Electromagnetic sensitivity (EMS) is a federally recognized condition in which people experience adverse health effects due to electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure, causing symptoms such as heart arrhythmia, headaches, eye problems, burning skin, brain fog, memory issues, and fatigue.

Infowars - com

<p>The Washington Post recently reported on dozens of 'electrosensitive' people who moved to a remote West Virginia town with no cell service to avoid symptoms they attribute to electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. This article aims to review the claim that electromagnetic sensitivity (EMS) is a federally recognized condition causing various health symptoms.</p>
<p>Electromagnetic sensitivity, also known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity or microwave syndrome, is a condition where individuals report adverse health effects from exposure to EMF. Symptoms can include heart arrhythmia, headaches, eye problems, burning skin, brain fog, memory issues, and fatigue. The article mentions that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) created a protected area in West Virginia, dubbed the National Radio Quiet Zone, to shield the Green Bank Telescope from RF-EMF interference.</p>
<p>The claim that EMS is a federally recognized condition is not entirely accurate. While some studies suggest a prevalence of perceived EMS, the scientific community generally agrees that more research is needed to establish a causal link between EMF exposure and these symptoms. A 2020 peer-reviewed study reported a 'high prevalence of perceived EMF sensitivity' in various countries, but this does not equate to a recognized medical condition.</p>
<p>The International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF) has called electrosensitivity a 'humanitarian crisis,' emphasizing that symptoms can vary and affect multiple body systems. However, the scientific consensus remains that the evidence is insufficient to conclusively link EMF exposure to these symptoms.</p>
<p>The article also mentions that many people and organizations are mobilizing for change to accommodate those with EMS. Children's Health Defense (CHD) and a coalition of nonprofits have submitted comments to the FCC, advocating for the recognition of EMS as a disability and prioritizing fiber internet over wireless when feasible.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while there is some evidence of perceived EMS, the scientific community does not fully recognize it as a condition caused by EMF exposure. More research is needed to establish a definitive link between EMF and the reported symptoms. The claim that EMS is a federally recognized condition is not supported by current scientific consensus.</p>
<p><strong>References:</strong></p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412024001983">2020 Study on EMF Sensitivity</a>&nbsp;</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.icbe-emf.org/">International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF)</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Electromagnetic Sensitivity and Its Impact on Modern Life

<p>In today’s interconnected world, wireless internet access has become ubiquitous, found in nearly every coffee shop, office, and home. However, the claim that Wi-Fi signals are not benign and can influence brainwaves, leading to hypnotic effects and social engineering, requires a thorough examination.</p>
<p>The content suggests that radio-frequency (RF) radiation from Wi-Fi can interfere with brain waves, particularly extremely low frequency (ELF) waves, which can make a person unknowingly enter a suggestive state of mind. This claim is attributed to Keith Cutter, a critic of modern wireless technology.</p>
<p>To evaluate this claim, it is essential to understand the scientific basis behind the effects of RF and ELF waves on the human brain. Wi-Fi operates using radio-frequency electromagnetic fields, transmitting data via pulse-modulated RF radiation. While it is true that Wi-Fi devices emit low levels of RF radiation, the cumulative impact of this exposure over time is a subject of ongoing research.</p>
<p>The content highlights the effect of ELF waves, which range from approximately 3 to 30 Hz, overlapping with the natural oscillation frequencies of the human brain. The brain’s electrical activity is divided into different frequency bands, each associated with different states of consciousness and mental function. The concern is that the 10Hz ELF pulses emitted by Wi-Fi beacons can induce brainwave entrainment, synchronizing brainwaves to an external frequency.</p>
<p>Brainwave entrainment refers to the synchronization of brainwaves to an external frequency. When the brain is exposed to a consistent external stimulus at a particular frequency, such as the 10Hz signal emitted by Wi-Fi, it can shift its own natural brainwave patterns to match. At 10Hz, the brain enters a more relaxed state, akin to alpha waves, which corresponds to reduced cortical activity.</p>
<p>However, the claim that prolonged exposure to the 10Hz ELF signal can create a “suggestible state,” making the brain more susceptible to external influences, is not supported by scientific evidence. While brainwave entrainment is a recognized phenomenon, its potential for mind control or social engineering is speculative and lacks empirical support.</p>
<p>Another concern raised is the potential for Wi-Fi to have a “memory effect” on body tissues, leading to long-term physical changes or health conditions. This claim is also not supported by reliable scientific studies. The concept of “trauma memory” in the body is a psychological concept, and its application to electromagnetic radiation is not backed by evidence.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that Wi-Fi can influence brainwaves and has potential for hypnotic effects and social engineering is largely unsupported by scientific evidence. While there are legitimate concerns about the effects of electromagnetic radiation, the specific claims made in the content are not backed by reliable studies.</p>
<p>References:</p>
<p>1. <a href="https://www.who.int/india/health-topics/electromagnetic-fields">Electromagnetic fields and public health: mobile phones</a> - World Health Organization</p>
<p>2. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504984/">Health effects of electromagnetic fields: EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses</a> - Belpomme D, Hardell L, Belyaev I, Burgio E, Carpenter DO</p>
<p>3. <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10198548/">Brainwave entrainment: a review and quantitative analysis</a> &nbsp;- Huang TL, Charyton C</p>

Claim Review: Wi-Fi Can Influence Brainwaves and Has Potential for Hypnotic Effects and Social Engineering

<h2>Claim Review: UV Laser Attack on Trump Rally Attendees</h2>
<p>The claim that a recent attack on Trump rally attendees in Arizona was carried out using a handheld UV laser device, causing symptoms such as temporary loss of vision, sunburns, and skin peeling, has been circulating online. This article aims to review the scientific validity of this claim.</p>
<h3>Understanding UV Lasers</h3>
<p>UV lasers in the wavelengths of 280nm - 315nm are considered UV-B and are extremely dangerous to the human eye. High-intensity UV light can cause permanent retinal damage or blindness. However, the symptoms described in the claim, such as temporary loss of vision and skin peeling, are not consistent with the effects of UV-B exposure.</p>
<h3>Scientific Evidence</h3>
<p>According to scientific studies, UV-B exposure primarily causes sunburns and skin cancer, but the immediate effects are typically redness and pain, not skin peeling. Temporary loss of vision is more commonly associated with visible light lasers, not UV lasers. Additionally, UV lasers are not visible to the naked eye or night vision optics, making them difficult to detect, but their effects would be immediate and noticeable.</p>
<h3>Technical Feasibility</h3>
<p>The claim suggests that a handheld UV laser device could cause blindness from 500 yards or farther. While high-powered lasers can cause damage at long distances, the energy required to cause blindness from such a distance is not feasible with handheld devices. Moreover, aiming an invisible beam accurately over long distances is extremely challenging.</p>
<h3>Protective Measures</h3>
<p>The claim also mentions protective glasses and sunblock as effective measures against UV lasers. While sunglasses and sunblock can protect against general UV exposure, they are not designed to protect against high-intensity laser beams. Specialized protective glasses are available for specific wavelengths, but their effectiveness against a directed energy attack is limited.</p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>Based on the available scientific evidence, the claim that a UV laser attack caused the described symptoms at a Trump rally is largely unfounded. The symptoms and technical details provided in the claim do not align with the known effects and capabilities of UV lasers. It is crucial to rely on scientifically verified information when assessing such claims.</p>
<p>For further reading on the effects of UV radiation, refer to studies from reliable sources such as the <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/ultraviolet-radiation#tab=tab_1">World Health Organization</a> &nbsp;and the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/all/?term=ultraviolet">National Center for Biotechnology Information</a> .</p>

Claim Review: UV Laser Attack on Trump Rally Attendees

<h1>Claim Review: Cellphone Radiation and Brain Cancer</h1>
<p>The claim that cellphone radiation may cause brain cancer has been a topic of debate for many years. Several peer-reviewed studies have been conducted to investigate this claim, but the evidence is not conclusive. While some studies show a link between cellphone radiation and brain cancer, others do not.</p>
<p>A recent study published in Environmental Health analyzed 24 studies and found significantly higher risks for malignant brain tumors, meningioma, and glioma on the side of the head where cellphones were held. The study also found that heavy, long-term cellphone use was linked to an increased risk of glioma. This study brings the number of meta-analyses published since 2016 linking cellphone radiation to an increased risk of brain cancer to seven.</p>
<p>However, a recent WHO-led study claimed there’s no evidence of a link between cellphone radiation and brain cancer. Some experts have suggested that the WHO picked industry-biased researchers to conduct its review. Lennart Hardell, a leading scientist who found a link between cellphone use and gliomas, agreed that the WHO study authors should be responsible for their fraudulent behavior violating human health and the environment.</p>
<p>Brain tumor rates are on the rise in Denmark, which is known for its high-quality tracking of cancer cases. This data contradicts the notion that the rate of brain tumors isn’t on the rise, which has been used to claim that cellphone use is not linked to an increased risk of brain tumors or cancers in general. A 2023 study on brain cancer rates worldwide from 1990-2019 found a significant rise in brain cancer among both men and women in nearly all parts of the world.</p>
<p>The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) claims there’s not enough scientific evidence to link cellphone use to health problems, including brain cancer. However, the FDA rejected the findings of a $30 million study it commissioned on the topic, which concluded there was 'clear evidence' that male rats exposed to high levels of wireless radiation like that used in 2G and 3G cellphones developed cancerous heart tumors, and 'some evidence' of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while some studies suggest a link between cellphone radiation and brain cancer, the evidence is not conclusive. The World Health Organization and other health agencies have not found sufficient evidence to support this claim. More research is needed to fully understand the potential risks.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-024-01117-8">Relationship between radiofrequency-electromagnetic radiation from cellular phones and brain tumor: meta-analyses using various proxies for RF-EMR exposure-outcome assessment</a> - Jinyoung Moon, Jungmin Kwon &amp; Yongseok Mun, Environmental Health volume 23, Article number: 82 (2024)&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Cellphone Radiation and Brain Cancer

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: