By its nature, relevant subject matter may involve personal accounts of health or psychological effects. To encourage sharing on an equitable basis, any observed instance of disrespect, trolling or commercial intent will be subject to appropriate moderation.


The forums are now closed but visitors may access all prior posts. Additional information, related to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) in general, may be found under the other page headings.

How to Join

Although anyone can read the Forums, you must register to post content. If you wish to do this, please let us know via the Contact form so we can temporarily disable blocking. An email will then be sent stating that you have 48 hours to register. Once received, select one of the seven categories of interest below, then “Add Topic” and follow the prompts. Subscriptions can be cancelled at any time via the Contact form.

Although this platform is primarily directed toward conditions within Australia, there are no geographical restrictions upon joining in. Daily statistics show 50 to 150 visits originating from dozens of Countries.

shielding studied i...
Clear all

shielding studied in pubmed paper

Eminent Member
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 47
Topic starter  

Interesting recognition of EHS, EMR dangers and shielding in a pubmed research paper   Unfortunately full access to the paper is not provided.  Check out also the similar articles links in the side bar.



Topic Tags
Active Member
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 16

Here is another link with slightly more information.

In real life circumstances, I have never heard of EHS being made worse by typically applied metal shielding. Another questionable premise is that natural EMF's are thereby excluded. In fact, the most significant biologically are far too low in frequency to be blocked by this means. Furthermore, there would be no disadvantage if they were since they are already outweighed in most localities by electro-polluting signals of exponentially greater magnitude.

The authors appear to be aiming for conclusions that promote reintroduction into living spaces of Schumann-type Earth resonances. While there is evidence devices capable of doing so may be beneficial as an adjunct, I fail to see any justification specific to the proffered shortcomings of RF shielding.


You are not alone. According to experts, over 35% of the world’s population feels some form of unwanted reaction to EMR exposure. Additionally, everyone is susceptible to induced biological abnormalities that may not manifest perceptibly for years or even decades.