Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
i v n i n seeks n e t o

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                             

Electro-green

Eco mentality for electromagnetism too
  (+2)
(+2)
  [vote for,
against]

People who are concerned with ecology should take a minimalist and coservationalist approach to electricity and magnetism, as well as to oil vegetation and other life. Why arey they so life-centrist? Lifists. Lifal discrimination. From 20 years in the future we are going to look back on the last 150 years' military-industrial-complex- violation of the the e-m spectrum in the same way we now speculate about violence between pre-historic humans and their now-extinct close relatives. Electro green people would try to preserve and leave relatively undisturbed the "natural" state of the e-m spectrum, so that we can explore increasingly more subtle uses of the earth's already complex transponders, amplifiers and receivers in the form of vegetable and animal organization -- as a way toward equality for all kinds of entities, organizational or disorganizational.
JesusHChrist, Oct 21 2012

50-60 Hz http://www.ncbi.nlm....gov/pubmed/2677573
[2 fries shy of a happy meal, Oct 21 2012]

No, 50-60 doesn't hurt. http://www.ncbi.nlm...gov/pubmed/16988988
[MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012]

listen to the king http://www.youtube....watch?v=1sONfxPCTU0
[JesusHChrist, Oct 22 2012]

[link]






       I suspect part of the reason we don't do this is:   

       (a) As far as we know, there's nothing interesting in the natural EM spectrum of the earth.   

       (b) In general, we don't suppress or endanger the natural EM spectrum. In fact, we're more afraid of it than it is of us.   

       (c) The EM spectrum has no panda*.   

       (d) However much we interfere with the natural EM spectrum, it all gets better once we turn the switch off, more or less at the speed of light.   

       *I would like this phrase to be engraved on my tombstone if I die, simply to bewilder people.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       //Well there seems to be proof enough that if you close to a powerline you have increased risk of getting cancer.//   

       Actually the opposite. There is overwhelming proof that powerlines have no perceptible effect on human health (other than by supplying hospitals, water purification plants and the like). People who live sufficiently far from power lines tend to die from waterborne parasites, malnutrition etc before they get cancer, thereby skewing the stats a little.   

       Likewise, the myths that mobile phones will (a) cause petrol pumps to explode and (b) cause planes to drop from the sky have both been debunked.   

       Broadly speaking, gamma rays (±10^20Hz) are very bad and will fuck you up. X-rays (±10^18Hz) are somewhat bad and may fuck you up. UV (±10^16 Hz) are a little naughty and sometimes cause skin cancer. Microwaves (±10^10Hz) are useful for cooking and can likewise cook your innards. UHF (±10^9Hz) transmits television and therefore fucks with your brain.   

       You'll see that there's a trend here. Power transmission (±10^2 Hz)...
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       um... [link]   

       Re. link: the only problem with it is that it's bollocks. A certain amount science is bollocks, you know. It really is.   

       If needs be, I can probably find several papers "demonstrating" that cats cause (or prevent - jury's out) cancer of the scrotum; that copper water pipes cause epilepsy; or that hydrogen nuclei can be fused by the application of voltage to a palladium electrode.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       Publications from the US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health are bollocks?   

       Well then I just don't know what to trust in anymore.   

       Can you find papers demonstrating no sensitivity of the pineal gland to electro magnetic frequencies?   

       //Publications from the US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health are bollocks? //   

       Hint: research is done in labs, not libraries.   

       However, that is a red herring of a different kidney. The research is from Pacific Northwest Laboratory, not the NIH (which is the outfit that provides the citation database). By the same token, Shakespeare was not written by Basingstoke Central Library, despite the fact they have copies of all his works.   

       The NIH itself (like most other governmental health outfits) has surveyed the many, many reports of experiments on this topic, and has concluded that there's no credible evidence for a link between power transmission and, well, anything (except for power, obviously).   

       Perhaps there's a conspiracy here, hmmm? That would make sense, since any scientist who could prove a link would keep quiet about to prevent the Nobel committee from finding out; you know what they're like. And the scientists are all in the pay of companies who make pylons anyway - it's well-known.   

       However, about 1 in 20 studies show a significant correlation at a confidence of >=95%. Indeed, about 1 in 100 studies show correlation at a confidence of >=99%. Amazing, when you think about it, so please do.   

       Oh, and since you asked for a paper showing no sensitivity of the pineal gland to EMFs, I picked one at random for you.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       That link shows no adverse effects in a particular area not negative sensitivity of the pineal gland to emf...   

         

       "Although the mineral magnetite (Fe3O4) is precipitated biochemically by bacteria, protists, and a variety of animals, it has not been documented previously in human tissue. Using an ultrasensitive superconducting magnetometer in a clean-lab environment, we have detected the presence of ferromagnetic material in a variety of tissues from the human brain. Magnetic particle extracts from solubilized brain tissues examined with high-resolution transmission electron microscopy, electron diffraction, and elemental analyses identify minerals in the magnetite-maghemite family, with many of the crystal morphologies and structures resembling strongly those precipitated by magnetotactic bacteria and fish. These magnetic and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy measurements imply the presence of a minimum of 5 million single-domain crystals per gram for most tissues in the brain and greater than 100 million crystals per gram for pia and dura. Magnetic property data indicate the crystals are in clumps of between 50 and 100 particles. Biogenic magnetite in the human brain may account for high-field saturation effects observed in the T1 and T2 values of magnetic resonance imaging and, perhaps, for a variety of biological effects of low-frequency magnetic fields."   

       Discuss.   

       Discuss? Wow. For how long?   

       The trick with science is to realize that a lot of people do it, and they don't always all get the same answer; and that you need to apply some level of discrimination and judgement in interpreting it; especially when people are looking for very very small effects in a poorly-controlled situation.   

       Yes, there's a variety of things in the human body that can be affected by magnetic fields. If you can pay someone to build you a big enough magnet, you can even levitate yourself in such a field.   

       It's also true that a lot of biological molecules contain hydrogen, which is what powers the sun. Hmmm - spooky, huh?   

       The body also contains proteins, as do (suspiciously enough) bacteria. The plot thickens.   

       It's also true that putting your hand in a microwave with the door lock disabled will cook your hand, by pure electromagnetism. So, there you have an MUCH stronger association between electromagnetic fields and adverse effects. Why bother with something as vague as single-domain magnetite in tissues?   

       If you want to extrapolate, it's a smaller step from microwaves to 60Hz than it is from single-domain magnetite to cancer.   

       Listen, I am very happy if you believe that power lines cause cancer. I dislike power lines too, mainly because they interfere with the badger trebuchet tests. I'm also very happy if you want to sell your house at a discount because it's near power lines. There is a good living to be made by the rational out of irrationality.   

       Personally, I think there's more mileage in the idea that AM radio transmitters cause cancer. The radiated power spreads further, and the wavelengths are shorter. Also, practically EVERYONE who was alive at the time of the first AM broadcasts is now dead, which is a pretty strong correlation. The effects clearly propagate over vast distances too. If any of my fellow Halfbakers live within a hundred mile radius of a radio station, I am prepared to offer them a generous 70% of the purchase price of their property; take the offer now, before the rumours spread and prices plummet further.   

       Pay no heed to those august bodies such as the WHO when they say there's no evidence for any risk - what would they know? The only definite answers must come from selective reading and good old-fashioned folk wisdom.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       That's quite the series of stretches away from pineal emf sensitivity there Hoss.   

       Pay no attention to those men behind the curtain.
Trust them to publish nothing but truths, they have nothing but our best interests at heart...
  

       That's actually my point, [2fries]. You _shouldn't_ blindly trust every scientific paper, even if it confirms the view that you yourself have long held as a result of a deep understanding of the subject.   

       If there isn't a complete consensus,I suggest that you just go with the minority view, as long as it aligns with your prejudice. You can't go far wrong with that. And my offer of 70% stands.   

       The trick is not to be hoodwinked, but to learn to wink your own hood.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       I have no scientific prejudice. I distrust everything equally.   

