Shielding methods and products against man-made Electromagnetic Fields: Protection versus risk.


Author: Panagopoulos DJ1, Chrousos GP2

Affiliation: <sup>1</sup>National Center for Scientific Research "Demokritos", Athens, Greece; Choremeion Research Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece; Radiation and Environmental Biophysics Research Laboratory, Athens, Greece. Electronic address: dpanagop@biol.uoa.gr.

<sup>2</sup>Choremeion Research Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece.
Conference/Journal: Sci Total Environ.
Date published: 2019 Feb 23
Other:
 Volume ID: 667   ,  Pages: 255-262   ,  Special Notes: doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.344. [Epub ahead of print]   ,  Word Count: 282  
    Human exposure to man-made Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) has increased to unprecedented levels, accompanied by increase in various health problems. A connection has been indicated by an increasing number of studies. Symptoms characterized as Electro-hyper-sensitivity (EHS) are frequently reported especially in urban environments. Lately, people are advised by private companies and individuals to protect themselves from man-made EMFs by metal shielding through various products, for which there are reasonable concerns about their protective efficacy and safety. Indeed, any metal shielding practice, even when correctly applied, attenuates not only man-made totally polarized EMFs accused for the health problems, but also the natural non-polarized EMFs responsible for the biological rhythmicity and well-being of all animals. Strong evidence on this was provided by pioneering experiments in the 1960's and 1970's, with volunteers staying in a shielded underground apartment. We analyze the physical principles of EMF-shielding, the importance of natural atmospheric EMFs, and examine available shielding methods and suggested products, relying on science-based evidence. We suggest that an avoidance strategy is safer than shielding, and provide specific protection tips. We do not reject shielding in general, but describe ways to keep it at a minimum by intermittent use, as this is theoretically safer than extensive permanent shielding. We explain why metallic patches or "chips" or minerals claimed by sellers to be protective, do not seem to make sense and might even be risky. We finally suggest urgent research on the safety and efficacy of shielding methods combined with use of generators emitting weak pulses of similar frequency, intensity, and waveform with the natural atmospheric resonances.



Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.



KEYWORDS: Electro-hypersensitivity; Electromagnetic Fields; Electromagnetic Radiation; Health chips; Schumann resonances; Shielding



PMID: 30831365  DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.344