from the staying-indoors-without-power dept.
A French woman has been awarded disability payments for a condition which is not recognized by medical science:
Despite dispute over the very existence of the syndrome, it has emerged that a French court has recognised a 39-year-old woman's disability claim for "hypersensitivity to electromagnetic waves".
In the first case of its kind in France, the Toulouse court awarded Martine Richard €800 ($900) a month for three years - according to Robin des Toits, an organisation that campaigns on behalf of sufferers. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS or électrosensibilité in French) is purportedly caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields such as those generated by WiFi and mobile phones.
In a statement on Wednesday, Étienne Cendrier, Robin des Toits spokesman, hailed the news as a victory, saying: "We can no longer say that it is a psychiatric illness." Victims of EHS say it causes headaches, joint pain, sleep disruption and dozens of other varying symptoms. Nonetheless the World Health Organisation has no clear diagnostic criteria for the condition.
Richard, a former playwright and radio documentary director from Marseille, says she is now forced to live in a remote part of the Pyrenees, without electricity, to escape from electromagnetic fields.
The French National Agency for Health Safety of Food, Environment and Labour (ANSES) accepts that those claiming électrosensibilité have real symptoms, but note the absence of "an experimentally reproducible causal link" to electromagnetic waves. A report is due in early 2016.
[Editors note: If you want to see an extreme case of this portrayed, check out Chuck in the first season of Better Call Saul}.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @09:37PM
If the patient can consistently demonstrate such sensitivity via double-blind testing - live in an isolated area where a 3rd party, unknown to the patient and the patient's contacts independently enables and disables EM fields - then I am 100% for giving them medical disability. Surely such a patient would be willing to undergo such testing for sake of medical progress too...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by halcyon1234 on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:54AM
Easier solution:
Original Submission [thedailywtf.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @06:29AM
That's kinda stupid.
She's not claiming that EM fields are fatal to her. Much less on the limited time-scale that would be required to pick up a check at an office.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Appalbarry on Saturday August 29 2015, @09:42PM
Surely there's some homeopathic remedy for this? Maybe expose some sterile water to low level WIFI, dilute it a few thousand times, and then apply it topically?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:24PM
As long as they don't use the 5 GHz bands, you can just put the water in the microwave.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Gravis on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:25PM
that's brilliant! we treat bullshit conditions with bullshit medicine!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:38AM
Why mess around with that process, when you can cure it with prayer?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:02PM
for EM sensitivity was demonstrated at a conference by Richard Stallman. [deadparrottavern.com]
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:18AM
And they say he doesn't have a sense of humor. Oh wait, link suggests he was being serious. :(
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:23AM
Link also suggests it had nothing whatsoever to do with EM sensitivity and everything to do with a visible protest of the misuse of RFID. IOt also indicates that he wasn't the only person there who took issue with it, just the only one to so visibly protest.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:22PM
I don't know what causes it. I don't know what the mechanism is.
I do know, however, that I have a mild case of this. Bluetooth and cellular signals both cause that problem, if in close proximity to my head and during high intensity transmissions. In my case, the result is a headache.
It's not a switch on/switch off sort of headache either. Accession is quick - quick enough that I can predict calls coming in to phones before they actually ring, by the sudden spike in high intensity activity (I've done this before, to the astonishment of sceptics) but the cooldown period is about half an hour or more of substantial discomfort.
Bluetooth headsets are similarly a trip on the pain train, but proximity is clearly needed - bluetooth keyboards don't bother me, cellular phone signals more than a yard or so away aren't a problem at all.
I know what you're thinking: "He's imagining it! It's all in his head!" Of course, I've been surprised by signal sources I didn't know were there, but you're so cocksure in your position, my evidence is anecdotal whereas yours is ... I don't know, faith-based?
I'm lucky. It's not that bad that it drives me out of modern society. I just don't use celphones or bluetooth headsets.
But it's all in my head. Of course. Always was.
(Score: 2) by Nollij on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:34PM
Would you be willing to submit to the scientific tests other people have mentioned, in order to better understand your condition?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:44PM
A sick person generally would like to be cured. Sick people normally go through a hell of a lot if it means it will cure them. Like being cut open with a knife and having parts of their body removed or re-plumbed. Or putting up with the side effects of medications. Anyone who claims to have a mysterious illness that no one can find objective signs for and who also refuses any attempt at investigation let alone treatment is full of shit. And that is my medical advice as a doctor.
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:53PM
Hey, doc. Love your take on it.
Let me offer a little addendum: if the cure/investigation is worse than the management strategy for the symptoms, just maybe your heuristic won't apply.