       It is exactly the lack of research and definitive findings in this area that I find so telling.
Reading between the lines has kinda always 'been' my hood Hoss.
  

       <wink- wink>
<nudge -nudge>
<knowwhatImean?- knowwhatImean?>
  

       //It is exactly the lack of research and definitive findings in this area that I find so telling.//   

       Strange. I find something like 15-20,000 papers dealing with electromagnetism and health.   

       Still, I'm sure that "abundant research, yet lack of definitive findings" is really just as suspicious as "lack of research and definitive findings".   

       Remember, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there's no conspiracy.   

       Actually, [2fries] let me run another idea past you. I have this theory that LCD monitors cause cataracts. I have no idea why or how they might do it*, BUT (and here's the kicker), there seems to have been very little research into this, and none of those few studies seem to have found anything significant.   

       Now, I don't know about you, but I've noticed that people who didn't have cataracts as children are now, in their 60s and 70s, beginning to develop cataracts. What does this correlate with? You got it - it correlates with the increase in LCD monitors.   

       I'm sure you're aware that LCD monitors are big business, making big bucks for multinationals. It's pretty clear where their interests lie. That's all I'm saying.   

       *actually, there may be a mechanism. The eye contains colour receptors located roughly in the red, green and blue areas of the spectrum. And guess what colours the pixels of an LCD are? You got it. You'll also note that LCDs don't have black pixels, despite the fact that darkness is almost certainly safe for human eyes. This isn't just coincidence - it's a hidden agenda.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       //There's quite a lot of research on magnetoception.// And pretty much all of it, in the case of humans, is negative. Shame, because it would be nice. Similarly, many animals can detect the polarization of sunlight, which is also good for navigation even on overcast days. We really ought to be able to do it ourselves.   

       As regards the effects of 50-60Hz EM on people, it strikes me that one of the problems is that the wavelength (around 10,000 kilometres) is just a bit longer than the average human. This means (and I may be on shaky ice without a horse to water under the bridge here) that field gradients across a human body (let alone across a pineal gland) will be less than huge.   

       I suspect that, if the fields induced by 60Hz power lines were remotely hazardous, then walking across a nylon carpet would be immediately fatal. Perhaps it is - I only use wool or bare parquet myself. It would also be possible to commit suicide by means of a AAA cell.   

       Still, this ought to be looked into, and I suggest that a few more tens of millions of Americas finest dollars would be far better spent on this research than on, say, anything else. After all, that would be a fraction of the cost spent on faking those moon landings.   

       After after all, if it were not for the maverick voices in the wilderness, we would still be unaware of the fatal effects of travelling over 30mph.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       //something like 15-20,000 papers dealing with electromagnetism and health//   

       Very good. Now narrow that search to electromagnetism and the pineal gland.   

       //just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there's no conspiracy.//   

       That's a very good point... though I've made no conspiracy references.   

       //The eye contains colour receptors located roughly in the red, green and blue areas of the spectrum.//   

       So... does melanopsin fall outside that there spectrum then?
Research on visual abnormalities caused by emf using blind studies of such things as form constants or migraine aura is non-existent... y'know unless you coun't the strictly heresay proof of being able to use trans-cranial magnetic stimulation to head off a migraine at the first sign of the preceeding visual aura.
  

       You are right. Research is done in labratories not libraries, but... without someone connecting all those dots then that research is nothing but useless piles of data.   

       That's all I'm saying... and you know I'm right.   

       //Now narrow that search to electromagnetism and the pineal gland. //   

       My god!!!!! You're right!!!!!! There are probably only a few tens or hundreds of papers on that topic.   

       But, [2 fries], it gets worse. I looked for papers dealing with the effects of electromagnetic radiation on the adrenal glands and there are HARDLY ANY!!!1! And the effects on the kidneys of border collies - jeeezus, you don't want to know.   

       [2 fries], it's time that your mighty nation threw its weight behind this to fill these much-needed gaps in the scientific literature. If every new PhD student spent only a few decades and few million dollars on looking into the effects of power lines on all possible organs, tissues and materials, then you guys would have made significant inroads into the problem within a couple of generations.   

       It's clear that only America is in a position to sacrifice a century of worthwhile progress to this cause. The resources of Europe, Asia and the rest of the world are only capable of dabbling in such frivolities as better cancer therapies, antiviral agents, controlled fusion reactors and other such fripperies.   

       Go, go now [2 fries] and lead your nation to the greatness it deserves.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 21 2012
  

       I get to go from conspiracy theorist to mighty national greatness in a single anno? That's gotta be some kind of new land/speed record. Maybe you should say my name a few more times. It makes me feel all gushy inside.   

       What was it you said about melanopsin again?
Form constants?
Migraine aura?
  

       Nothing?   

       Really?   

       Spare me your derision. I got over it sometime during junior high school, and it's honestly a real shame to see it carry over into middle-aged-hood.   

       Same fucking kids.
Bigger playground is all.
  

       Melanopsin - didn't follow the question, but yes.   

       Trans-cranial stimulation - yes, of course. But it's not often done by standing someone near a power line, as far as I know.   

       By the same token, you can kill people with bullets, yet airborne dust (which is the same apart from the particle size and composition, and velocity) just doesn't break the skin.   

       There are some things that people (I mean lots of people) want to believe in, and the best that science can do is to investigate the more nearly plausible of them. In the case of EMF from power lines, a very large number of people have investigated them for possible health effects and, in the great majority of cases, have not found anything significant or reproducible.   

       So, I'm not sure what more you expect science to do, given that money could be spent investigating the effects of a near-infinite number of things on a near-infinite number of other things. Most of the science didn't give the answer you want, but you're not obliged to accept the answer.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 22 2012
  

       //an untested hypothesis or an area science has barely looked into shouldn't be dismissed as 'not existing', 'unproven' etc. The absence of research doesn't say anything either way. //   

       But the hypothesis (the broader one of whether there is detectable harm associated with power line EMR; and also more specific ones of whether various cells and tissues can respond to such a field) _has_ been extensively tested. The great majority of the results say that there is no detectable harm or effect at the limits of the sample size, even when using artificially large fields. So, there's not an absence of evidence.   

       Sure, there will not be experiments on every possible exposure of every possible tissue. But you only a country with as much cash to spare as the USA would want to waste money on performing every such test.   

       At the end of the day, the important question is: does this make people sick? And the answer, as far as we can tell, seems to be "no". If people don't like the answer and want more research, that's fine, it'll keep scientists in employment.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 22 2012
  

       <Deltas and Epsilons>
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
<my head>
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 22 2012
  

       thinly disguised rant. [+]
Voice, Oct 22 2012
  

       //a career that balances your chi's with the traditional practice of leaving security holes in software.//   

       My chi's what?   

       Also, if we've got delta, epsilon and chi, where are zeta through phi?
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 22 2012
  

       I will bear in mind your potentially sage advice, the sagacity of which I'll be able to gauge as soon as I understand it. "[MB-san]" takes me back a while.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 22 2012
  

       Well, chemistry for the gooderment of mankind is OK with me. Have you worked on anything I've inhaled?
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 22 2012
  

       //the pineal gland IS responsive to electromagnetic frequencies.//   

       Only in the sense that it receives neural inputs from the eyes. In that sense, my lips are also responsive to electromagnetic frequencies (I smile more when it's sunny).   

       The pineal is funny. It is probably the subject of more folklore and flummery per gram than any other bodily organ.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 23 2012
  

       I disagree. The female reproductive system undoubtedly holds that distinction.
Alterother, Oct 23 2012
  

       //The female reproductive system undoubtedly holds that distinction.//   

       I did say "per gram". The female reproductive system is quite massive, comprising a vagina, cervix, uterus, at least one each of ovary and fallopian tube, shoes and additional accessories including a man.
MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 23 2012
  

       Ah yes, I failed to account for the subqualification in your statement. I think we can safely agree, however, that both have been the source of much bafflement and consternation since the dawn of medical science.
Alterother, Oct 23 2012
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle