Dr. Weeks’ Comment: I am a medical doctor who understands the plague of the 21st century – electrical pollution. In our homes and medical office, we have no DECT phones (we use land lines or cell phones on speak mode or with POP attachments NOT with bluetooth attachment), we have no WIFI (we use ethernet), we have no compact fluorescent light bulbs (we hoarded the incandescent) and we have no dimmer switches. On the road, we do not drive hybrid cars (battery pollution is measurable), we plug in Graham Stetzer filters in hotel rooms and college dormitory rooms and we use our laptops unplugged. We do NOT use grounding pads which connect to our earth forces: we walk barefoot on the grass or beach. And we count our blessings and give thanks as we move through our increasingly polluted landscape.
We are no longer considered paranoid or overly fearful of electrical pollution. Since my daughter measured the dangerous level of electrical pollution at her high school (a remarkable scientific effort whose results were ignored by the school board expecting one heroic member) and since Dave Stetzer came and led 2 workshops on our Whidbey Island, we have in the years following enjoyed overwhelming support and confirmation regarding our concerns about electrical pollution. We have patients whose newborns have cancer attributed to constant viewing of moves on the iPad resting for months on the pregnant belly. We have cared for many young people whose unilateral brain cancer is attributed to cell phone placement at that part of their brain. (This despite the iPhone manual warning never to have the iPhone on and closer than 5.8th of an inch to your body). We take this topic seriously and we honor the brave scientists like Prof. Magda Havas and Dr. Sam Milham, M.D. who courageously stand up to the titans of power – electrical companies who millions of dollars in lobby money are use to attempt to discredit dissident voices of reason.
Today, there remains considerable static in the debate about electrical pollution. My father taught me that a half-truth is worse than a lie and too often people with a focus on marketing and profiteering listen in on scientific discussions and create a product for sales at market which purports to solve a problem- yet in truth does not – and in the cases of tiny dots placed on cell phones or connecting a bed pad to the earth – can make a person sicker. MUCH sicker. Kids who think their cell phone is now magically safe use the cell phone for longer duration and with less caution while grounding into a toxic earth (in a suburb or a city) is a different matter than grounding where there is less transient electricity on the earth surface. But sadly, the cautionary principle dissolves when there are profits to be made.
Here following is a email thread of particular interest to people concerned with electrical sensitivity and electrical pollution. I share it to invite all who are interested into the discussion.
Mr Oschman, seems to me you are shooting the messenger of bad news when you target Magda, an unfortunate situation this reporter/editor can appreciate.
I’ve been using earthing products carefully and discussing them with several of you including Gaétan Chevalier of the Earthing Institute and LA Building Biologist Oram Miller who wrote recently: ”There is no situation that I know of where earthing would not be beneficial, except some people claiming to be so EHS that they pick up the harmonics of dirty electricity on the soil, as Sam Milham points out, when they ground their earthing mat to the earth, or they live next to a substation, which has more current and voltage on the earth… The fact is that certain of our electrically hypersensitive (EHS) clients don’t feel well when using an earthing pad when the breakers to Romex circuits near their bed are left on, even if there is no current flow to loads (lights out), but they do feel better when the circuits are switched off. Granted there are multiple frequencies on the line from the voltage and the resultant electric field emitted into the room from the circuit, both 60 Hz, and higher frequencies, but these people do react to use of the earthing pad with adverse symptoms when these circuits are left on.”
1. Your statement that, “The idea that the power returns to the electric utility sub station via the earth is a fiction that was created by Dr. Magda Havas.” is false.
You have obviously not read the NESC Handbook that I am attaching to this email. It states the following and these are direct quotes:
“When the earth returns were used in some rural areas prior to the 1960’s, they became notorious offenders in dairy areas because circulating currents often cause both step and touch potentials.”
“In some cases, they have adversely affected milking operations by shocking the cattle when they were connected to the milking machines, and have affected feeding.”
2. Please have the courtesy and decency to quote me properly. Your statement that, “She has subsequently retracted that erroneous statement. “ is a false statement. Some would call it a “lie”. I have never “retracted” my statements about an earth return.
Jim, we disagree about the value of grounding.
Grounding in a clean environment is a good thing and the best way to do it is to walk barefoot on wet grass or along the beach.
Grounding in a polluted environment can make people ill. I have had several people contact me telling me they felt ill after using your grounding sheets. They did not believe this was a “detoxing” as they become more ill the longer they used them. As soon as they stopped they felt fine. All of these people were attaching the grounding plug to the house grounding and, I expect, this is the problem.
We can choose to disagree but please have the courtesy not to make false statements about what I have or have not said. Also, please familiarize yourself with the facts before you make yourself look like someone who does not know what he is talking about. You are the one who is going to lose credibly among those who are in the know.
p.s. Please feel free to circulate my email response to all of those people you sent this to in an attempt to discredit me and to bolster your sales.
You connected the Fluke Scopemeter between the ground and the Earthing product. The meter is a high impedance device, so the product was not grounded. It was “floating” above ground, and therefore the scope would obviously pick up the oscillations of the ambient 60 Hz field and the harmonics, and this is what you recorded. It is well known that a high impedance device in this arrangement will pick up a lot of ambient noise. The grounding products will not work if they are not grounded.
The idea that the power returns to the electric utility sub station via the earth is a fiction that was created by Dr. Magda Havas. She stated that the laws of physics require that the electron that leaves the power station must ultimately be returned to the station. There is no such law of physics. She has subsequently retracted that erroneous statement.
Dr. Chevalier and I wrote an article to help clarify some of the issues and abundant confusions about grounding and Earthing. I attach the relevant part of that essay.
This web site is neither for advertising nor dispensing of medical advice. Clients who consult with Dr. Weeks receive information in an educational context in an effort to learn about optimizing care with their local health care practitioners. Dr. Weeks formerly practiced on Whidbey Island off the coast of Washington.
The information contained on these web pages is derived from Dr. Weeks’ years of clinical experience and his review of scientific literature. However, these ideas and information are for your education and entertainment only. They are positively not intended to be a substitute for careful medical evaluation and treatment by a competent, licensed personal health care professional. Dr. Weeks and his associates do not recommend changing any current medications or adding any new therapies without personally consulting a fully qualified physician. Dr. Weeks and his staff specifically disclaim any liability arising directly or indirectly from information contained on these Web pages.
Varying and even conflicting views are held by other segments of the medical profession. The information presented on these Web pages is intended to be educational and entertaining in nature and is not intended as a basis for diagnosis or treatment. This information is current at the time of posting on the World Wide Web, and is published and distributed as a courtesy to the public.