So, in the spirit of equity, let's put it to the test. I'll submit to all the bluetooth-induced pain you like, as long as you sit right by me. I'll have a cheese grater, and your nipples will be exposed to my tender mercies for as long as I'm in pain.
But we'll make this fair. I'll take an IV with morphine. See? I'm sweet and reasonable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:14PM
Just realised my original response didn't join the thread.
Link here:
http://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=9245&cid=229596 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:13PM
Of course it's in your head. You said so yourself - Bluetooth keyboards are fine, but anything in close proximity to your head causes a headache.
Seems pretty clear the problem isn't in your foot doesn't it!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:49AM
You said so yourself
Whoosh.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:30PM
my evidence is anecdotal whereas yours is ... I don't know, faith-based?
Ours are Scientific.
In every case where claimants were put in a double blind situation, they were unable to detect or predict anything at all.
From the world health link in TFS:
Studies on EHS individuals
A number of studies have been conducted where EHS individuals were exposed to EMF similar to those that they attributed to the cause of their symptoms. The aim was to elicit symptoms under controlled laboratory conditions.
The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals. Well controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms were not correlated with EMF exposure.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:43PM
You're right. Is no pain. All in my head.
Obviously, the problem here is that I'm .... I don't know. I don't even know for a fact that the source is electromagnetic - it just seems to fit the symptoms.
I noticed the symptoms decades ago, before I knew that anyone else even had this. I just thought I was a freak.
But you're right, the studies prove there is nothing there, so any pain was just coincidence. Thank you for liberating me from my ignorance and superstitions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:54AM
The road to recover begins has to begin somewhere. Now try correlating it with the stock market, or bitcoin price, or perhaps the Cottingley Fairies. Anyway, it's probably just evil humours that can be removed with a little blood-letting.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TrumpetPower! on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:44AM
I'm sure your pain is real.
(Yes, yes there're certainly those who fake those sorts of symptoms, but nowhere near enough to even begin to suspect that somebody claiming pain isn't in pain until the other end of a really long road.)
But I'm also certain that your pain isn't caused by EM radiation. As certain as I am that your pain also isn't caused by Ice-9 contamination in the water supply, alien spaceship exhaust fumes, or the psychosexual remnants of Elvis's farts.
I hope you choose to see a competent medical physician to try to get relief for your pain. Your ideal doctor will take your concerns seriously but also walk you through why EM radiation can no more possibly be the cause of your pain than the dust from Tinkerbell's wings could be.
Only then will you readily accept that the cause of your pain, whatever it is, isn't supernatural...and only that will open the door to safe and effective treatment.
And I should hasten to add: there's no guarantee of successful treatment. Doctors only seem like miracle workers, but there's still lots and lots to learn....
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:19AM
I'm perfectly open to discussion on what the cause might be.
I have actually thought pretty hard about what the plausible avenues might be.
Chemical? No, nothing's being introduced into my head, and phones don't start suddenly putting out gases/particulates/plasma/any other specific substances when they receive a call, so it seems unlikely.
Heat? Not directly. Bluetooth headsets don't get any hotter than regular headphones.
Physical vibrations? Strongly doubt it, since it doesn't have to be touching my head to be palpable.
Gravitation? Vanishingly unlikely, since everything of the same mass and proximity should have the same effect.
Magnetism? I doubt it, since regular phones, headphones, and speakers don't have the same effect and they certainly contain plenty of moving magnets.
I'm sure there are lots of ideas I'm missing here, including I suppose some related to weird quantum entanglements and so on - but I still see no mechanism there.
The only sources of energy coming from a cellular phone that I'm aware of are sonic (not a problem) and electromagnetic (jury is out). You seem supremely confident that it isn't radiation, but you don't really explain why it mightn't be and you don't offer any alternative hypotheses.
The last time I spoke to a neurologist about it, he advanced a couple of hypotheses on how EM radiation might be doing it, largely based on non-ionising interactions with neurotransmitters. Those remain the current best guess.
Oh, and yeah, he took me seriously. In the end he sort of shrugged and said that I use cellular telephony at arm's length, for SMS or speakerphone calls only, and avoid bluetooth. And you know what? His advice worked.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TrumpetPower! on Sunday August 30 2015, @05:46AM
Erm...you're way over-thinking this.
Headaches are caused by much, much, much more mundane matters.
Like physical trauma of infinite varieties, exposure to a wide range of noxious fumes or the like, low blood sugar, tumors, muscle tension, various forms of stress and anxiety -- and that's before we get into the entire realm of migraine.
