To davefoc: The NRPB give field strengths both for B and E fields in their literature. They confirm that under a powerline the maximum E field is less than 10,000 V/m, and the B field around 40 uT. Curious isnt it that they previously set the guideline reference level at 12,000 V/m , so the utilities were not breaking their rules. After a good deal of pressure from the likes of me the NRPB have finally brought their guideline for public exposure down to be in line with ICNIRP, but it still does not adequately protect the public.
Bioelectromagnetics
- Thread starter cogreslab
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bioelectromagnetics
- Status
cogreslab said:
Bacteria are not animals, Roger. 5th graders know this. You don't. Why should anyone trust you when you speak of scientific findings?
cogreslab said:
The animals have rights, depending on how Bambi-eyed they can get, enabling them to install guilt-feelings in humans? What kind of f*cked up ethics is that, Roger?
Would you experiment on the cave rat (Neotoma), some mole species that are totally blind, or the cave wolf spider, found in Kauai?
Here's a hint, Roger: Write your post in a separate text editor, e.g. Notepad. Then post it all at the same time. That way, you get around the time-out feature.
I still need to answer the question about why the corpus callosum is so important for signal transduction. This brain structure straddles the two halves of the cerebral hemisphers and is bathed by the third and lateral ventricles which thereby afford a direct pathway for any electric field and currents throughout the entire extracellular fluids. These fluids are 0.9 percent saline solution, and therefore they are rich in separated Na and Cl ions. and can carry electric signals almost losslessly because of their high conduuctivity.
On every cell's surface (except cancer cells) there are glycoproteins honed by evolution to receive these signals via their sialic acid residues (negatively charged, hence receptive to positively charged cations like Ca2+).
Continued...
On every cell's surface (except cancer cells) there are glycoproteins honed by evolution to receive these signals via their sialic acid residues (negatively charged, hence receptive to positively charged cations like Ca2+).
Continued...
Finally, for I am quite busy today, My claims are simple, integrated and well within the bounds of normal science. Please anyone, tell me of any claim I have made which I have not supported with peer reviewed and published studies from other laboratories. As for never having done the experiment, in the 1980s I spent three months at the Coroner's Central London office analysing the SIDS cases there back several years by reference to their proximity to important EMF sources, and the results showed a significant association. This was presented at BEMS meeting shortly afterwards, to a packed audience of experts. It was also featured in a six week campaign by the Sunday Mirror to get the Government to act. The NRPB promised to do their own study in collaboration with Bristol University, but have never dared to publish the results.
As I said, the NRPB are well aware that what I am saying is right. The Prof of physics at Bristol has just lost his MRC funding for being outspoken on the EMF issue, by the way. He responded by organising that amazing picture of all the neon tube lights in a field being lit up by the HT powerline. Come on, you guys, get onto the right side in this argument, and stop beleiving this establishment rubbish propaganda.
As I said, the NRPB are well aware that what I am saying is right. The Prof of physics at Bristol has just lost his MRC funding for being outspoken on the EMF issue, by the way. He responded by organising that amazing picture of all the neon tube lights in a field being lit up by the HT powerline. Come on, you guys, get onto the right side in this argument, and stop beleiving this establishment rubbish propaganda.
To Cleopatra: Our computers are attacked many times each hour, so we have to keep well firewalled I am afraid. Any way, my posts are already far longer than most of the replies, and it makes sense to split up these complicated arguments. I would be happy, as indicated to buy you lunch (is that in Manchester? I used to live in Wilmslow) and take you though all this science (and the Atlantis thing too).
I hope you noted the last para in the Timaeus about the beauty of the integrated Universe, btw, which is more or less what I am driving at: all electrons by Hund's Rule are connected throughout the Universe, and as Blake would say, the sound of a wounded hare at the other end of the earth affects me too. Or Donne: every man is a part of the main. Plato was aware of that astonishing beauty. I reckon he got it from the Pythagoreans when he was in Sicily.
I hope you noted the last para in the Timaeus about the beauty of the integrated Universe, btw, which is more or less what I am driving at: all electrons by Hund's Rule are connected throughout the Universe, and as Blake would say, the sound of a wounded hare at the other end of the earth affects me too. Or Donne: every man is a part of the main. Plato was aware of that astonishing beauty. I reckon he got it from the Pythagoreans when he was in Sicily.
cogreslab said:
Sir, I hope that you can understand that such statements can cause nothing but ironic remarks to your claims considering the specifics of your challenge.
