{"id":4208,"date":"2021-06-28T04:18:30","date_gmt":"2021-06-28T09:18:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/?p=4208"},"modified":"2024-04-23T03:33:11","modified_gmt":"2024-04-23T08:33:11","slug":"building-science-self-authorized-organizations-dispensing-accreditations-on-emf-and-electropollution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emfsurvey.com\/building-science-self-authorized-organizations-dispensing-accreditations-on-emf-and-electropollution\/","title":{"rendered":"Amateur EMF Consultants: Are They Qualified to Test for EMF, “Electropollution” and “Dirty Electricity?”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Amateur EMF Consultants & Circular Self-Referencing Organizations Dispensing Accreditations or Certifications on EMF and “Electropollution” Expertise: A Flow of Consciousness Diatribe regarding Smart Meters, “Dirty Electricity”, Electropollution and other Contentious Subjects
\n<\/span><\/h1>\n

A phrase found in\u00a0Nature <\/i>magazine (one of the most highly respected scientific journals known next to Science<\/em>) on page 74 Nov 26, 1885 exemplifies this phenomena:<\/p>\n

“A well-known lawyer, now a judge, once grouped witnesses into three classes: simple liars, damned liars, and experts.<\/strong>”<\/p>\n

 <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is a subject which has been a long time in coming for discussion on this website.<\/p>\n

There are a number of organizations and self-proclaimed experts who claim to be the gold standard for EMF education and suggested standards \/ quasi-regulation, what it is, the effects on human health, what can and should be done about it, and finally the bestowing of credentials on individuals who may or may not be qualified to be EMF consultants. Some of them also have connections with manufacturers of products that allegedly correct EMF issues or they make instruments that are used to evaluate EMF fields.<\/p>\n

In some of my EMF FAQ pages and blogs I do make comments which allude to this phenomena, but I do not directly attack their positions for a number of reasons described below.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

1) I believe in free speech and moreover, we need some level of disagreement in certain areas because civil discussion about differences in opinion can serve two important purposes: Learning about another person’s perspective is a valuable tool as they may make good points worth considering or reconsidering. But whether you agree, partially agree or disagree completely, the effect of being open to another viewpoint helps to define YOUR OWN belief system and stance on certain subjects.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, the Internet and other recent trends in Western thinking have tended to polarize people to the point to where for some reason, they must prove themselves right, (ego) prove others wrong, or feel it is their divine mission or right to correct their thinking about a certain subject. I don’t believe it is my business as to what others think or to try and force them to believe something against their will. It is often a fruitless endeavor and a waste of energy. To a large extent, only attorneys get paid to argue so I avoid doing it for free.<\/p>\n

However, there is an ethical duty in my role as an occupational health specialist to offer alternative thoughts to what I perceive as an unnecessary frightening of the public and the selling of products and services that do not perform as purported and are administered by the inexperienced and the biased for reasons good or bad.<\/p>\n

Website that Monitors Alleged EMF Quacks<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.emftestingexpert.com\/<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

2) I believe there is a place for organizations who wish to promote healthier buildings for human habitation. When I did residential work for 17 years, I saw all sorts of issues with homes and structures that made me think: ‘Lord, what a stupid design or a cheap approach to an important factor in residential \/ office use.” Mostly it was homes in terms of making the building envelope too tight and placing energy efficiency over biological needs for fresh air. The other thing I saw that ticked me off (besides seeing corners cut on multi-million dollar homes) was seeing the HVAC system (particularly in Texas) being placed in the attic instead of on the ground floor where you have to over-tonnage the unit to make up for the heat of the attic which can reach 140 F + in the summertime. My house is older with the HVAC unit placed in sane place – on the first floor where it has cooler air to work with. I believe the shift in location for newer homes is for a few reasons including more direct access to ductwork (in theory) and also freeing up some extra square footage on the first floor. The latter reason is particularly asinine as you are trading off maybe 25 – 40′ square feet to put the HVAC unit in a place which is harder to service and is trying to cool air while inside an oven environment.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, execution is everything. Does the organization in question follow sound science and reasonable advice? Or is there a recklessness and \/ or a harmful agenda present? Or is it a mixture where some suggestions are valid while others should be taken with a grain of salt or halite mine as the case may be?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

3) My experience, education and skilled intuition makes me skeptical of the biological effects of non-ionizing radiation at low enough levels in frequencies and amplitudes which are non-thermal, non-optically damaging (such as lasers, UV light, etc.) regimes of EMF on humans. I do not directly oppose organizations that want to see better stewardship over our electrical infrastructure and the use of cell phones for a few reasons that I will get into detail later. (see Section 3f)<\/p>\n

For one, I think if someone is genuinely concerned about power lines and cell phones, there are some potential issues that are worth looking at. I do believe both high voltage powerlines and cell phones can be deleterious and even dangerous, but NOT for the reasons or cause and effect mechanisms that the “electrosmog” and “dirty electricity” alarmists purport.<\/p>\n

Here are some common disagreements I have:<\/p>\n

A) Above ground power lines: My main concern with the above ground portion of our electrical infrastructure such as the traditional telephone pole style secondary 12.5 kV feeders, or the huge looming primary 238 kV monsters that run down the greenbelt of the utility ROW (right of way) is what is known as the “fall zone”. In a high wind, tornado, car wreck or earthquake, etc. you don’t want these coming down on your home or your fence where they can easily cause property damage and an immediate electrical threat. I have seen this twice in my life and both times the transformer exploded which is not a thing you forget. In one case, a line landed on my metal fence and caught the grass on fire. THAT is an immediate hazard!<\/p>\n

But the vast majority of the time either the lines are too far away, (such as the primary feeders) or they are being buried in newer, suburban neighborhoods, or in some cases you have a home with a virtual zero lot back yard and the lines can almost be touched if you lean out the second story window. That is a bit too close for me, but it has nothing to do with the magnetic field EMF.<\/p>\n

However, I do remember two properties I surveyed in which one had the primary feeder running directly over the back yard which I believe is technically a violation of the utility ROW, but I didn’t know the story of which came first. Another one was the most expensive and largest home I ever surveyed worth well into the 8 figures and built on the edge of a lake with great view. However, it was built directly beneath the huge monster 238 kV feeders hovering about 90 feet above the roof. I had trouble believing how this happened until my assistant at the time pointed out an important note on the blueprints laying on the marble kitchen table: it was classified as a “remodel” instead of a new build. (which it was – the original house was about 100’ to the East and torn down) After my client turned down the home, I recall the builder calling to ask for a copy of the report and I told him he would either have to contact my primary or pay for his own survey.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

How are large power lines harmful?<\/strong><\/p>\n

They make people worry which in turn releases the stress hormone cortisol which tends to depress the immune system over time and that can lead to illness or accidents. (increased stress correlates with an increased accident \/ illness rate)\u00a0 This is a real physiological effect even if it is based on perception and I don’t know how many mothers of children thanked me for coming over to their home for an EMF survey because they were losing sleep over the imposing high voltage tower in view of their home.<\/p>\n

B) Green power transformers: In newer neighborhoods in which the secondary feeders are buried, you will see these green (typically metal) boxes that are about 1 meter cubed out in the front yard on the property line between two homes near the sidewalk or in the back alley. (depending on where the feeders are buried) I’ve gotten a lot of calls about these over the years or in conjunction with a power line survey and the answer is simple. Unless they are defective (in which case you may have erratic electrical operation, unexplained hums or noises in audio equipment, etc.) they are not a significant issue. The primary EMF is the 60 Hz AC Magnetic field and while it is relatively high at the source, the falloff to ambient levels is very rapid as magnetic fields from coiled windings falloff as 1 \/ r^3 or 1 over the distance cubed. Within 1′ – 2′ the fields fall off to levels as if the transformer wasn’t even there.<\/p>\n

C) The same phenomena is usually found with electrical substations, though the falloff is more in tens of feet so by the time you are across the street, it drops off to whatever magnetic field the secondary feeders are radiating.<\/p>\n

D) The phenomena of so-called “dirty electricity” (which is really just noise on the voltage amplitude component and is formally known as EMI or electromagnetic interference as it distorts the wanted signal) does exist, but it is only a hazard to sensitive electronic equipment and that is the reference for which the term was invented. It is a vernacular term used by electronic technicians and electrical \/ RF engineers that has been misappropriated and misunderstood by those who preach it is a direct health hazard. It was never originally linked to any kind of adverse biological reaction and it does not cause brain cancer like other recognized carcinogens. In order to have any real “effect” you have to directly contact the conducted power line<\/strong> which is typically 120 V and the effect of direct electrocution is by far the most hazardous overarching issue to be concerned with. The radiated component of any power line that has electrical noise on it has no way of affecting a person in a manner that I would consider a risk \/ safety hazard. And even in electronics, it is mostly a problem when it is CONDUCTED EMI as opposed to RADIATED EMI though the latter can happen with strong signals and \/ or close proximity \/ sensitive electronic equipment.<\/p>\n

It is not like I haven’t investigated the phenomena with an open mind; I own the popular book on the subject by Dr. Samuel Milham “Dirty Electricity” published circa 2010 along with other texts such as: Cross Currents by Dr. Robert Becker M.D. (who dubbed dirty electricity as “Electropollution”) and the Electrodynamic Man by Leonard J. Ravitz (psychiatrist) along with several other resources on electro-sensitivity. Regarding Dr. Milham’s book, I noticed a there are very few graphs or illustrations, no actual citations, and very few references to his claims. When you check in the back of the book there is Reference section, but it is only 3 pages and 90% + of the papers are authored \/ co-authored by Dr. Milham himself. Again, a literal circular referencing source. BTW, he also uses the comparison about how children in Sub-Saharan Africa which has hardly any electricity rarely manifest leukemia. Also, there are a litany of other factors that differ the United States from Sub-Saharan Africa, but those are not mentioned as this is the proverbial hammer looking for a nail.<\/p>\n

BTW, the Earth has natural transients occurring all the time known as spherics, which are largely lighting strikes taking place all across the world. Also, you have the Schumann resonances, geomagnetic storms, solar flares, CMEs (Coronal Mass Ejections) and cosmic rays. Much of this is responsible for the static you hear on an AM radio. You can also build special equipment that can hear spheric activity such as “whistlers” and “tweaks” and “sprites”.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, the body has numerous bioelectrical signals (muscle potentials plus the significant magnetic fields around the heart and brain) that are also rather noisy, yet humans continue to live in spite of this.<\/p>\n

E) On smart meters and why they are harmless unless you are unwise enough to open one. (which is a utility company violation and something only a licensed electrician should do)\u00a0 For one, the RF power levels are minuscule, (particularly compared to your phone, Bluetooth, etc.) intermittent (only a brief pulse every 30 seconds or so) and the home inhabitants are shielded from the it because the meters are partially enclosed in a metal case with a metal backplate that effectively blocks almost all of the point source field from entering the structure. Also, since the smart meter is located at the power drop, the predominant field is the AC magnetic field, not the RF emissions from the smart meter.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

F) Cell towers \/ wireless routers \/ cell phones:<\/p>\n

Back in the mid-1980s I used to work on 2 way trunked radio systems and cellular phones when they were $4,000 metal boxes that were typically mounted under the seat and required a rather tedious external antenna to be installed. At the time, no one was worried about EMF or RF radiation, and in fact I had a number of customers ask me to align the RF circuits for HIGHER power so that they could get more range and clarity out of those early analog models which typically ran in the 2 watt range, but could be bumped up to 4 watts at the ceiling.<\/p>\n

Now, cell towers typically run on ~ 2 watts (5G systems are a little more at 4 watts) and our cell phones are less than 0.25 watts. So why did the power go down instead of up? It wasn’t due to the concerns over safety, but because signal to noise ratios and receiver sensitivity have greatly improved (BETTER RECEPTION) so the need for higher transmitter power DECREASED (both at the cell tower and the cell phone) which in turn significantly increases battery life while in use. Also, there are more cell towers and coverage so a phone does not usually have to “hunt” for a tower as much as it used to. It is in the cell manufacturer’s best interests to keep consumers happy about a cell phone that has significant usage time between charges. Personally, I wish they left the small whip antenna on in case of areas of poor reception, and to this day if I am traveling to a rather remote location, I still keep a paper map on me in case the GPS navigation goes out. (it still happens in some areas) But antennas are not as aesthetically pleasing and they are usually easy to break off which makes for a common warranty replacement item.<\/p>\n

Trivia – Example of a ridiculous theory on a link between 5G cellular wireless and CoViD-19:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/knowyourmeme.com\/videos\/216646-coronavirus-5g-conspiracy-theory<\/a><\/p>\n

Air pollution \/ indoor air quality is an infinitely more likely causation factor between industrialization \/ electrical infrastructure and the incidence of SARS CoViD-19. This is a classic case of 5G being a confounding factor which reflects that correlation is not causation.<\/p>\n

\"Air

Air Quality Pollution Linked to the “Double-Punch” Synergistic Effect of SARS CoViD-19 Inflammatory Responses in the Body not 5G
<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

So how are cell phones dangerous?<\/strong><\/p>\n

a) They are a HUGE distraction factor and you are more likely to have an accident while walking around, working in a hazardous area and ESPECIALLY if you are driving which is why so many laws in conjunction with operating a motor vehicle while a cell phone have been passed. This is a PROVEN risk and not debatable.<\/p>\n

b) I believe that the exposure to lighted screens late at night throws off circadian rhythms and disrupts sleep which our body needs to operate efficiently. There is also a sort of addiction many people have developed in living through their phone. An example of a theory related to disruptions in bodily rhythms leading to cancer is the Carcinogenic Effects of Night Shift Work which has been substantiated by the NTP (National Toxicology Program) as shown here on a CDC \/ NIOSH website:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Recent News about Night Shift Work and Cancer: What Does it Mean for Workers?<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n