Shielding methods and products against man-made Electromagnetic Fields: Protection versus risk
Abstract
Shielding methods and products against man-made Electromagnetic Fields: Protection versus risk Panagopoulos DJ, Chrousos GP. Shielding methods and products against man-made Electromagnetic Fields: Protection versus risk. Sci Total Environ. 2019 Feb 23;667:255-262. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.344. Highlights • Human exposure to man-made EMFs has increased with increasing health problems. • Metal shielding is lately suggested by private companies/individuals as a way to reduce exposure. • Metal shielding reduces both man-made and natural atmospheric EMFs. • EHS symptom relapses and internal desynchronization are reported after shielding. • An avoidance strategy of man-made EMFs should be preferable than metal shielding. Abstract Human exposure to man-made Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) has increased to unprecedented levels, accompanied by increase in various health problems. A connection has been indicated by an increasing number of studies. Symptoms characterized as Electro-hyper-sensitivity (EHS) are frequently reported especially in urban environments. Lately, people are advised by private companies and individuals to protect themselves from man- made EMFs by metal shielding through various products, for which there are reasonable concerns about their protective efficacy and safety. Indeed, any metal shielding practice, even when correctly applied, attenuates not only man-made totally polarized EMFs accused for the health problems, but also the natural non-polarized EMFs responsible for the biological rhythmicity and well-being of all animals. Strong evidence on this was provided by pioneering experiments in the 1960's and 1970's, with volunteers staying in a shielded underground apartment. We analyze the physical principles of EMF-shielding, the importance of natural atmospheric EMFs, and examine available shielding methods and suggested products, relying on science-based evidence. We suggest that an avoidance strategy is safer than shielding, and provide specific protection tips. We do not reject shielding in general, but describe ways to keep it at a minimum by intermittent use, as this is theoretically safer than extensive permanent shielding. We explain why metallic patches or "chips" or minerals claimed by sellers to be protective, do not seem to make sense and might even be risky. We finally suggest urgent research on the safety and efficacy of shielding methods combined with use of generators emitting weak pulses of similar frequency, intensity, and waveform with the natural atmospheric resonances. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
AI evidence extraction
Main findings
The authors argue that metal shielding attenuates not only man-made EMFs but also natural atmospheric EMFs that they describe as important for biological rhythmicity and well-being. They report that EHS symptom relapses and internal desynchronization occurred after shielding in earlier volunteer experiments, and suggest avoidance of man-made EMFs as preferable to extensive permanent shielding.
Outcomes measured
- Electro-hyper-sensitivity (EHS) symptoms
- Biological rhythmicity/desynchronization
- Well-being/health problems (general)
- Exposure reduction to man-made and natural atmospheric EMFs
- Safety and efficacy of shielding methods/products
Limitations
- Narrative review/opinion-style synthesis; methods for literature search and study selection are not described in the abstract.
- Claims of increased health problems and connections to man-made EMFs are not quantified in the abstract.
- Details of the cited 1960s–1970s volunteer experiments (design, sample size, outcomes, controls) are not provided in the abstract.
- Recommendations about specific products (e.g., patches/chips/minerals) are not supported with specific empirical data in the abstract.
Suggested hubs
-
ehs
(0.86) Abstract discusses EHS symptoms and reports relapses after shielding.
View raw extracted JSON
{
"publication_year": 2019,
"study_type": "review",
"exposure": {
"band": null,
"source": "metal shielding products/practices against man-made EMFs",
"frequency_mhz": null,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": null
},
"population": "Volunteers (reported from pioneering experiments in the 1960s–1970s) and general public users of shielding products",
"sample_size": null,
"outcomes": [
"Electro-hyper-sensitivity (EHS) symptoms",
"Biological rhythmicity/desynchronization",
"Well-being/health problems (general)",
"Exposure reduction to man-made and natural atmospheric EMFs",
"Safety and efficacy of shielding methods/products"
],
"main_findings": "The authors argue that metal shielding attenuates not only man-made EMFs but also natural atmospheric EMFs that they describe as important for biological rhythmicity and well-being. They report that EHS symptom relapses and internal desynchronization occurred after shielding in earlier volunteer experiments, and suggest avoidance of man-made EMFs as preferable to extensive permanent shielding.",
"effect_direction": "harm",
"limitations": [
"Narrative review/opinion-style synthesis; methods for literature search and study selection are not described in the abstract.",
"Claims of increased health problems and connections to man-made EMFs are not quantified in the abstract.",
"Details of the cited 1960s–1970s volunteer experiments (design, sample size, outcomes, controls) are not provided in the abstract.",
"Recommendations about specific products (e.g., patches/chips/minerals) are not supported with specific empirical data in the abstract."
],
"evidence_strength": "low",
"confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"stance": "concern",
"stance_confidence": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
"summary": "This review discusses physical principles and practical methods of shielding against man-made EMFs, emphasizing potential risks of metal shielding. The authors state that metal shielding can reduce both man-made and natural atmospheric EMFs, and they report symptom relapses and internal desynchronization after shielding in earlier volunteer experiments. They recommend prioritizing avoidance of man-made EMFs and minimizing shielding (e.g., intermittent use), and call for urgent research on shielding safety and efficacy.",
"key_points": [
"The paper frames rising man-made EMF exposure as accompanying increased health problems and suggests a connection supported by an increasing number of studies.",
"It argues that metal shielding attenuates both man-made polarized EMFs and natural non-polarized atmospheric EMFs.",
"EHS symptoms are described as frequently reported, particularly in urban environments.",
"The authors cite earlier volunteer experiments in shielded living conditions as evidence for adverse effects such as symptom relapses and desynchronization.",
"The review questions the protective efficacy and safety of commercially promoted shielding products.",
"It suggests avoidance of man-made EMFs as safer than extensive permanent metal shielding and recommends minimizing shielding via intermittent use.",
"It argues that metallic patches/chips/minerals marketed as protective may not be physically plausible and could be risky.",
"The authors call for research on shielding combined with generators emitting weak pulses resembling natural atmospheric resonances."
],
"categories": [
"Shielding & Mitigation",
"Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)",
"Risk Assessment & Policy"
],
"tags": [
"EMF Shielding",
"Metal Shielding",
"Natural Atmospheric EMFs",
"Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity",
"Desynchronization",
"Exposure Reduction",
"Shielding Products",
"Avoidance Strategy",
"Risk Assessment",
"Protection Tips"
],
"keywords": [
"shielding",
"metal shielding",
"man-made EMFs",
"natural atmospheric EMFs",
"electro-hyper-sensitivity",
"EHS",
"biological rhythmicity",
"desynchronization",
"protective products"
],
"suggested_hubs": [
{
"slug": "ehs",
"weight": 0.85999999999999998667732370449812151491641998291015625,
"reason": "Abstract discusses EHS symptoms and reports relapses after shielding."
}
],
"social": {
"tweet": "Review argues metal EMF shielding may reduce both man-made and natural atmospheric EMFs; reports of EHS symptom relapses/desynchronization are cited, and authors recommend prioritizing EMF avoidance and minimizing shielding use.",
"facebook": "A 2019 review examines EMF shielding methods and products, arguing that metal shielding can attenuate both man-made and natural atmospheric EMFs. The authors cite earlier volunteer experiments reporting EHS symptom relapses and desynchronization, and recommend avoidance strategies and minimal/intermittent shielding pending more research.",
"linkedin": "This review in Sci Total Environ (2019) analyzes EMF shielding principles and products, raising concerns that metal shielding may also block natural atmospheric EMFs. The authors cite earlier volunteer experiments reporting symptom relapses/desynchronization and call for research on shielding safety/efficacy, recommending avoidance and minimal/intermittent shielding."
}
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.