Take Charge of EMF Exposure

You can't avoid it; How to neutralize it

On Monday nights at 7pEST, I host a show on Brighteon.TV called “The Tenpenny Files: On Your Health.” For the last 22 years, I’ve given literally 1,000s of interviews via radio, TV, podcasts, live conferences, and seminars – and almost all my information was, in one way or another, about vaccines. But as a trained ER doctor – who was director of a Level 2 trauma center for 12 years – and an Integrative Medicine physician with a busy practice in Middleburg Heights (Cleveland) Ohio since 1996, there are so many other topics to discuss.  The Tenpenny Files is an educational show where I will bring you valuable information – ON YOUR HEALTH.

A few weeks ago on my Brighteon show, my guests were Rob Workman and William Bathgate, experts on the effect of EMFs on your biology. You can watch the complete show here.

Robert Workman has 25 years of experience in residential remodeling and is currently a managing partner in a St. Louis Missouri based remodeling company —Jones Home Improvements. In addition, Robert is the St. Louis’ first Certified Building Biologist Environmental Consultant (BBEC), specializing in mitigating the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields in residential and commercial buildings.

William Bathgate, with a specialty in both electrical and mechanical engineering. Similar to Robert, Bill is also a Certified Building Biologist and a Certified Electro-Magnetic Radiation Specialist. Bill has over 20 years of  experience working with IBM and Hewlett Packard in computer systems design. He holds a DOD Top Secret Clearance, serving in Cyber Security with the US Missile Defense Agency, NASA and Homeland Security. He knows a lot about EMF and radiation.

Towards the end of the interview, I asked them both if they thought there was an association between EMFs, 5G, and the ‘turbo cancers’ we are now seeing in record numbers. They both became very animated and responded with an strong “YES” and other affirmative comments. Bill made a comment, almost under his breath, that “EMFs were strongly associated with almost all pediatric leukemias.”

That caught my attention.

With almost all children now spending hours their hand-held cell phones or wearing virtual reality headsets to watch movies or even do their homework, could all of these cumulative EMFs be contributing to the uptick in childhood cancers we are now seeing, especially blood cancers?

What is EMF?

Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are packets of energy that have no mass. Visible light is the form of EMF we are most familiar with. EMFs travel at the speed of light and are basically sine waves of different frequencies. As such, a low frequency EMF has a long wavelength, while high frequency EMFs have a short wavelength. The shortest frequencies have very high energy levels that can damage DNA and are referred to as ‘ionizing radiation.”

At the low end of the frequencies are electric and magnetic fields associated with electricity. These are often called extra-low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELFs) or “non-ionizing radiation.” The effects of ELFs on physiology decreases rapidly the farther away you are from the source. Nonetheless, we are all exposed every day to ELFs from power lines, appliances, and even the wiring within our homes and offices. Both EMFs and ELFs have been associated with a wide variety of biological and adverse health effects; in addition, they both can increase the risk of cancer.

The strongest evidence regarding the hazards of EMF exposure comes from studies on prolonged cell phone use. As far back as 1965, Cardell et. al. demonstrated an elevated risk of brain tumors and acoustic neuromas. These are benign, slow growing tumors that form along the branches of the eighth cranial nerve responsible for balance and hearing. An association between acoustic neuromas and prolonged cell phone use has been observed exclusively on the side of the head where the phone is regularly used.

Historical backdrop

The Epoch Times recently wrote a two-part article on the invisible health concerns from EMF (electromagnetic fields).

Motorola first introduced the first cordless handheld phone in the early 1970s. Telecommunication networks, which use electromagnetic radiation to transmit information, have advanced from the now-defunct 1G, which only supported voice calls, to 5G and its high-speed data transfers. While these companies consistently deny andy health-associated problems (think Big Tobacco), studies conducted since the 1970s have suggested possible links to infertility, chronic inflammation, neuropsychiatric problems, infertility, and cancer, and inflammation.

In April 2021, I interviewed Rinat Strahlhofer, on my Monday morning podcast, “This Week with DrT.” Strahlhofer is the co-creator of the organization, We Are Not SAM. She shared this information:

Cell phones are tested using a large, plastic head of a dummy named SAM, which is short for Standard Anthropomorphic Mannequin. SAM’s head, nearly double the size of a toddler’s head and larger than 97 percent of all people. It is filled with a syrup-like liquid that very different than bone and brain tissues. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) relies on thermal testing against this “balloon” to determine the safety of cell phone EMFs.

Test calls average less than six minutes, unlike the hours of time real humans spend on their phones. In addition, the testing on SAM only measures the HEAT generated by the device, not the RADIATION emitted and then absorbed. If the heat in SAM’s head does not increase by 1 degree Celsius, the device is considered to be safe.  