I don't have any reasons to doubt you I just hope that you can distinguish the difference between an argument which is based on an anecdote and an argument which is built on a scientific experiment.
The problem is, Mr. Coghill, that the various new-agers who sell their products with a wrap of homeopathy and a sauce of Atlantis have formed an establishment as well , they have formed an industry that pays well and they have equal financial interests to protect.
It's an establishment of the worse kind. It's an establishment who invests on the fear of the common people and tries to find malice in the words of those who pose questions.
I work under firewall as well. Ask Alistair at your lab to fix it.
I just contacted your lab to purchase the CD about Atlantis and see what this is all about. I will have to study it and return to this subject.
If you talk to me about science I will talk you about my legal adventures with those who try to get advantage of the human pain and about the establishment that wants to sell fraud as an "alternative way of thinking". They make me angry you know.
Oh my!!Please.
I concede there are a lot of people out there who have no real scientific understanding of homeopathy nor any academic understanding of the Atlantis story. I guess some of them try making a living out of that, too. But when you read the opinions of one who has recognised, good degrees in the relevant sciences, a long period of their study, a laboratory well equipped and routinely investigating the issues, a list of peer reviewed publications, referee status in the most respected journals in the fierld, (and a few dozen white coats too) do you not think he deserves an audience and not dismissal as a loonie? OK so the ideas are heterodox. But they are also based on solid biology chemistry and physics. And on reading the original Platonic dialogues in their original, not some moonstruck mumbojumbo.
If science never had any more heterodox ideas it would atrophy. I dont put myself in the league of William Harvey or Pasteur, both of whom like others had their detractors, but we are doing good and groundbreaking bioelectromagnetics science in our lab and it is showing that the establishment is wrong, and that the NRPB and the utilities are deliberately obfuscating, procrastinating and downright deceiving the public in these matters, with the result that perhaps several hundred infants die each year from SIDS and several hundred more young children get laeukaemia each year in the UK. They could stop these tragedies at a stroke by admitting the truth.
If science never had any more heterodox ideas it would atrophy. I dont put myself in the league of William Harvey or Pasteur, both of whom like others had their detractors, but we are doing good and groundbreaking bioelectromagnetics science in our lab and it is showing that the establishment is wrong, and that the NRPB and the utilities are deliberately obfuscating, procrastinating and downright deceiving the public in these matters, with the result that perhaps several hundred infants die each year from SIDS and several hundred more young children get laeukaemia each year in the UK. They could stop these tragedies at a stroke by admitting the truth.
cogreslab said:
I hope that those who follow the thread, you included Mr. Coghill, can appreciate that I am addressing your posts seriously although you have attempted to dodge the issue of the PhoneShield crystal that decorates my cell right now and the issue of the challenge that the fellow posters brought.
Since you use semantics to your posts let me ask you a question. How do you want me not to take you as a "loonie" when I read the specifics of your challenge and when you claim that you don't wish to have eyes of animals starring at you when you perform experiments?
It's everything in the semantics Mr. Coghill. Semantics. Nothing goes alone, magnets, crystals, homeopathy and Atlantis. We are talking about a package here. You have a target/consumer group.
You play your cards really well, you are neither an idiot nor a "loonie" and this in my book makes you more blameworthy.
You aknowledge the... originallity of your ideas... at least!
I could listen if you didn't belong to the other side of the river. Once you make a living with selling products you are part of the game and part of the establishment.
Thanks for the offer but I will buy the CD. It's a habit at this corner of the Earth to pay our bills . You can autograph it if you want to do something special for me. Thank you.
Oh! One last observation. Distinguishing people between those who can read Plato in the prototype and the rest is quite an elitist attitude that belongs to the establishment you detest so much.
If you want to flatter my lowest ego try to reply to my questions with honesty instead.I am so easy in that.
Plently of references about the potential or otherwise of EM fields to cause harm.
No evidence that I can see that any of his devices have actually undergone a properly controlled clinical trial.
I really wouldn't be impressed that the Sunday Mirror had supported a case, if the BMJ, Lancet, NEJM, Nature or among the more newsy magazines New Scientist or Scientific American, had said something, yes, I'd be impressed.
Tabloids do medical scare stories because there's no decent gossip.
BTW: the myelin sheath of neurones in the CNS is formed by myelin rich processes of oligodendrocytes, wrapped around the axons of the neurones. It's not like insulation on wire, so I don't understand why it should be stripped off and recoagulate around blood vessels because of thermal effects.
No evidence that I can see that any of his devices have actually undergone a properly controlled clinical trial.
I really wouldn't be impressed that the Sunday Mirror had supported a case, if the BMJ, Lancet, NEJM, Nature or among the more newsy magazines New Scientist or Scientific American, had said something, yes, I'd be impressed.
Tabloids do medical scare stories because there's no decent gossip.
BTW: the myelin sheath of neurones in the CNS is formed by myelin rich processes of oligodendrocytes, wrapped around the axons of the neurones. It's not like insulation on wire, so I don't understand why it should be stripped off and recoagulate around blood vessels because of thermal effects.
o We don't test animals.
o We did test worms.
o I concede worms are animals.
o Bacteria are animals.
o The challenge is for humans, not mammals.
o "On every cell's surface (except cancer cells) there are glycoproteins honed by evolution to receive these signals via their sialic acid residues (negatively charged, hence receptive to positively charged cations like Ca2+)."
He blinded me with science.
o We did test worms.
o I concede worms are animals.
o Bacteria are animals.
o The challenge is for humans, not mammals.
o "On every cell's surface (except cancer cells) there are glycoproteins honed by evolution to receive these signals via their sialic acid residues (negatively charged, hence receptive to positively charged cations like Ca2+)."
He blinded me with science.
Nobody. I wanted to ask you if you use Coghill's mood maker without actually knowing what it was.I thought that it worked the way vitamins do. Then I looked for the link and I realized what this device(?) was or claims to be.BillHoyt said:
Maybe they don't know what to do with the brains afterwards.Have you ever showed them? I have heard that women that exercise other professions eat them.
davefoc
Philosopher
Roger Coghill said:
You are right. Thank you for correcting me. See quote from the NRPB document, ELF Electromagnetic Fields and the Risk of Cancer document, below:
A few things to note here:
1. The electric field falls off very rapidly so that it is only 1kV m-1 25 meters from the midspan position.
2. The electric field is blocked by trees or structures substantially as you and the article mentioned.
3. Something, not mentioned by the article, but significant I think is that the body is acts as a conductor. Although it is a poor conductor it is a much better conductor than air and as such the body would tend to create a field around it that is roughly at the potential of the ground it is standing on. This is particularly true as the air cap between the body and the source of the field increases.
All of this put together suggests to me that there are very few people that would have significant long term exposure to even moderately high electrical fields and given the failure to definitively find an effect at all I am inclined to think that the health consequences of exposure to ELF electrical fields is between very small and negible.
The NRPB document suggested that low level magnetic fields when coupled with a mutation inducing agent might serve as a promoter of mutation. The document listed a lot of tests looking at this idea. As I read the document the majority of the tests found nothing, but a few tests using fairly high magnetic fields supported the proposition. Whether there is such an effect or not this report suggests it must be relatively small if it exists at all.
You are right. Thank you for correcting me. See quote from the NRPB document, ELF Electromagnetic Fields and the Risk of Cancer document, below:
A few things to note here:
1. The electric field falls off very rapidly so that it is only 1kV m-1 25 meters from the midspan position.
2. The electric field is blocked by trees or structures substantially as you and the article mentioned.
3. Something, not mentioned by the article, but significant I think is that the body is acts as a conductor. Although it is a poor conductor it is a much better conductor than air and as such the body would tend to create a field around it that is roughly at the potential of the ground it is standing on. This is particularly true as the air cap between the body and the source of the field increases.
All of this put together suggests to me that there are very few people that would have significant long term exposure to even moderately high electrical fields and given the failure to definitively find an effect at all I am inclined to think that the health consequences of exposure to ELF electrical fields is between very small and negible.
The NRPB document suggested that low level magnetic fields when coupled with a mutation inducing agent might serve as a promoter of mutation. The document listed a lot of tests looking at this idea. As I read the document the majority of the tests found nothing, but a few tests using fairly high magnetic fields supported the proposition. Whether there is such an effect or not this report suggests it must be relatively small if it exists at all.
cogreslab said:
Plants breathe too, Roger. Care for yet another redefinition of what you can perform experiments on?
I have simply lost count on just how many times you have changed your stance regarding this. And, quite frankly, deriving your ethical scientific standards based on what a former Beatle thinks, is not only highly unprofessional, it is downright ridiculous.
Do you still stand by your claim that infants and human beings are not mammals?
cogreslab said:
Can you please indicate which professor you are talking about? The directory for the department of physics at Bristol can be found here: http://www.phy.bris.ac.uk/research/staff.html
I want to send him an email. - Thanks
- Status