Whatever is causing your headaches, it's something mundane, not exotic. Stop wasting your time looking for the exotic, and start looking for the mundane.
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @06:12AM
This may come as a surprise to you, but this is where the neurologist actually started.
We tested it in his office, where I had no trauma, there were no noxious fumes, I was otherwise ostensibly in good health, and I called out exactly when he sent a phone signal to his phone, about a second before it started ringing.
Was it a hyper-measured double blind? No. But as of that test, he took me seriously.
He actually proposed that what I was experiencing matched the broad symptoms of a kind of migraine, but that it was externally triggered by the phone. I forget the details, but it related to altered rates of blood flow in the brain owing to neurotransmitter activity - but we didn't go so far as to prove it.
In the end we had a great discussion, he gave me some painkillers, and we discussed management of the condition, concluding that it was a hell of a lot more manageable than any medication he could justify putting me on.
So. Yeah. Been there, done that. Do you have any other slick ideas founded on your conviction that cellular telephony is fundamentally incapable of causing headaches other than by drunk dialing of exes?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:17AM
There's a name for that: reality. For the uneducated, that's an evidence-based system based on objective facts rather than subjective opinions.
You can (and do) keep coming back, whining that "But it's happening and the pain hurts so it must be EM!"
You remind me of a friend of mine. He has a doctorate in Physics, is a fundie Christian, but also believes that the pre-Christian ancients really knew stuff about the universe that we don't - such as the crystal skulls being real magical artefacts made by space aliens from space. He once told me that we don't know how magnets work therefore god. His PhD topic is weather forecasting, and according to him I should also ignore everybody else who says there is anthropogenic global warming because he's seen the graphs and therefore it's not true. Anybody who disagrees with him by definition doesn't know what they're talking about, or is a liar who is earning money from specialised interests.
This is precisely what you sound like. "What I'm experiencing is not explainable by terms that I won't accept, and I only accept that it's EM radiation!"
If you can detect EM radiation, then you've no problems for the rest of your life: go win a fortune from the Randi Foundation - bank it and live off the interest. You'll have the most amazing life, and you can build a house with a fucking Faraday cage. You don't even need the Randi Foundation, though, because you'll have proved one of the basic medical marvels of the last 100 years and will be able to make more money than god.
What it really comes down to is: Which is more likely?
That you can detect electromagnetic radiation in a method that nobody else has ever been able to rationally and scientifically prove?
Or that you get headaches because you think microwave radiation is bad?
The correct answer, the answer based in reality, is the latter. As I said, if you can disprove otherwise please do so - but no amount of your childish foot-stomping and appeals to authority will provide this counter-evidence.
Yes, appeals to authority. You claim you've spoken to a neurologist. I wouldn't care if you'd consulted the president of physics, because without actual evidence to back up your statements then all you're doing is claiming that aliens put cancer in your head. Claims are all you have.
It's far more likely that you've lied here about speaking to a neurologist (because, in your mind, it adds weight to your arguments and most people don't understand what an appeal to authority is) than it is that you've convinced one that you're detecting EM radiation, but even if you have all that would prove is that you're a better conman than he is a rational person: get some REAL evidence, conman. Until you do so, you'll be called that.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @09:16PM
Yeah, I know I'm not supposed to feed the trolls. But it's Sunday, I have nothing going on, so let's go.
> There's a name for that: reality. For the uneducated, that's an evidence-based system based on objective facts rather than subjective opinions.
I brought my evidence. Celphones, even ones about which I didn't know (until I try to figure out why I feel as if I've been whacked in the head with a sock full of sand) do a thing which results in pain for me. That's my evidence of a thing happening. The pain - I guess that's subjective, because only I as a subject get to experience it. But there's a lot of consistency.
> You can (and do) keep coming back, whining that "But it's happening and the pain hurts so it must be EM!"
It's happening. The pain hurts. I never said that it must be EM. I don't know what it is. I quite explicitly said that I don't know what it is, and I haven't ruled out every possible alternative. Try reading my posts again, this time with attention to detail. If it turns out not to be EM, that might actually be good news because it might be easier to block. Turns out these days lots of employers in the tech field get quite snippy when you say you don't want to be called on any cellular device, please and thank you. I haven't heard anything more compelling as an explanation from you yet, but who knows? You might be the guy that works it out.
> You remind me of a friend of mine. He has a doctorate in Physics, is a fundie Christian, ...
[snip blathering about someone who isn't me, who has their own issues unrelated to mine]
> This is precisely what you sound like. "What I'm experiencing is not explainable by terms that I won't accept, and I only accept that it's EM radiation!"
Again, in small words, for the slow members of the class: I have no fixed opinion on the source or mechanism other than the evidence I have collected. Maybe cellular devices attract invisible zombie fairies which like to chew on my dura mater. I don't know, and have no proof in any direction. So take your preconceptions about what I'm saying, shove them somewhere dark and smelly and ride them straight to Washington, D.C. where you'll find many like-minded people.
> If you can detect EM radiation, then you've no problems for the rest of your life: go win a fortune from the Randi Foundation - bank it and live off the interest. You'll have the most amazing life, and you can build a
> house with a fucking Faraday cage. You don't even need the Randi Foundation, though, because you'll have proved one of the basic medical marvels of the last 100 years and will be able to make more money than god.
Believe it or not, I don't really want to be a public spectacle, and you'd have to pay me an insane amount of money to put up with it. If the Randi Foundation will give me the number of a neurological researcher in reasonable
driving range of me, we can work out a test. Until then, the fact that I have to avoid bluetooth headsets and cellular phones around my head just isn't that big a deal to me.
> What it really comes down to is: Which is more likely?
> That you can detect electromagnetic radiation in a method that nobody else has ever been able to rationally and scientifically prove?
> Or that you get headaches because you think microwave radiation is bad?
Given that it happens even when I don't know, pre-headache, that the source is present, I strongly doubt that my opinion on microwaves has anything to do with it. Given that I've been able to predict celphones ringing, it seems that whatever is going on does have predictive value. What someone else has bothered to investigate or prove has no bearing on my way of life. And frankly? I have no stake in what you believe or not.
> The correct answer, the answer based in reality, is the latter. As I said, if you can disprove otherwise please do so - but no amount of your childish foot-stomping and appeals to authority will provide this
> counter-evidence.
I have yet to stomp my feet over it. I have come close to punching a dickhead coworker who set a celphone to silent mode and hid it near my seat, but no foot stomping.
> Yes, appeals to authority. You claim you've spoken to a neurologist. I wouldn't care if you'd consulted the president of physics, because without actual evidence to back up your statements then all you're doing is
> claiming that aliens put cancer in your head. Claims are all you have.
OK, suit yourself. I spoke to the ghost of Aleister Crowley. Feel better? (Actually, I totally didn't, but whatever helps you sleep.) This isn't a peer reviewed venue anyway, so again, your opinion on what I may or may not have done while you weren't watching is of less importance to me than how much salt I get on my steak tonight.
> It's far more likely that you've lied here about speaking to a neurologist (because, in your mind, it adds weight to your arguments and most people don't understand what an appeal to authority is) than it is that you've
> convinced one that you're detecting EM radiation, but even if you have all that would prove is that you're a better conman than he is a rational person: get some REAL evidence, conman. Until you do so, you'll be called
> that.
Please, do feel free to call me whatever makes you feel better. But since you're so passionately involved, I'll reveal that (despite the fact that this discussion earns me no money and plenty of calumny) I do have an agenda.
Ready?
Primed for me to reveal the hideous extent of my sinister agenda?
I wanted to let people know that something like this happens, and regardless of the reasons, it's apparently real - real enough to hurt me at any rate.
Why? Why would I undermine the cleverly-organised society provided us by the benevolent actions of the Freemasons and Illuminati under the guidance of Aleister Crowley?
Because the first commentary was people joking about homeopathy, as opposed to serious investigation.
But you're right, I don't get paid, it's not that big a deal, and you're absolutely entitled to your opinions. Y'all have a nice day with that.
(Score: 2) by Pav on Monday August 31 2015, @04:14AM
Perhaps it's something like this [stackexchange.com]? The water at lipids in your body SHOULD absorb all the radiation, but if eg. you've got a filling in the front of your mouth, your teeth show, and your dentist is good at making microwave antennae who knows. (I certainly don't know enough about microwave antennas to comment further). Have you risked looking like a real conspiracy nut and tried shielding on various parts of your head, around your mouth etc? Perhaps you could get a better handle on a possible mechanism.
(Score: 2) by Pav on Monday August 31 2015, @04:20AM
Oh, and if you want a minimum amount of pain I'd suggest shielding all of your body then unshielding gradually. It could potentially be really interesting.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2015, @04:46PM
Interposing barriers does make a difference.
People using their phones with the ear facing away from me aren't too bad.
Light fabrics don't do it.
I haven't done detailed experiments.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:07AM
The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals.
There's some weasel words in there. "Majority of studies" and "any more accurately than non-EHS individuals"
How repeatable are the minority of studies, and how accurately can non-EHS individuals detect EMF exposure?
