Earthing : Perhaps one of the greatest discoveries, ever

[WildAboutHarry]

It goes back to my comment about the sound of distant flowing water being soothing to people.  There may be some subtle evolutionary benefit to people who find that experience soothing and this preference may have created a survival advantage.

Only if being around the sound of flowing water had some survival advantage to our ancestors.  Kind of a stretch.  Especially if you consider crocodiles.

The placebo effect is very powerful.  Don't ask me how I know this, but you can often successfully treat warts with certain materials that fluoresce under regular UV light.  The treatment has no effect other than to make the wart glow a pretty color, but in many cases the warts disappear.  The treatment is more effective if the practitioner makes up some scientific-sounding explanation (i.e. "Well, the wavelength of the ultraviolet light makes the magic elixir bind to the wart and sets up harmonic frequencies that destroy the virus").  Along a similar line, in one of the old Whole Earth Catalogs (the proto-internet), a successful treatment for plantar warts was described as consisting of "voodoo and a Swiss Army Knife".

The electrical discharge theory might actually just be the explanation offered by a civilization accustomed to such technical explanations when the truth is more subtle and harder to quantify.

But almost invariably a scientific explanation will ultimately explain the phenomenon.  Eating green leafy vegetables makes me feel better, smell better, and look better.  What subtle property makes that happen?  Oh, wait.  There are vitamins in those things.  Difficult to discover and quantify, but ultimately quantifiable.

If there is something to grounding, I would think that electronics workers who are tethered to grounding straps all day would be the happiest, healthiest people on earth.

[MediumTex]

It goes back to my comment about the sound of distant flowing water being soothing to people.  There may be some subtle evolutionary benefit to people who find that experience soothing and this preference may have created a survival advantage.

Only if being around the sound of flowing water had some survival advantage to our ancestors.  Kind of a stretch.  Especially if you consider crocodiles.

The placebo effect is very powerful.  Don't ask me how I know this, but you can often successfully treat warts with certain materials that fluoresce under regular UV light.  The treatment has no effect other than to make the wart glow a pretty color, but in many cases the warts disappear.  The treatment is more effective if the practitioner makes up some scientific-sounding explanation (i.e. "Well, the wavelength of the ultraviolet light makes the magic elixir bind to the wart and sets up harmonic frequencies that destroy the virus").  Along a similar line, in one of the old Whole Earth Catalogs (the proto-internet), a successful treatment for plantar warts was described as consisting of "voodoo and a Swiss Army Knife".

The electrical discharge theory might actually just be the explanation offered by a civilization accustomed to such technical explanations when the truth is more subtle and harder to quantify.

But almost invariably a scientific explanation will ultimately explain the phenomenon.  Eating green leafy vegetables makes me feel better, smell better, and look better.  What subtle property makes that happen?  Oh, wait.  There are vitamins in those things.  Difficult to discover and quantify, but ultimately quantifiable.

If there is something to grounding, I would think that electronics workers who are tethered to grounding straps all day would be the happiest, healthiest people on earth.

You're right.

I'm just trying to think about this in terms of something between accepting what seems to be based on flimsy science and completely discounting it because it sounds quacky.

[Gumby]

If there is something to grounding, I would think that electronics workers who are tethered to grounding straps all day would be the happiest, healthiest people on earth.

Nope. Those are anti-static mats. They just discharge the static buildup at a specific charge (as specified by the standards for the components). They aren't grounding mats that would provide a constant unimpeded ground.

[Gumby]

The placebo effect is very powerful.  Don't ask me how I know this, but you can often successfully treat warts with certain materials that fluoresce under regular UV light.  The treatment has no effect other than to make the wart glow a pretty color, but in many cases the warts disappear.

Since when is phototherapy a placebo effect?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_therapy

You can't think of a plausible explanation for UV light treating a wart? I'm sure there are many.

[MediumTex]

One interesting question is why placebo effects seem so troubling to people.

If I engage in an activity and it has beneficial effects, do I really care what the mechanism is for the benefit?

Maybe what are observed as placebo effects are actually real beneficial effects with mechanisms that are simply not understood.

I keep thinking about acupuncture in this discussion.