Testing cell phones for safety on a plastic model doesn’t represent children, the elderly or women, especially pregnant women. Research has shown that children absorb 150% more radiation than SAM.

In a report published in 1988 by the US Air Force, it was revealed that as far back as 1956, the Department of Defense (DoD) directed the armed forces to investigate the biological effects of exposure to radiofrequency/microwave radiation (RF/MW). Several conferences were held that concluded:

“a number of biological dysfunctions can occur in the human body, ranging from damage to major organs, disruption of important biological processes, to serious damage to the eye to cancer.”

Is there proof?

While proving causality between RF/MW has been challenging, correlations have been around since that 1960s: When mice were exposed to EMFs for as little as 4.5 minutes/day, 5 days/week for about a year, 35% had developed leukemia.

Throughout the years, various effects on the chromosomes have been detected by researchers including mutational, mutagenic, cardiovascular, hematologic, oncogenic and psychological effects. In 1977, an interesting rat study showed a behavioral response to when exposed to EMF radiation:

White female rates were trained to lift their head in exchange for a food pellet. The total number of movements was counted during each exposure to quantify the effect of EMF irradiation.

The animals were exposed to 918 MHz RF/MW at power levels of 10, 20, and 40 mW/cm2. At the lower level, no changes were noted. But an 04 mW/cm2, behavioral responses decreased rapidly after 5 minutes. After 15 minutes, behavioral activity terminated.  (page 10 of this document)

It was concluded that among the biological effects, behavior was the most sensitive biological component and most serious consequences of exposure to RF/MW radiation. (page 17 of this document)

A more recent study (2019) evaluated the amount of DNA toxicity from cell phones from low-level exposure. This was from the abstract:

The National Toxicology Program tested the radiation effects of two common radio frequencies from cell phones over a two-year study in rodents.

Radiation (RFR) modulations emitted by cellular telephones in a 2-year rodent cancer bioassay that included interim assessments of additional animals for genotoxicity endpoints.

Male and female rats and mice were exposed 18 hr/d, at 10-minute intervals from gestation day 5 or postnatal day 35, respectively. After 19 rats and 14 mice had weeks of exposure, animals were examined for evidence of RFR-associated genotoxicity using two different measures.

The results showed significant increases in DNA damage in the frontal cortex (brain) of male mice, leukocytes of female mice, and hippocampus (brain) of male rats. Equivocal DNA damage was found in several other tissues of rats and mice.

Conclusion: Results suggest that exposure to RFR is associated with an increase in DNA damage.

What about cell phones, EMF and childhood leukemia?

When I heard Bill Bathgate mention the connection between EMFs and childhood leukemia, I went to PubMed and on a cursory search found several articles on the topic.

The website EMFS.info has an extensive page dedicated to childhood leukemia, with links to dozens of abstracts and major epidemiological studies of magnetic fields and childhood cancer.  More than 40 epidemiological studies have been performed, just looking at a possible link between childhood leukemia and EMFs. Some studies found no association, but most HAVE found associations.

The first indication between excessive exposure to EMFs from power lines and cancer came in 1979 from the study by Wertheimer and Leeper, who reported elevations in cancers among children living in homes near power lines carrying high voltage current, thus generating large electromagnetic fields. The report generated the same level of skepticism and resistance from electrical companies that was demonstrated by the asbestos and tobacco industries when their dirty industries were exposed.

But over time, the results were confirmed by three major meta-analysis for childhood leukemia and in other studies done around the world. EMFs increase the rate of leukemia as exposure to magnetic fields is increased. In 1997, a review by the US National Research Council concluded:

“The link between wire-code rating and childhood leukemia is statistically significant (meaning it is unlikely to have occurred by chance) and is robust. Eliminating any single study from the group does not alter the conclusion that the associations exist.”

Reports since 2000 have generally confirmed an association between exposure to magnetic fields from power lines and childhood cancer. The risk was significant enough that the International Agency for Research on Cancer labeled ELF fields as being “possible human carcinogens.”

Later, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated:

“Epidemiological data…show an association between ELF magnetic field exposure and an increased risk of childhood leukemia.”

Other researchers found the following:

• 2003 – Canada - Infante-Rivard and Deadman reported that occupational exposure of a pregnant woman to high-levels of EMFs significantly increased the risk of her child developing leukemia.

• 2005 – UK - Draper et al. Children living near high voltage power lines had a significantly elevated risk for leukemia but no other cancers. The risk decreased with distance from the power lines.

• 2006 – Japan - Kabuto et al. A significant increased risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) was found among children whose bedrooms had magnetic fields that were greater than 0.4μT compared to children whose bedrooms had fields measuring less than 0.1μT (4 mG).

  • The strength or intensity of magnetic fields is commonly measured in a unit called a "gauss." One milligauss (mG) is a thousandth of a gauss, and a microtesla (µT) is a millionth of a tesla (one milligauss is the same as 0.1 microtesla). These are infinitesimally amounts of radiation that can cumulatively cause changes in the physiology. A more detailed description/discussion can be found here.

• 2010 – Multinational pooled data - Kheifets et al. Concluded that “recent studies on magnetic fields and childhood leukemia do not alter the previous assessment that magnetic fields are possibly carcinogenic”.

• 2015 - Conclusions: The result in this meta-analysis indicated that magnetic field exposure level may be associated with childhood leukemia.

• 2022 - In summary, our study suggests that exposure to ELF-MF higher than 0.4 µT increases the risk of developing leukemia in children. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is probably the subtype of leukemia associated with ELF-MF. Prolonged exposure to electric appliances that generate magnetic fields higher than 0.4 µT, such as electric blankets, is associated with a more elevated risk of childhood leukemia.'

• 2023 - Conclusions: In this Italian population, close proximity to high-voltage power lines was associated with an excess risk of childhood leukemia.

Reading through a few of the many published the studies that showed NO association between EMFs and leukemia, it appears the researchers wrote their abstracts cautiously and in a way to minimize or negate any association between EMFs and cancer. Unfortunately, I didn’t have time to research who funded each of the studies, but that may give more information.

Nonetheless, within many other studies, researchers have clearly found a statistical association between “unusually high” and/or sustained EMF exposure and childhood leukemia even through the definition of “high exposure” has a lot of variables.

Even if the risk is small, taking steps to mitigate the effects is worthwhile.

EMF Sensitivity

During our Brighteon conversation, Robert revealed that he became interested in becoming building biologist after developing EMF sensitivity, now considered a medical condition and well-defined pathological neurologic disorder (brain or nerve disease). Other symptoms can include:

• Skin conditions – burning, rashes, prickling sensation

• Headaches – various intensity

• Persistent nausea

• Dizziness

• Tinnitus

• Sleep disorders

• Debilitating fatigue

• Body aches, often diagnosed as fibromyalgia

• Arrhythmias and hypertension

• Memory loss and concentration difficulties

• Anxiety and mood disorders

During the interview, I asked both Robert and Bill if they were familiar with EMF remediation technologies. At that point, Robert said,

“Yes, I’d test out most of them. The tools that I have found to really work are all the devices from EMF Solutions.”

I was pleasantly surprised to hear him say this!

We’ve been an affiliate with EMF Solutions for the last year. I have all of their recommended products installed in my house – the whole house mitigation, several room neutralizers, clips on all my screens in my podcast studio, my car, my laptop, and my phone. And I have the ZZZZZs packet for under my mattress. I purchased them over time but now that I have everything installed, I can honestly say I definitely feel the difference; I know I am definitely sleeping better!

A few weeks ago, I had the founder, Cory Hillis on my podcast. Here’s the link to listen if you want more information

Real Life Mitigation

There are a number of simple steps that individuals can take to reduce their exposure to EMF from cell phones. This list comes from the article, “Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields,” by David Carpenter (2013)

• Use a landline whenever possible; wired phones do not generate EMFs.

• Cell phones should not be held directly to the ear. Children, in particular, should never use cell phones held to their head. If your child uses a cell phone, they should be given clear boundaries on the amount of use per day.  Two hours of screen time, outside of work, is a broad recommendation.

• Use a wired earpiece to keep the phone off the body. Cell phone EMFs fall off rapidly with distance, so a phone on the desk with a wired earpiece has less exposure.

• The use of Bluetooth reduces, but does not eliminate, exposure to the head. Using these devices while wearing the phone on your belt only changes the parts of the body that is densely exposed.

• Never sleep with a cell phone under the pillow. If the phone is in your bedroom, put the phone into airplane mode before sleep.

ELF-EMF fields from electronics and appliances fall off rapidly with distance. Experts are less concerned about the brief exposures to ELF-EMF we encounter everyday but far more concerned about longer-term chronic exposures, including at night while we sleep. This article - which is rather long but you should bookmark it for later reading, especially if you have symptoms of EMF sensitivity - has a rather extensive list of ways to reduce your daily exposure.

Conclusion

I hope this overview simplified a complex problem with EMFs. And I hope the real life solutions for eliminating symptoms you may not have associated with EMF issues in the past. Please contact EMF Solutions to get a free evaluation of your home and devices. I’m confident that you will be glad that you did!