)  They are generated just like RF because they are RF.  Standards require some minimal amount of filtering to avoid causing problems with other equipment.  People intentionally put "high frequency impulses" on the power lines by using HomePlug and similar network over powerline equipment, or powerline intercoms or babymonitors, or powerline remote controls like X10 or Insteon or by the electrical company to send meter readings from your home to an access point/concentrator.


* RF burns are real, as is RF heating like your microwave.  RF diminishes in strength by the square of the distance (the inverse square law) so it is relatively easy to get a safe distance from even a very powerful transmitter.  There may or may not be evidence that holding a low-power (under 1watt) transmitter next to your head for hours on end for day after day may cause problems more slowly and more subtle than RF burns.  Google "cell phone brain tumor" for a joyful week of reading.  But remember, due to the inverse square law, if you double the distance you are exposed to 1/4 the power, or triple the distance for 1/9 the power.  How far are you from your cell phone compared to the power wiring, and consider that your cell phone is emitting 100's or 1000's of times the signal strength to start with.

[Storm]

These devices are bunk.  AgAuMoney pretty thoroughly debunked them.  If you're afraid of EMI you might just consider not having so many electronic devices near your brain.  Many people choose not to set a clock radio next to their bed for this reason.  You might also stay away from electrical blankets.

I think it's fair to assume, regardless of what you believe, that having electrical equipment burning a few kilowatts an hour might not be good to have next to any biological material you care about.

I don't mine bitcoins next to my bed...

[Gumby]

I'm not afraid of EMF, since I really don't understand it. But, I found it interesting that people supposedly feel a difference in their mood and well being when they use the filters. Guess it might just be a placebo effect. I was surprised to see Dave Asprey shucking them, but then again, I suppose people will sell anything to make a buck.

[Gumby]

So, I went looking around Asprey's site to see what evidence he cites in recommending EMF filters, and this is the study he cites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18556048

I'm well aware that this study may be entirely flawed, but is there a chance that there's some truth to what the study observed?

[dragoncar]

I'll fourth or fifth that this is total BS.  If you want to do your own experiment, go somewhere with no electricity, like the middle of a park or a cabin in the woods or something.  Besides the fact that you are in nature (close your eyes), do you "instantly feel the difference"?

[l82start]

on the one hand i am in favor of experimental bio-hacking, but i am a bit disappointed at some of the new-age sounding sales items i see on his site. i hadn't read much past the nutrition/power coffee and brain-workshop pages when gumby posted his question, and i found his take on those had lots of interesting info..  he seems to be into checking out anything that might be a good hack which is OK by me, he is bound to have some hits and misses with his experiments...  as with most things a grain of salt and do your own due diligence are called for...

[Gumby]

I'll fourth or fifth that this is total BS.  If you want to do your own experiment, go somewhere with no electricity, like the middle of a park or a cabin in the woods or something.  Besides the fact that you are in nature (close your eyes), do you "instantly feel the difference"?

I suspect if you could throw a switch and instantly transport yourself into the middle of a park you would feel different. But, that's hardly a scientific exercise.

For what it's worth, Prevention magazine did a lengthy article on EMF pollution...

http://www.prevention.com/health/health ... our-health

Keep in mind that they aren't talking about normal "electricity". They are talking about a very specific, measurable "high-frequency voltage transients":

Milham was especially interested in measuring the ambient levels of a particular kind of EMF, a relatively new suspected carcinogen known as high-frequency voltage transients, or "dirty electricity." Transients are largely by-products of modern energy-efficient electronics and appliances--from computers, refrigerators, and plasma TVs to compact fluorescent lightbulbs and dimmer switches--which tamp down the electricity they use. This manipulation of current creates a wildly fluctuating and potentially dangerous electromagnetic field that not only radiates into the immediate environment but also can back up along home or office wiring all the way to the utility, infecting every energy customer in between...

..Could a disease whose cause has long eluded scientists be linked to perhaps the greatest practical discovery of the modern era? For 50 years, researchers who have tried to tie one to the other have been routinely dismissed by a variety of skeptics, from congressional investigators to powerful interest groups--most prominently electric utilities, cell phone manufacturers, and WiFi providers, which have repeatedly cited their own data showing the linkage to be "weak and inconsistent." Recently, however, in addition to the stunning new investigations into dirty electricity (which we'll return to), several developments have highlighted the growing hazards of EMF pollution--and the crucial need to address them...

...In 2007, the Bioinitiative Working Group, an international collaboration of prestigious scientists and public health policy experts from the United States, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, and China, released a 650-page report citing more than 2,000 studies (many very recent) that detail the toxic effects of EMFs from all sources. Chronic exposure to even low-level radiation (like that from cell phones), the scientists concluded, can cause a variety of cancers, impair immunity, and contribute to Alzheimer's disease and dementia, heart disease, and many other ailments. "We now have a critical mass of evidence, and it gets stronger every day," says David Carpenter, MD, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and coauthor of the public-health chapters of the Bioinitiative report.
Source: http://www.prevention.com/health/health ... our-health

I'm just trying to understand both sides of the argument here. I am really a lay person when it comes to EMF and "transients", but to simply dismiss it, without further investigation, seems a little shortsighted.

[Gumby]

More from the Prevention article:

A telltale sign of an energy-efficient device is the ballast, or transformer, that you see near the end of a power cord on a laptop computer, printer, or cell phone charger (although not all devices have them). When plugged in, it's warm to the touch, an indication that it's tamping down current and throwing off transient pollution. Two of the worst creators of transient radiation: light dimmer switches and compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs). Transients are created when current is repeatedly interrupted. A CFL, for instance, saves energy by turning itself on and off repeatedly, as many as 100,000 times per second.

So how does the human body respond to this pulsing radiation? "Think of a magnet," explains Dave Stetzer, an electrical engineer and power supply expert in Blair, WI. "Opposite charges attract, and like charges repel. When a transient is going positive, the negatively charged electrons in your body move toward that positive charge. When the transient flips to negative, the body's electrons are pushed back. Remember, these positive-negative shifts are occurring many thousands of times per second, so the electrons in your body are oscillating to that tune. Your body becomes charged up because you're basically coupled to the transient's electric field."

Keep in mind that all the cells in your body, whether islets in the pancreas awaiting a signal to manufacture insulin or white blood cells speeding to the site of an injury, use electricity--or "electron change"--to communicate with each other. By overlapping the body's signaling mechanisms, could transients interfere with the secretion of insulin, drown out the call-and-response of the immune system, and cause other physical havoc?

Some preliminary research implies the answer is yes. Over the past 3 years, Magda Havas, PhD, a researcher in the department of environmental and resource studies at Trent University in Ontario, has published several studies that suggest exposure to transients may elevate blood sugar levels among people with diabetes and prediabetes and that people with multiple sclerosis improve their balance and have fewer tremors after just a few days in a transient- free environment. Her work also shows that after schools installed filters to clean up transients, two-thirds of teachers reported improvement in symptoms that had been plaguing them, including headache, dry eye, facial flushing, asthma, skin irritation, and depression.

Transients are particularly insidious because they accumulate and strengthen, their frequency reaching into the dangerous RF range. Because they travel along home and utility wiring, your neighbor's energy choices will affect the electrical pollution in your house. In other words, a CFL illuminating a porch down the block can send nasty transients into your bedroom.
Source: http://www.prevention.com/health/health ... our-health

I've got to say, the article makes a pretty compelling argument — to a layperson at least — that more investigation is warranted.

[Gumby]

And there was another separate study that came to a similar conclusion...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18512243

Again, maybe this is another flawed study, but I'm left wondering if we aren't looking at this closely enough.

On the other hand, the people who ran these studies are probably heavily invested in EMF technology and perhaps want us to believe a certain narrative. So confusing.

The part that weirds me out is that supposedly you can measure these transients, which implies that your cells could react to them as well.

[AgAuMoney]

I'm just trying to understand both sides of the argument here. I am really a lay person when it comes to EMF and "transients", but to simply dismiss it, without further investigation, seems a little shortsighted.

Did you read my footnote where I basically stated that point, as well as why you should be more concerned about your cellphone, and why the powerlines are of less concern even tho that is what the OP's link is purporting to solve?

There may or may not be evidence that holding a low-power (under 1watt) transmitter next to your head for hours on end for day after day may cause problems more slowly and more subtle than RF burns.  Google "cell phone brain tumor" for a joyful week of reading.  But remember, due to the inverse square law, if you double the distance you are exposed to 1/4 the power, or triple the distance for 1/9 the power.  How far are you from your cell phone compared to the power wiring, and consider that your cell phone is emitting 100's or 1000's of times the signal strength to start with.

[AgAuMoney]

So, I went looking around Asprey's site to see what evidence he cites in recommending EMF filters, and this is the study he cites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18556048

I'm well aware that this study may be entirely flawed, but is there a chance that there's some truth to what the study observed?

From just the abstract it is apparent the "study" is not even a study.  It is simply more testimonial from the same source.  1) single blind.  2) the teachers (and most likely the students) were aware that "something" was being done to help.

My father was in school administration.  In junior high a lot of us used to play with mercury, rolling it around on our desks, hands, etc.  No complaints, no reactions, no apparent problems.  Some years (ok, many years) later there was a broken lab thermometer which spilled a minute amount of mercury on a lab bench and some fragments of glass.  School was shut down, hazmat cleanup of the people, site, and everything else was performed and school reopened.  Complaints ensued, attendance plummeted, all sorts of health problems surfaced.  Test after test showed no issue for mercury, mold, asbestos (had been removed decades before), radon, and I don't remember what all they were monitoring/testing for.  But after a few months (threat of strike and parents pulling their kids out of school) they closed the school for a couple of weeks, sealed the building, had hazmat crews remove anything soft and do a thorough cleaning, then replaced window blinds and all the carpet and any soft surface (e.g. bulletin boards) and spent well over $1,000,000 before labor.  Tests afterwards showed much worse indoor air quality (carpet and glue tends to do that), but the complaints basically stopped, absenteeism returned to normal levels for both students and staff, and the insurance company up'd their rates for at least the next 10 years my dad was there (increase was enough that 3-4 years more than paid the bill, 5 years would have ensured any reasonable time-value of money was compensated).

Do not underestimate the "placebo" effect.

[Gumby]

I'm just trying to understand both sides of the argument here. I am really a lay person when it comes to EMF and "transients", but to simply dismiss it, without further investigation, seems a little shortsighted.

Did you read my footnote where I basically stated that point, as well as why you should be more concerned about your cellphone?

Yes, but a cellphone is easy to switch off. The other transients, not so much. I see you point, but the argument that most high-frequency voltage transients are weaker than a cell phone doesn't necessarily absolve them from interfering with cellular functions.

There may or may not be evidence that holding a low-power (under 1watt) transmitter next to your head for hours on end for day after day may cause problems more slowly and more subtle than RF burns.  Google "cell phone brain tumor" for a joyful week of reading.  But remember, due to the inverse square law, if you double the distance you are exposed to 1/4 the power, or triple the distance for 1/9 the power.  How far are you from your cell phone compared to the power wiring, and consider that your cell phone is emitting 100's or 1000's of times the signal strength to start with.

1) single blind.  2) the teachers (and most likely the students) were aware that "something" was being done to help.

I'm confused. The paper specifically said...

"We installed Graham Stetzer filters and dummy filters and measured power quality in three Minnesota Schools. Teachers completed a daily questionnaire regarding their health and the behavior of their students for an 8-week period. Teachers were unaware of which filters were installed at any one time (single blind study)."
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18556048

I am skeptical of their findings as well, and I totally get that the observations in the paper may be flawed, but I'm not sure how you figure that the students or teachers were aware of whether or not they had working filters. The classroom either received dummy filters or working filters and students and teachers supposedly weren't ever told which one they received. Seems like there wouldn't be a placebo effect in that situation. Not to mention that elementary/middle school students don't exactly all agree to behave well and feel better just because someone purportedly winked and nodded on the way in or out of the classroom.

[Gumby]

Last Word on Nothing blog has a good post on the subject. The author admits they can't "debunk" it, but they aren't convinced it's a real concern.

http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2012/0 ... ectricity/

[MachineGhost]

In any case, I noticed that on his blog he recommends (and sells) "EMF Filters" and claims that he noticed a difference in the way he felt from using them. My instinct tells me this is just a gadget that doesn't do anything. But it reminded me that MG mentioned something similar in another thread. MG said, "I felt it working instantly!"

Are you talkinng about a ferrite bead?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_bead

Not the same concept that what I was referring to.  The body has a natural defense mechanism against radiation and you can either reinforce it (typically passively) and/or use artificial shield generators (actively).

There was no placebo effect in the situation I was referring to.  I had been up almost 24 hours and was beyond tired and fatigued so any positive change in my stressed mental or physical state was very noticeable.  I just don't believe placebo effects can ever be that dramatic, otherwise I would be familiar with it from trying many other things that did nothing.

[MachineGhost]

interrupted. A CFL, for instance, saves energy by turning itself on and off repeatedly, as many as 100,000 times per second.

That's really interesting as I didn't know that.  I use a full spectrum CFL bulb in my PC room (where I plugged in the Nimbus) and have for about one and a half decades.

[Gumby]

Are you talkinng about a ferrite bead?

No. I was talking about these so-called filters that Asprey is selling on his site.

http://www.greenwavefilters.com

Apparently you plug them in and something magic happens to minimize "dirty electricity" in the room.

My questions are:

1) Does "dirty electricity" exist?
2) If so, does the product actually do anything?
3) If so, how does the product work?
4) If the product does something, is it more than a placebo effect?

There was no placebo effect in the situation I was referring to.  I had been up almost 24 hours and was beyond tired and fatigued so any positive change in my stressed mental or physical state was very noticeable.  I just don't believe placebo effects can ever be that dramatic, otherwise I would be familiar with it from trying many other things that did nothing.

Intriguing. Still having a hard time understanding what it "feels" like. Can you elaborate a bit on what you think it does?

[Gumby]

To compare what they say with reality, the field strength of the things they talk about are many times lower than the same stuff as emitted by a cell phone, a bluetooth headset, or your WiFi gadgets or WiFi router (or anything doing wireless communication).  Those devices should be much higher on your list of concerns both because of the strength but also the nearness as well as the duration of exposure and the body parts nearest the point of field emission.

I'm having trouble accepting this as a reason to dismiss dirty energy. That would be like saying that the Earth's gravitational pull is so much stronger and closer than the Moon's gravitational pull, so therefore the Moon's gravitational pull is inconsequential. Yet, while nobody can really "feel" the Moon's pull, we know that it is constantly pulling massive amounts of water around our planet. Its "weak" force still has a large effect.

I remain somewhat skeptical of "dirty energy," but I'm also trying to understand why intelligent bio-hackers are buying into them. (Perhaps it is so they can sell them). But I'm not sure I would dismiss dirty energy entirely just because it is measurably small in comparison to cell phones.

[Gumby]

This is a bigger issue than I thought...

VIDEO: WiFi in school proven dangerous

The video plays on parents fears, but you can't help but wonder if there is any merit to what they show.

[MediumTex]

This is a bigger issue than I thought...

VIDEO: WiFi in school proven dangerous

The video plays on parents fears, but you can't help but wonder if there is any merit to what they show.

Aren't we being bombarded with radiation from the sun, radio stations, cell phone towers and other sources more or less continuously?

Is wifi really adding that much to this load?

[Gumby]

Aren't we being bombarded with radiation from the sun, radio stations, cell phone towers and other sources more or less continuously?

Is wifi really adding that much to this load?

The argument is that, supposedly, our bodies have adapted to the sun's radiation over millions of years, through evolution.

But the antennas you mention supposedly are part of the concern. For instance, you can find out the number of antennas in your vicinity by searching your home address here:

http://www.antennasearch.com

Most people are unaware just how many antennas are near their homes.

So, there's that and WiFi, but the "dirty electricity" is also from high-frequency voltage transients which is supposedly a relatively new kind of exposure for humans — or at least in the levels we are getting now. I really don't know. It's pretty confusing to say the least. Experts say the energy is too weak, yet, there are people who can "feel" the exposure and you can even instantly see erratic heart rates when they switch on WiFi routers (see video). 

[dragoncar]

I suspect if you could throw a switch and instantly transport yourself into the middle of a park you would feel different. But, that's hardly a scientific exercise.

Fair enough.  How about this experiment:  go to the back of your house.  Have a friend throw the power relay to the entire house.  See if you can sense when the power is on or off.  You may need to unplug certain things that beep when power is applied, or make noise.

You neighbor's power is likely an insignificant factor here.  Electromagnetic fields decrease according to the inverse cube law.