HOW HARMFUL IS BLUETOOTH?

[sphenoid]

Crazy, yet not surprising that the air pods are that strong. I ditched all Bluetooth years ago with no regrets. When I’m around some I can feel it, not necessarily in a specific type of way, I just feel worse. Can anyone recommend a good emsog meter?

 

[Mossy]

There is a timely ad on this forum, by LifeGivingStore, selling components that claim to counter the negative effects of EMF. Does anyone have any insight or thoughts about these devices?

 

[Pete Rey]

There is a timely ad on this forum, by LifeGivingStore, selling components that claim to counter the negative effects of EMF. Does anyone have any insight or thoughts about these devices?

I've been around the block quite a few times in alternative health circles, and this reminds me greatly of Wilhelm Reich's orgone, which I do not consider legitimate science. So being the skeptic that I am, I read their page: Skeptical? Click Here

I see lots of mention of studies, but no citations. I see a reference to Martin Pall and a short video on calcium channels. Ok, so we can read his work to learn why EMF is potentially harmful. I don't think Pall ever commented on any of these products, though. Not to mention any criticisms of his papers.

I see a video of a demonstration of cymatics using a metal plate, an oscillator, and salt. Pretty to look at, and a subject I love, but does that really qualify as supportive evidence of the statement "They are the only company to find the root cause (subatomic chaos) and are properly able to address it?" I think not. That sentence deserves a big "citation needed" sticker as far as I'm concerned.

But wait, there is a link to "more studies" on that page. Maybe that's where the real sauce is? Nope. Just the same videos, plus some videos of dodgy-looking experiments they conducted themselves. No way to vet their methodology. Any information that one could use to do so is "proprietary" and "patent pending."

Followed by that we get an exhaustive list of testimonials rivaling Biblical genealogies in length, with first names only. Not to say they are fake, but we are talking about solutions to psychosomatic issues here, which makes determining cause and effect notoriously slippery. I'm sure we've all had the experience of convincing ourselves that we feel better because we bought something that is supposed to make us feel better. And as any Amazon seller will tell you, it is not difficult to accumulate a mountain of positive reviews with some basic incentives.

Overall I see a website which is extremely light on actual evidence, and very heavy-handed on sales tactics. And that's 45 minutes of my life I won't get back. Caveat emptor.

 

[Healthseeker]

yeah a scientist told me that life giving store ad makes the site look shady.

 

[Logan-]

I've been around the block quite a few times in alternative health circles, and this reminds me greatly of Wilhelm Reich's orgone, which I do not consider legitimate science. So being the skeptic that I am, I read their page: Skeptical? Click Here

I see lots of mention of studies, but no citations. I see a reference to Martin Pall and a short video on calcium channels. Ok, so we can read his work to learn why EMF is potentially harmful. I don't think Pall ever commented on any of these products, though. Not to mention any criticisms of his papers.

I see a video of a demonstration of cymatics using a metal plate, an oscillator, and salt. Pretty to look at, and a subject I love, but does that really qualify as supportive evidence of the statement "They are the only company to find the root cause (subatomic chaos) and are properly able to address it?" I think not. That sentence deserves a big "citation needed" sticker as far as I'm concerned.

But wait, there is a link to "more studies" on that page. Maybe that's where the real sauce is? Nope. Just the same videos, plus some videos of dodgy-looking experiments they conducted themselves. No way to vet their methodology. Any information that one could use to do so is "proprietary" and "patent pending."

Followed by that we get an exhaustive list of testimonials rivaling Biblical genealogies in length, with first names only. Not to say they are fake, but we are talking about solutions to psychosomatic issues here, which makes determining cause and effect notoriously slippery. I'm sure we've all had the experience of convincing ourselves that we feel better because we bought something that is supposed to make us feel better. And as any Amazon seller will tell you, it is not difficult to accumulate a mountain of positive reviews with some basic incentives.

Overall I see a website which is extremely light on actual evidence, and very heavy-handed on sales tactics. And that's 45 minutes of my life I won't get back. Caveat emptor.

Thanks for writing this. That was 45 minutes of your life you won’t get back, but the end product saved others from doing the same research, and maybe not understand it as well as you do.

yeah a scientist told me that life giving store ad makes the site look shady.

I have always been suspicious of that company, ever since seeing their heavy advertisement on this forum, and seeing their most advertised intestinal health product contained maltodextrin. If they gave their maltodextrin-added cascara away for free, I would still not consider using it, and if I had it for free, I would put it in thrash.

Cascara Sagrada Powder - Ray Peat Recommended Cascara From Farmalabor In Italy

@LifeGivingStore does your cascara sagrada contain maltodextrin? Farmalabor Cascara Contains Maltodextrin Edit: I just saw that it does contain maltodextrin. -Other ingredients: Maltodextrin - Life Giving Store Don't you think this is problematic? Nickerson, Kourtney P et al...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Logan-]

More is coming:

EMF Stickers (?!)

The above image is very prominently displayed at the top of the forum lately. I'm sure many of you, like me, were "Skeptical? We were too....." and duly Clicked Here; because, as fans of physics may know, EMF exposure is rather more complicated to solve than placing a sticker on a phone. I was...

raypeatforum.com

 

[mayku-T-meelo]

@miquelangeles

 

[Logan-]

@CreakyJoints @Zellig Pliskin

 

[Nick]

Interference with calcium regulation in the cell (I believe the "channels" model is refuted by Gilbert Ling and possibly Gerald Pollack) is just one of many different simultaneous mechanisms of biological effects of EMF, so the claim that this is the root cause of EMF damage is definitely misleading.

 

[Mossy]

I've been around the block quite a few times in alternative health circles, and this reminds me greatly of Wilhelm Reich's orgone, which I do not consider legitimate science. So being the skeptic that I am, I read their page: Skeptical? Click Here

I see lots of mention of studies, but no citations. I see a reference to Martin Pall and a short video on calcium channels. Ok, so we can read his work to learn why EMF is potentially harmful. I don't think Pall ever commented on any of these products, though. Not to mention any criticisms of his papers.

I see a video of a demonstration of cymatics using a metal plate, an oscillator, and salt. Pretty to look at, and a subject I love, but does that really qualify as supportive evidence of the statement "They are the only company to find the root cause (subatomic chaos) and are properly able to address it?" I think not. That sentence deserves a big "citation needed" sticker as far as I'm concerned.

But wait, there is a link to "more studies" on that page. Maybe that's where the real sauce is? Nope. Just the same videos, plus some videos of dodgy-looking experiments they conducted themselves. No way to vet their methodology. Any information that one could use to do so is "proprietary" and "patent pending."

Followed by that we get an exhaustive list of testimonials rivaling Biblical genealogies in length, with first names only. Not to say they are fake, but we are talking about solutions to psychosomatic issues here, which makes determining cause and effect notoriously slippery. I'm sure we've all had the experience of convincing ourselves that we feel better because we bought something that is supposed to make us feel better. And as any Amazon seller will tell you, it is not difficult to accumulate a mountain of positive reviews with some basic incentives.

Overall I see a website which is extremely light on actual evidence, and very heavy-handed on sales tactics. And that's 45 minutes of my life I won't get back. Caveat emptor.

Thank you Pete Rey, for taking one for the team and investing your time and sharing your thoughts.

 

[DaveFoster]

Probably not very harmful, irrespective of its value in promoting an economically and socially integrated life. With respect to those benefits, bluetooth may be a net gain.

 

[CreakyJoints]

@CreakyJoints @Zellig Pliskin

Thank you very much for the tag, and drawing my attention to this thread, I appreciate it - I was unaware that there was any crossover with my own thread (in case people missed it and wish to discuss the advert in question). @Pete Rey has done a wonderful job of expressing some of my own misgivings about the supposedly miraculous devices being advertised here and I'm glad to see at least some skepticism still alive and well on this forum. 45 minutes is roughly the amount of time I lost looking through the "literature".

 

[Smelly5]

I found I can't think as clearly after using bluetooth phones vses cabled headphones. It's like there's a low-grade static occurring in the background of my mind which I otherwise wouldn't have. For me this is enough to limit using them.