If a doctor spends an hour talking with me and validates all of my physical pains and discomforts and then gives me a sugar pill and I feel better, that would only be a placebo effect if we don't recognize that it may have been the combination of the validation and attention from an authority figure PLUS the sugar pill that created the good outcome, and clearly the hour of talk therapy is a real form of therapy.  After all, we don't think of improving conditions following psychotherapy to be the result of a placebo effect.

The reason that the sugar pill may be necessary, though, is that the structure of the health care delivery system may require it, for the same reasons that a voodoo doctor may need to use rat tails in his potions simply because his patients won't recognize their therapeutic potential without the rat tails.  They have been conditioned to have certain beliefs about what effective treatment should look like, and thus treatments are far more effective when they are presented in the proper cultural context and with the proper packaging (e.g., go to the doctor and get a pill).

I admit that I enjoy the attention I get from my doctor and his interest in all aspects of how my body feels.  When I am there I catch myself thinking "I wish other people cared about me this much."  I often feel better as I leave even if I wasn't aware of feeling that bad when I went in.  The experience of having other people be kind to you clearly has many beneficial effects, and I assume that we wouldn't call these placebo effects.

[WildAboutHarry]

You can't think of a plausible explanation for UV light treating a wart? I'm sure there are many.

Sure.  But unless you understand the mechanism, or at least can propose a plausible hypothesis of action, it is difficult to distinguish the real thing from a placebo.

One interesting question is why placebo effects seem so troubling to people.

The placebo effect is troubling precisely because it can prevent the seeking of actual, proven therapies.  Placebo-type treatments can be a haven for scoundrels (medicine shows, crank cancer cures, etc.).

I think the placebo effect is amazing, and can be (and is) used in legitimate medical therapy.  But there is such a great opportunity for fraud.

[Gumby]

One interesting question is why placebo effects seem so troubling to people.

I think when someone quickly dismisses a therapy — perhaps because they do not understand it — and labels it a "placebo effect", it suggests that the patient imagined their own healing process.

I keep thinking about acupuncture in this discussion.

Me too. However, I have had many successful acupuncture treatments since I began treating my condition — overwhelmingly positive responses.

Often when one does acupuncture, the acupuncturist sticks his fingers into your gut — to help determine your health — and looks for stiff and tender muscles and asks you if they feel sore or tender. (He can usually feel it, but he asks anyway). All of these specific points in the stomach should be soft according to Traditional Chinese Medicine (i.e. no soreness or stiff tension).

Then, without moving his fingers, the acupuncturist will proceed to stick a needle into your thigh or foot and then push his fingers into your gut again and the same muscles will go soft instantaneously. If he takes the needle out, the muscles instantly go stiff again. A good acupuncturist can do this just by firmly touching an acupuncture point with his/her finger (no needle needed to test a point). This is often how they determine which acupuncture points they need to treat.

So, if my acupuncturist can change the softness and tension of specific muscles in a specific region my stomach, by placing or removing a single needle — as if he were turning a light switch on and off — is that a placebo effect? No, I don't think so. I really don't. There is a direct cause and effect that he can toggle at will. Not only that, but he first did this to me when I initially had zero faith that acupuncture was going to do anything. (I only did it because my wife thought it might help, but I was initially convinced that it wouldn't do a thing).

So, he leaves the pins in place for 20 minutes to half an hour and comes back and the muscles in the stomach have loosened up and I feel better all over. I give him some money and I make another appointment. Works for me.

Mainstream doctors say its a "placebo effect" but I don't see very many people trying to figure out how acupuncture might actually work. The term "placebo effect" seems to be a way to dismiss things without having to investigate them further. As in... "Oh, that doesn't make any sense, so it must be a placebo effect."

[Pointedstick]

One interesting question is why placebo effects seem so troubling to people.

I think when someone quickly dismisses a therapy — perhaps because they do not understand it — and labels it a "placebo effect", it suggests that the patient imagined their own healing process.

If you really think about it, the idea that people could "imagine their own healing process" is rather unsettling to those in the business of selling you extrinsic cures. Not that I think there's some kind of grand conspiracy going on, but (say) your dentist is just going to inherently going to prefer filling your cavities than recommending a diet that prevents you from getting cavities in the first place. A lot of this will be because they're dentists and not nutritionists, so their focus is on fixing problems after they've developed. Similarly, your average doctor accustomed to prescribing medication and performing surgery probably does not think very much about the body's own means of healing itself.  Having a narrow professional focus can inhibit you from seeing the big picture or the value of other approaches.

[Dozha]

I'd like to add my experience regarding accupuncture. 

Thirty + years ago, in Taiwan, I went to an accupuncturist, Chinese of course, who was trained in Chinese medicine.  I needed help with a smoking addiction (was smoking a particularly lethal Taiwanese brand called "Long Life") and I'd been smoking since I was 13, so the prognosis for quitting was not good.  He was a funny guy who had his own addiction issues, so knew well what I was going through.  He said he didn't really want to ever stop drinking for good, so he just treated himself when things got too bad and temporarily went on the wagon. He warned me that unless I had a strong intention to quit forever, it wouldn't work long term.  Let me say as an addict I had had that strong intention many times, but it never got me very far past the first overwhelming urge to smoke.  I also knew nothing about Chinese culture or medicine (was there with my husband who was studying the language and culture), had no opinions except, as a Westerner with no experience, a general skepticism about traditional Chinese practices and attitudes.  Anyway, the treatment worked, to my great surprise. 

I had five treatments early morning for five days in a row. I could feel the difference immediately.  The first day I got to noon without a desire to smoke.  By the fifth day, I was getting through the entire day. The Seventh Day Adventists had a big medical mission in Taipei at that time, with a hospital and clinic.  I joined their smoking cessation program in order to get continuing support, but I'd joined those things before and had never been able to quit for any length of time. 

This lasted for over fifteen years, then in a really intense family crisis I started again.  Let me say I never had an urge to smoke again after acupuncture, but in this crisis, I felt "entitled"--I've been told this is a typical issue with addicts.  I then sought out help from an American trained acupuncturist and had no success at all.  Fortunately, by that time there was nicorette to get me over the first hurdle of physical dependancy. 

So the first time, I had no belief and it worked.  The second time I had belief and it didn't work. I'm not sure placebo is an explanation if you don't trust the treatment, but maybe it works unconsciously. 

My sister, who had the care of my mother in my mother's extreme old age, used to take her to an acupuncturist regularly.  My mother was always a cynic with dark suspicions about everything/everyone.  But she would hobble into the acupuncturist's office snarking and bitching, and come out with a spring in her step, wielding her cane like a broadsword.  She never admitted that it did her any good, though. 

two n=1 experiences FWIW.

[MediumTex]

So the first time, I had no belief and it worked.  The second time I had belief and it didn't work. I'm not sure placebo is an explanation if you don't trust the treatment, but maybe it works unconsciously. 

Are you sure about what you are saying?

In the first case you had enough belief to go see the guy.

In the second case you said you were feeling entitled (i.e., justified in what you were doing).

It may be that you believed it more the first time than you thought you did and less the second time than you thought you did.

I'm not saying it was placebo; I'm just saying we can be very clever when it comes to self-deception.

[Gumby]

You can't think of a plausible explanation for UV light treating a wart? I'm sure there are many.

Sure.  But unless you understand the mechanism, or at least can propose a plausible hypothesis of action, it is difficult to distinguish the real thing from a placebo.

Sorry, WildAboutHarry, but you took a legitimate medical treatment (Pulse dye lasers) and claimed it was a strong placebo effect. That's not the case. Dermatologists use those UV lasers all the time to treat warts — and they aren't considered to be placebos.

Wart > Treatment > Procedures

Laser treatment – often with a pulse dye laser or carbon dioxide (CO2) laser. Pulse dye lasers (wavelength 582 nm) work by selective absorption by blood cells (specifically haemoglobin). CO2 lasers work by selective absorption by water molecules. Pulse dye lasers are less destructive and more likely to heal without scarring. CO2 laser works by vaporizing and destroying tissue and skin. Laser treatments can be painful, expensive (though covered by many insurances), and can cause little scarring when used appropriately. CO2 lasers will require local anaesthetic. Pulse dye laser treatment does not need conscious sedation nor local anesthetic. It takes 2 to 4 treatments but can be many more for extreme cases. Typically, 10–14 days are required between treatments. Preventative measures are important.


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wart#Procedures

[WildAboutHarry]

Sorry, WildAboutHarry, but you took a legitimate medical treatment (Pulse dye lasers) and claimed it was a strong placebo effect. That's not the case. Dermatologists use those UV lasers all the time to treat warts — and they aren't considered to be placebos.

Sorry, Gumby, but please note that I said "regular" UV, not UV lasers.  I used to use the "placebo" version when I worked in the medical field back in the early 1970s.  Lasers were kind of unwieldy back then (think Goldfinger).  Further, "placebo" wart cures were non-scarring.  Not, apparently, the case with CO2 lasers (i.e. "vaporizing and destroying tissue" - sounds like Goldfinger).

I don't have a problem with anyone spending their own money on alternative therapy, nutritional supplements, tinfoil hats, etc.  But I remain skeptical of claims made, in the absence of specific, objective evidence.

Ok, the tinfoil hat thing is probably uncalled for.  But I have heard people objecting to electricity produced from nuclear power plants because they believe the electricity is radioactive. 

[dragoncar]

Wow, OK.  I can accept that there may be scientific evidence for benefits of grounding.  I don't know.

But some of the explanations I've read so far seem like quackery.  For example, AFAIK the earth isn't "negatively charged."  Net charge should be zero or very close thereto.

Plus, the same people who worry about grounding are also worried about things like electromagnetic interference.  Well I assume you are plugging the grounding mat into the ground plug of your outlet.  Do you realize that there is mutual capacitance between the "hot" wires and the "ground" wires in your house?  In fact, I wager that most "ground" wires are actually very electromagnetically noisy (relatively speaking).  Not something I'd necessarily want to connect to my body if I was worried about such things.

So maybe the benefits of grounding can actually be attributed to increased electromagnetic exposure.  Kind of like how EM fields near the brain can help avert seizures.

Edit:  I read more and see that you recognize the antenna effect, and that you are grounding with a separate earth spike.  Even if you are anywhere near a large transformer, the local earth can have significant fluctuations.

By the way, 50 years ago people may have had leather soles but they still walked on carpet and wood, and slept on wooden beds so most of their time was still ungrounded.

Another misconception: I would hardly call our skin "highly conductive" unless perhaps it is wet.

[Gumby]

But some of the explanations I've read so far seem like quackery.  For example, AFAIK the earth isn't "negatively charged."  Net charge should be zero or very close thereto.

Generally speaking, the Earth is negatively charged.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_electricity

Well I assume you are plugging the grounding mat into the ground plug of your outlet.

Well, clearly you didn't read the thread. I said I was plugging a grounding rod directly into the Earth itself.

By the way, 50 years ago people may have had leather soles but they still walked on carpet and wood, and slept on wooden beds so most of their time was still ungrounded.

True. But they were still grounded anytime they left the house. And furthermore, humans have existed for over 2 million years — grounded for almost all of it. Few people ground themselves now.

Another misconception: I would hardly call our skin "highly conductive" unless perhaps it is wet.

You mean like from salty sweat? A pair of feet have 250,000 sweat glands. When you sleep, you sweat. For all we know our bodies are trying to be more conductive when it contacts the Earth.

[Gumby]

In the first case you had enough belief to go see the guy.

In the second case you said you were feeling entitled (i.e., justified in what you were doing).

It may be that you believed it more the first time than you thought you did and less the second time than you thought you did.

I'm not saying it was placebo; I'm just saying we can be very clever when it comes to self-deception.

Interesting counterpoint about the placebo effect — which, mind you how been shown to have some affect in all medical treatments.

...Not all treatments get the same placebo effect.  There are two requirements for the placebo effect to kick in.  The first is the belief that a treatment will work, and the second is a strong desire to get better.

In this country, we’re raised in the religion of western medicine.  We’re bombarded with advertisements that tell us to “see your doctor”? when we get ill.  We’re one of only two countries that allows direct-to-consumer drug advertising.  Our belief in western medicine is deeply ingrained, whether we know it or not.

The same can’t be said for Chinese medicine.  Most people don’t understand it at all.  It’s not part of our cultural paradigm.  Many who go to get acupuncture not only don’t believe it will work, they are downright skeptical.  This means acupuncturists are not getting the same placebo effect for their treatments that western doctors get for theirs...

...The fact that acupuncture is as effective as it is without getting that extra 30-50% boost from placebo is remarkable.  Contrast that with certain classes of drugs like antidepressants, which have recently been shown to be no more effective than placebo. These drugs are almost universally believed in by patients and doctors alike.  And yet they don’t work any better than sugar pills.

Source: http://chriskresser.com/chinese-medicin ... omment-545

He's right. Western medicine itself probably enjoys a big placebo effect. I was very skeptical of acupuncture when I first tried it. I initially figured that it would just be relaxing and wouldn't be any more helpful than getting a massage. What I experienced was way beyond what any massage could ever do.

So, he raises a good point that many alternative therapies have bigger placebo hills to climb than Western medicine does. Perhaps a good deal of Western pharmaceutical success might come from commercials and marketing for all we know.

[dragoncar]

That article speculates that during a storm water droplets move electrons from the clouds to the ground, thus imparting temporary positive charge to the cloud and negative charge to the earth surface -- a situation which is neutralized when lightning rebalances the charges.  This, the natural state of the earth would appear to be neutral.

When you rub a balloon on your head you can also strip electrons from your body giving you a net positive charge, which can be neutralized when you touch a doorknob.  That doesn't mean that your natural state is positive charge any more than it means a doornob naturally has a negative charge. 

Yeah millions of years ago people were probably more grounded.  They also died at 30.  Correlation and... Well you know the rest.

[dragoncar]

I'll also note that negative charge (electrons) will also flow between an object with a positive charge and another object with, say, twice the positive charge.  That does not imply that either object has a negative charge.

[Gumby]

That article speculates that during a storm water droplets move electrons from the clouds to the ground, thus imparting temporary positive charge to the cloud and negative charge to the earth surface -- a situation which is neutralized when lightning rebalances the charges.  This, the natural state of the earth would appear to be neutral.

That's not exactly what the article said.

Eliminating, for the moment, consideration of the extremely dense charge populations that exist in the upper reaches of the atmosphere, a region called the ionosphere, filled with hot, dense, plasma gas whose ions give the ionosphere its name, we note that there is always some amount of unbound positive and negative, but net positive, electric charge in the atmosphere closest to the surface of the negatively charged Earth on a 'fine day'. When days are not so 'fine', the net unbound charge that exists in the clouds of thunderstorms can be exceedingly negative.

The 'fine day' net positive charge sets up an electric field between the negative Earth and the net positive charge in the air, and this electric field stores electrical energy.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_electricity

Not sure how you interpret "neutral" from that. On a "fine day" the Earth is negatively charged and the lower atmosphere has a net positive charge.

Yeah millions of years ago people were probably more grounded.  They also died at 30.

You're confusing life expectancy with life span.

Life expectancy vs. life span

Life expectancy is often confused with life span to the point that they are nearly synonyms; when people hear 'life expectancy was 35 years' they often interpret this as meaning that people of that time or place had short life spans. One such example can be seen in the In Search of... episode "The Man Who Would Not Die" (About Count of St. Germain) where it is stated "Evidence recently discovered in the British Museum indicates that St. Germain may have well been the long lost third son of Rákóczi born in Transylvania in 1694. If he died in Germany in 1784, he lived 90 years. The average life expectancy in the 18th century was 35 years. Fifty was a ripe old age. Ninety... was forever."

This ignores the fact that the life expectancy generally quoted is the at birth number which is an average that includes all the babies that die before their first year of life as well as people that die from disease and war. The genetics of humans and rate of aging were no different in preindustrial societies than today, but people frequently died young because of untreatable diseases, accidents, and malnutrition. Many women did not survive childbirth, and individuals who reached old age were likely to succumb quickly to health problems.