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by Username on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:57AM
The strongest signals on frequencies used by cell phones, isn’t from the phone, its from the tower, and they’re constantly going through you or any other obstacle. It’s like dropping a pebble in a bucket of water, the waves hit everything in it’s path. The phone is just waiting for the right packet addressed to it in order to ring. Even turning the phone off wont stop the signal from the tower.
So it doesn’t really matter how far away you are from a cell phone.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:26AM
You're right - except for the part where you're wrong.
The tower itself produces huge signals. However, those signals attenuate massively over distance, through obstacles and so on.
You'll get a stronger signal on the relative bands by holding a mobile phone to your head than you will from a tower unless you're right in front of the tower itself.
Go ahead, check the math. It's fairly basic physics.
If you're interested, you can look at some of the DSP wizardry used inside phones and towers alike to cope with crappy signals. A lot of patents have been awarded in those fields.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:43AM
Not necessarily, the cellphone has to reply to the tower. Not SO much now, but not that long ago, my old CRT would very definitely react to the RF just before my cellphone next to it would ring.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday August 30 2015, @06:41AM
There was often "bumping" on the car stereo just before a text message came in
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:32PM
It's all those routers using systemd.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @10:49PM
Sure.
As long as
a) I'm paid for my time (the cooldown period means that each test will require substantial time before addition pain sources register as being different)
b) I get high quality pain meds (I did mention headaches which last for substantial periods, didn't I?)
Honestly, I don't give a damn what it is. Maybe it's electromagnetic signals (it seems like it) and maybe it's the goblins from Legend shining sunlight on the Tim Curry clone sitting on my hypothalamus. I'm not wedded to any theories on the topic. I just know that, experientially, active cellular phones and bluetooth headsets cause me pain.
Must be the goblins in my head.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:36AM
a) Why? Those are all your problems, not ours. You're getting a diagnosis, and you'll be breaking new ground. You'll get paid millions to lecture around the world over the course of your life. Why the fuck should you get paid for a diagnosis? You pay the doctor, the doctor doesn't pay you. That's how the system works.
b) You want drugs, go find yourself a dealer.
You give us nothing but appeals to authority and childish emotional outbursts demanding that we accept your half-baked conclusions, and then you have the cheek to insist that you won't provide evidence your position because it's not fair on you. What's actually not fair is that you're getting any airtime for this vacuous non-scientifically supported bullshit to start with.
Time to grow up, we're not buying a tarot reading from you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @09:43PM
> a) Why? Those are all your problems, not ours. You're getting a diagnosis, and you'll be breaking new ground. You'll get paid millions to lecture around the world over the course of your life. Why the fuck should you get
> paid for a diagnosis? You pay the doctor, the doctor doesn't pay you. That's how the system works.
News break: people who participate in medical trials tend to get compensated for time and trouble. I'm not asking for anything unusual. And I don't want to lecture, I don't want to spend stupid amounts of time in airplanes for the amusement of the TSA, and so far I have a diagnosis, however imprecise. If you want to study me, make it worth my while.
Actually, scratch that. You're obviously a troll. If a qualified neurologist (possibly with the assistance of postgrads/electrical engineers/whoever) wants to investigate me, we can work something out. Trolls online don't get to study me.
> b) You want drugs, go find yourself a dealer.
Again, it may surprise you, but people who take part in medical studies tend to get related medications for free - this includes palliatives. So either offer the drugs in a study, or go bother someone else.
> You give us nothing but appeals to authority and childish emotional outbursts demanding that we accept your half-baked conclusions, and then you have the cheek to insist that you won't provide evidence your position
> because it's not fair on you. What's actually not fair is that you're getting any airtime for this vacuous non-scientifically supported bullshit to start with.
I don't demand that you accept any conclusions. And frankly, judging by your post, any such demands would be ignored on the strength of your fanaticism. I will provide evidence - in fact, I already offered to (but what the hell, reading is such hard work and you clearly are having trouble with reading comprehension already) but not on my own dime, without painkillers, any more than I already have.
> Time to grow up, we're not buying a tarot reading from you.
Didn't offer one. Still not offering you one.
I hope you're sitting down, because I have some big news:
I didn't ask for anything - I offered information. You are absolutely free to take me at my word, doubt my every word, or denounce me as a tool of ... communists? Fundamentalists? Who do we not like this week?
The net outcome to my life beyond my idle Sunday afternoon troll-feeding of your belief system is nil.
So tone down the rhetoric. Take three deep breaths. Have some dip.
(Score: 3, Informative) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:05PM
About three weeks ago I was experiencing cardiac arrythmia and tachycardia so I request an electrocardiograph at the emergency room.
Perfectly normal.
However the symptoms did not go away.
"Are you having a heart attack."
"No but I am experiencing one. That's a different thing."
Somatic illness is the experience of the symptoms of real illness or such conditions of pregnancy that are not really present. This is to be distinguished from psychosomatic illness in which the illness really is present but due to the mind weakening one's immune system. For example you can die of psychosomatic cancer, it has real malignant lesions.
In my case Ativan for anxiety took care of it but I have the insight to know that I can experience somatic illnesses. Most of those who suffer do not have that insight.
I would agree that she is disabled, but due to her experience and not due to her being hypersensitive to anything.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:34AM
Alternatively she has an undiagnosed illness that is real, and given the reality of those.symptoms the monetary support is needed to the degree it does not matter what you call it.
(Score: 1) by pinchy on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:25PM
I wonder if a lot of these peoples problems are coming from high audio frequencies given off some electronics?
When I was younger the CRT whine was pretty annoying. Fans on CPUs even though relatively quiet compared to say a persons voice can be irritating after a full day.
There's an electrical junction box on one of the apartment buildings here that gives off a quite loud non-stop squeal every time I walk by it. I dont know how the tenants put up with it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:33PM
Monitors (old CRTs and modern flat panels alike) don't give me headaches. Laptops don't give me headaches.
iPhones do. Blackberries do. Nokia brick phones do. Modern LG phones do. Samsung androids do. Old G1 googlephones do.
Now maybe it's the noise, and maybe they're all giving off the same noise in the same way, but I'm bound to say that given all the different generations of phone represented there, I doubt it.
Cellular signals, they all have in common.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2015, @11:53PM
So cellular and bluetooth, which all together use at least 9 frequency bands do? I'd be curious if sticking your head next to your wi-fi router or a ham radio antenna or walkie-talkie or other radio devices does too. Of course, given the unblinded nature of such a study, it probably will even if it shouldn't, but eh still curious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:07AM
wi-fi router: I suspected a response, but not enough that I could say for sure. Let's call it negative.
ham radio: negative (but I haven't been particularly close to a source)
walkie-talkie (family band): negative
While you're asking, you might have included unshielded electrical motors (negative), and audio rate electronics such as analogue synthesis equipment (negative), or microwave ovens (negative). I have had no negative responses from being near alternators, or electrical vehicles, or elevators, or escalators, or laser displays, or PA systems (besides the usual ringing in the ears from excessive loudness).
The only confirmed positive responses I have experienced are active celphones and bluetooth headsets. Those produce fairly intense headaches, most intense on the side where the source is.
I can generally tolerate phones as long as they are not active. Whatever the cause may be, it seems to be related to activity levels. If it's not electromagnetic signals, maybe it's something about the batteries discharging. I genuinely do not know what the cause is.
Actually, let me amend that: as long as I don't use a celphone, or use a bluetooth headset, I neither know nor greatly care what the cause is - it doesn't bother me.
Oh, and no, regular headphones don't cause me any unusual discomfort either.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:13AM
You have any shrapnel or metal implants? I had shrapnel in my arm that would hurt when near magnetic sources.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:18AM
Just fillings, and I had symptoms before I got those. So no, not in any sense that you're talking about.
I have actually been hit by ricochets and flying chips and splinters and things, but nothing remained in my body.
No metal screws, plates or anything like that on my bones, either.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:53AM
Possible experiments, try cellphone in speakerphone mode kept away from your head, and if you can find one, a wired headset w/ a ferrite core on the wire.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:06AM
Celphone in speaker mode away from my head is OK (over a yard is quite tolerable, over two yards isn't noticeable to me).
Never found a headset with a ferrite core, headsets without have caused some of the worst headaches I had. I might as well just hold the phone to my ear.
SMS and tucking a phone into my pants pocket doesn't cause me any noticeable pain.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:44AM
You'd probably have to add the core yourself. If you can get a ring, just wrap the cord through it two or three turns.
(Score: 2) by martyb on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:15AM
Fascinating discussion! A few times a year I meet people who, for whatever reason, claim they are unable to wear a watch; within a couple days or so, the watch just stops running. Have even heard some report that it doesn't matter if the watch is mechanical or battery powered. After some relatively short period of time, the watch just stops.
So, I am willing to take your report at face value. Let's take a closer look:
From parent comment:
From another of your comments:
And from yet another:
And another:
and this should do it:
Summary:There is directionality (most intense on the side where the source is), severity is mitigated by distance (over a yard is quite tolerable), and a number of different phones (and presumably bluetooth headsets) are able to set it off.
Proposal:
The distance to the phones provides a lessened intensity of stimulus (tolerable at one yard), lessened duration of stimulus (immediate deactivation upon kill switch activation ), randomization of time of stimulus, and simultaneous logging of stimulus and response.
That's the gist of the idea; feel free to tailor to your situation.
That should provide a goodly part of blindness to the testing along with as 'gentle' a test setup as I can imagine. Thoughts?
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:33AM
Yup, directionality, yup, mitigation by distance, yup a number of phones set it off.
So your summary is on target.
As for your proposal, most of it looks pretty good as experimental design. The only problem is that I think you missed is that there is a cooldown period of roughly half an hour to an hour, so this would be a long experiment. Also, intensity is related to how clearly I perceive, so they can't be too far for reasonable identification. About two feet from my head with a ringing or active phone is enough for pretty clear and swift response (the neurologist's phone was closer, I think, but it was a bit behind me).
The main objections are that it will suck a lot, and it will take a long time, but I guess in the interests of science I can block out a day of suckage. I'm fairly sure a neurological institute could rustle up that experimental kit.
So, yeah, work with a team in the Pacific Northwest somewhere, and I will take time off work to make this happen.
As for the watch thing? I have no idea. That's not me.
(Score: 2) by martyb on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:54PM
Thanks for the feedback! The watch thing was just an affirmation that I've encountered seemingly impossible stuff and part of my motivation to craft that reply.
It was unclear to me whether increasing the distance would reduce the recovery time. If the phones were set up, say, 4-5 feet away, you might lose directionality but still have an ability to sense that a phone was ringing and, with the much lessened intensity, you might be able to have less pain and quicker recovery?
I wonder whether it makes any difference whether or not the phone's ringer is turned on? An interesting variation would be to silence the ringers and have each of the two phones in a 5-sided box (open side to the video camera and away from you.) Maybe add a third input you could control to flag "I sense *something* is ringing" and then use the other two controllers to identify which one of the phones rang.
I'd be curious what an fMRI would reveal; take before and after scans and see what areas are 'lit up' differently.
If you were interested in pursuing this, I suspect your neurologist might know someone who would be interested in doing a study. It certainly sounds like something that could 'make' someone's research career with a well-written and documented research paper.
I'm sadly pressed for time and have a busy day ahead; I will check for replies as soon as I can.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @05:07PM
If you want a quick, clear, unambiguous response the phones need to be closer. As I said, I'm just not that sensitive compared to some of the claims. I get a headache from an active phone in a couple of feet, not a quiescent phone across the room. The problem is that the headache which results from that does take a while to diminish. If you want to test different ranges, it's going to take extra long.
The neurologist to whom I spoke admitted this was outside his field. But if you can find the number of someone who actually is interested and has the time (or army of postgrads to do their bidding) I'll give 'em a call, what the hell.
(Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:12PM
Sadly, I'm nowhere near you and have no idea who might be interested in performing such a study.
My best suggestion at this point would be to contact your neurologist and ask him/her for suggestions. Whatever course you choose to pursue, I do want to take a moment to thank you for your time and patience in sharing your symptoms here. Until this point, I'd always thought that reports of cell phones issues to be mostly scaremongering or ill-informed blathering. There is, however, a part of my thinking which still holds the idea that "failing to show adverse results does not necessarily mean that it is safe."
I wish you the very best, and hope you do pursue this. Who knows, you may learn of others who share this 'condition' and be able to compare notes and learn from each other.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by Nollij on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:24PM
Does this apply to different frequencies and technologies? i.e. CDMA vs GSM, 850 vs 1900MHz?
What about old dumbphones? What version of BlueTooth were these using?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @09:27PM
I haven't done any kind of investigation in which I pinned down bands. Dumphones, like the old Nokia brick, did do it. (Sorry, I don't remember the model, it was over a decade ago). Not sure on the version of the last bluetooth headset I tried, but it was about a year ago, so probably recent.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:50AM
Man I'm glad the CRT is dead. I've always had very good high frequency hearing. I could walk into a room where a monitor was on but blank and positioned such that there was no visual indication that it was powered up, walk straight up to it and ask if I could shut it off. Other people would be surprised it was even on, but the piercing screech would really get to me after a while, so I wouldn't hesitate to ask.
Once I had a terrible job in college where I worked at a Juvie detention home. There were set hours for TV but the kids would try to get some extra by watching it with the volume off. I could be 100 feet away in the building and I'd hear it the moment the TV was turned on, or if I walked in the building and the TV was already on. The kids hated that.