It can be argued that it is better to compare life expectancies of the period after adulthood to get a better handle on life span. Even during childhood, life expectancy can take a huge jump as seen in the Roman Life Expectancy table at the University of Texas where at birth the life expectancy was 25 but at the age of 5 it jumped to 48. Studies like Plymouth Plantation; "Dead at Forty" and Life Expectancy by Age, 1850–2004 similarly show a dramatic increase in life expectancy once adulthood was reached.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expec ... _life_span

[MediumTex]

I looked at the ground rods for my house last night and found that the ground wire for the cable TV input had become disconnected from the ground rod so I reattached it.

When I woke up this morning I felt refreshed.

It's possible that all the touching of the ground rod while reattaching the wire had some beneficial effect, or it could mean absolutely nothing.

I still felt refreshed when I woke up.

[l82start]

A molecule may be nonpolar either when there is an equal sharing of electrons between the two atoms of a diatomic molecule or because of the symmetrical arrangement of polar bonds in a more complex molecule.

Examples of household nonpolar compounds include fats, and oil,

based on this wiki entry i have decided the best way to achieve polar neutral is to rub oil on the skin, it is my understanding that oil from reptiles is the best type to use for this purpose, if anybody would like to purchase some.... i will be happy to sell...



just being a comedian
i have no opinion on grounding mats.... its an interesting topic..

[Gumby]

It's possible that all the touching of the ground rod while reattaching the wire had some beneficial effect, or it could mean absolutely nothing.

I still felt refreshed when I woke up.

Heh. And did this experience inspire you to ground yourself again in the future? Or are you just trying to be funny.

[MediumTex]

It's possible that all the touching of the ground rod while reattaching the wire had some beneficial effect, or it could mean absolutely nothing.

I still felt refreshed when I woke up.

Heh. And did this experience inspire you to ground yourself again in the future? Or are you just trying to be funny.

I wasn't being funny.

I assume that whatever benefits are available from using a grounding mat would also be available from literally holding your hand on a ground rod.

I did feel refreshed when I woke up.  I'm not suggesting there is a connection, but it still felt good to wake up feeling refreshed.

[Gumby]

I wasn't being funny.

I assume that whatever benefits are available from using a grounding mat would also be available from literally holding your hand on a ground rod.

I did feel refreshed when I woke up.  I'm not suggesting there is a connection, but it still felt good to wake up feeling refreshed.

Yes, generally it doesn't really matter how you do it (though, some people have better results when they avoid outlet electrical grounds and use a dedicated ground line). However, most people who gain benefit say the more you do it, the more benefit you get. It would be uncommon to get a benefit from touching a ground for only a few seconds.

I will point out that there are a few double-blind studies on Earthing, and the results suggest that grounding isn't simply a placebo effect:

The Effect of Earthing (Grounding) On Human Physiology — Gaétan Chevalier, Kazuhito Mori, and James L. Oschman

The Effect Of Earthing On Human Physiology Part 2: Electrodermal Measurements — Gaetan Chevalier, Ph.D., Kazuhito Mori, Ph.D.

Pilot Study on the Effect of Grounding on Delayed-Onset Muscle Soreness — Dick Brown, Ph.D., Gaetan Chevalier, Ph.D., and Michael Hill, B.S.

There does seem to be something going on here.

[MediumTex]

Gumby,

Can you provide an update on how the earthing mat is treating you?

[Gumby]

I had to temporarily stop using the mat as it was apparently amplifying the effectiveness of the anti-eukaryote medication I am taking to the point that it was giving me herx reactions. Not fun. Interestingly, acupuncture has also been known to amplify therapeutic herbs and medications as well, by improving blood flow. I will try again when I stop taking the medication in another month and feel more comfortable with it.

My sense is that the mat is a bit stronger in its effect than putting your feet directly on dry ground. Perhaps more like standing on wet ground. Most people don't like to touch moist ground for hours at a time, so I suspect it's an effect that people don't often experience. I've been walking barefoot on dry ground in the yard for a few minutes at a time and I seem to be able to tolerate that ok.

So, I will continue the experiment in a month or so.