As for this story, I tend to think that these kinds of conditions are psychological, but I also leave some room for doubt that in some cases it is true based on my experience of hearing what others could not. Birds for example are able to make use of magnetic fields and maybe, some people still have those structures buried in the older parts of the brain. It would be interesting to see fMRI studies on such people provided they could pass a double bind test of being able to sense EM fields. I know I could have passed a double blind "is the CRT on or off" test with 100% accuracy.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Snotnose on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:34AM
and to a lesser extent my 802.11 network. Bought an aftermarket PS3 controller, the bluetooth handshaking just don't wanna work with it. Gives me a headache whenever I just want to join a CoD lobby and shoot some n00bs.
Various issues with my 802.11 network as well, seems after every 3-4 updates something goes wonky. For the last 6 month's I've had to disable my windows firewall to print, and I've had issues with my NAS as well (requires power cycling the NAS device before it pulls it's head out of it's facebook page and sez 'oh hey, you want something?') More headaches.
Double blind tests? Not a problem. Will my PS3 controller connect? yes/no. Can I access my NAS filesystem? yes/no. I'm pretty sure in either case I can tell when the RF is active and when it's not.
Can I have my $1500 a month now?
/ kids, don't buy aftermarket PS3 controllers
// mine was iffy from day one, but the L3 button died after 3 weeks
/// $20 for 3 weeks, vs $50 for 3 years. Hmmm, lemme think about that
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:10AM
Every time someone uses the microwave oven, 802.11b,g,n and bluetooth lost connection.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:44AM
Every time someone uses the microwave oven, 802.11b,g,n and bluetooth lost connection.
That's what I told my neighbor. In reality, I was forcing 802.11 disconnects so I could grab his 3 way handshakes. For whatever reason I could only get 2 of the 3 packets, hence he seemed to lose his network a lot.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by VortexCortex on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:29AM
800 Euros a month? That must be one hell of a tinfoil hat! [emfclothing.com]
Sadly, most of the EMF shielding clothing sold today isn't very effective (they lack grounding) so when going out on the town it's still best to wrap oneself in foil. In all seriousness, the most useful thing on such sites is the EMF detector. They're easy to build, but for the unskilled masses a detector can help determine if what they're experiencing is all in their heads or actually related to EMF pollution or EMF weaponry. [youtube.com] In a pinch one can try a battery powered AM radio tuned to the static between stations. To gather accurate data one should record the EM field strengths & frequencies silently and invisibly: Attach your detector to your belt / carry it in your purse. Then use a notepad or phone app to record the time as one is experiencing symptoms. After having collected both data sets compare them; This helps confirm whether the symptoms are real or psychosomatic. However, EM detection devices do nothing to detect the ELF (extreme low frequency) sonic energy pollution / weaponry. [slavery.org.uk]
Once detected one can even triangulate the source or in extreme cases follow the beam back to its generator (which can be humorously embarrassing for those who thought they were attacking in secret -- hint: Using such a device broadcasts strong radio waves and reveals your location). What's even more fun is reflecting the signal, or creating your own: Strong EM beams can stop cars in their tracks [technologyreview.com], or prevent them from starting. Pumping a car full of EMF is sometimes harmless but can fry the alternator, fuel injectors, and other electrical components. Beware: Payback can be a real bitch.
Until we start using less wasteful transmission technologies or designing meta material homes: Shields Up! [lessemf.com] To the insanely skeptical: Start your journey into reality by accepting that transcranial magnetic stimulation has real documented effects [google.com], everything else follows naturally from there. [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by VortexCortex on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:33AM
In other words: Maybe it's a payoff to keep her quiet because she, like so many others, have evidence of governments attacking civilians with EMF weaponry.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @04:28AM
some people are just too sensitive.
if they would worry more about useless stuff like the rest of us, they won't have time to register
these "brain pains", damnit : )
I can use cell phones but i prefer to use them in speaker phone mode.
Also I don't like to go to airports: they are smelly, have lots of international bacteria traffic, have stinky jet engine fumes AND they have huge
powerful sweeping microwave radars. Also the plane have radars.
Incidentally the microwave oven was invented because some military jet mechanic was grilling his well-deserved-break hotdogs in front of the
nose tip/random of the jet plane?
(Score: 3, Touché) by mendax on Sunday August 30 2015, @05:30PM
I'm allergic to work, cold, poverty, lack of electricity, walking, bicycling, no Internet service, and most aspects of government. So, this must entitle me to my own private island in the south Pacific with a generator, satellite dish, and lots of supplies, complete with road system and vehicle so I can drive the 50 meters from my luxurious house to the beach.
Hmm..... I like this idea.... and its more rational than any alleged electronic sensitivity.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.