Welcome to the Afibber’s Forum
Our 18th Year Online!
Moderated by: Shannon Dickson


Afibbers Home Afibbers Forum General Health Forum
Afib Resources Afib Database Vitamin Shop


Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more

Posted by Jackie 
Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 24, 2017 12:17PM
More information is coming forth about risks from Electropollution. Six years ago, as a result of several webinars, I offered two posts the EMF topic with considerations for Cardiovascular Risk. Links follow.

This clip comes from a new report quoting Martin Pall, PhD…..”who has identified and published several papers describing the molecular mechanisms of how EMFs from cellphones and wireless technologies damage plants, animals and humans.”

Several observations are relevant to afibbers with regard to intracellular calcium increases and should be an important alert to all former afibbers and those who are currently dealing with PACs or outright arrhythmias….since we know the importance of the intracellular electrolyte ratios and balances and the fact that elevated IC calcium causes trouble.

Now this report indicates that EMF exposure increases intracellular calcium and how it does that !!!

Quotes to motivate you to learn more and take steps to reduce your EMF exposure …

... " Many studies have shown that when you're exposed to EMFs, intracellular calcium increases. Pall also discovered a number of studies showing that you can block or greatly reduce the effects of EMFs using calcium channel blockers — medication commonly prescribed to patients with heart disease.

This turns out to be a crucial point, because it's the excess calcium in the cell and the increased calcium signaling that are responsible for a vast majority of the biological effects of EMFs.

Pall has discovered no less than 26 papers showing that EMFs work by activating voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs), which are located in the outer membrane of your cells. Once activated, they allow a tremendous influx of calcium into the cell — about 1 million calcium ions per second per VGCC.

This turns out to be a crucial point, because it's the excess calcium in the cell and the increased calcium signaling that are responsible for a vast majority of the biological effects of EMFs.

Common heart problems linked to EMF exposure include:
• Cardiac arrhythmias (associated with sudden cardiac death)
• Atrial fibrillation / atrial flutter
• Premature atrial contractions (PACs) and premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), also known as heart palpitations
• Tachycardia (fast heartbeat) and brachycardia (slow heartbeat)... " (end quotes)

Be sure to read the complete report and then start thinking about your EMF exposure and what you can do to reduce and eliminate where possible for all the obvious reasons.

Source: The Real Dangers of Electronic Devices and EMFs [articles.mercola.com]


Previous Electropollution posts:
Electropollution: Cardiovascular Risk?
Part 1 [www.afibbers.org]
Part 2 [www.afibbers.org]

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 24, 2017 03:17PM
Jackie:

A smart meter was installed on the corner of my house, where all the other services are. My bedroom is on that side, this meter was installed about 7 months ago, the last two months I have been hearing a noise that sounds like purring or snoring, lasts about a minute (or just a little less) it started waking me up, it isn't all the time but off and on throughout the day and night.
It didn't sound like an animal so I contacted all of the people that have their services on that wall, they came out looked at their meter, opened them, said no problem. I then called a person from Pest control, he heard the sound and said that is no animal. My neighbor does not have a problem with any sounds. I cannot take this anymore I am calling my power company tomorrow and telling them I want that meter taken off and put an analog meter on. I understand from my search on the net that you can get that meter swapped out but you have to pay a certain fee every month (which would be worth it), but not sure if they will do it. If they don't I am going to tell them that I will pull it off. There are covers that block most of the radiation of these meters, you can buy them or on u tube there are directions how to make one. But, that won't solve my noise problem, has anyone here have a similar problem?

Liz
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 12:07AM
Mercola is a fraud.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 08:38AM
Follow the money trail with Mercola and you'll find his real expertise.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 12:26PM
Read carefully... The findings reported by Dr. Mercola are from an interview with Martin Pall, PhD.....
Has nothing to do with Dr. Mercola's source of revenue.


[electromagnetichealth.org]

Also, to clarify the legitimacy of concerns about EMF radiation damage, refer to the ongoing work published by
George Carlos, PhD, JD since he's been writing about the coverup of these risks for a long time.

[cellphones.procon.org]


The focus of my original post was the revelation about the production of intracellular calcium and the connection or potential to cause arrhythmias. It could certainly help explain the increasing prevalence of arrhythmias and PACs, etc. since the science is there.

Jackie



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2017 01:19PM by Jackie.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 12:47PM
Liz - I can understand your frustration.

Apparently for some individuals who are said to be "electrically sensitive," smart meters can cause headaches, ringing in the ears and insomnia after the smart meter is installed. Perhaps the noises you are noticing are being produced in your ear... similar to ringing, yet different sound. I don't know...only a speculation. It's unfortunate that you weren't given the option prior to installation so you could opt out.

Hopefully, you can get it resolved quickly without undue expense and stress.

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 01:40PM
The guy from pest control heard it as well, twice, he said he would be available to say so as well. He did tell me that these meters can and have caused fires.

Liz
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 01:52PM
Carey and Gagheld:

Mercola is right on this one, there is a lot of stuff on the net about these meters.

Liz
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 02:51PM
Quote
Elizabeth
Mercola is right on this one, there is a lot of stuff on the net about these meters.

And a broken clock is right twice a day.

If you want to convince me of something, you have to start with sources I will even read and Mercola isn't one of them. I'm serious. He's a proven fraud so I won't bother reading a word he publishes. I know a lot of people who will say the same thing, including most of the entire medical science community. If he's the only source you can find to support a claim, then the claim is probably wrong.

I know a little about the EMF issue and I'm willing to hear more and be swayed, but so far there's nothing here that I find compelling.

Not trying to be argumentative or a nit picker. This goes to basic scientific credibility.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2017 08:01PM by Carey.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 04:09PM
Carey:

For your reading pleasure:

[emfsafetynetwork.org/smart-meters/smart-meter-health-complaints]

[www.emfsafetynetwork.org/smart-meters/]

Liz



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2017 04:31PM by Elizabeth.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 08:15PM
Quote
Elizabeth
For your reading pleasure:
Liz

All these articles are posted on activist web sites that don't even pretend to be objective. They're mostly anecdotal, they almost all contain factual errors, and they like to say their information is backed by peer reviewed studies but they provide no citations for those alleged studies. Why not?

Does anyone have anything from a reputable, objective source? When I see stuff like this on a web site's banner, I'm not going to consider it a reliable source. They have a social justice agenda, not a science agenda.

Quote

We envision a world free of EMF pollution where children, communities, and nature thrive! Our mission is to educate and empower people by providing science and solutions to reduce EMFs to improve lives, achieve public policy change, and obtain environmental justice.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 25, 2017 10:10PM
Too many people are having problems, for me, this noise that has been waking me is driving me crazy. I am going to have an analog meter exchanged for this "smart" meter. I have to pay for the exhange and pay a fee every month but it will be well worth it to stop the noise. This noise started a few months after the "smart meter" was put on my house, I have lived in this house for 35 years without such a problem. You can believe what you want and i will do the same.

Liz
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 26, 2017 10:44AM
I don't doubt you when you say it's making noise. All I can suggest about that is complaining to the electric company. There's no reason a meter should make any noise (the one that's been on my house for years doesn't).

What I'm skeptical of are the health issues attributed to EMF. That's not a new issue and the consensus of the evidence is that the extremely low-power signals from wifi, cell phones, etc. are not harmful. What people forget about EMF is that our bodies are bombarded by much higher power electromagnetic signals 24/7 and have been since the day we were born (conceived, actually). Aside from the obvious sources like radio, TV and radar, there are interstellar sources so this isn't even new historically. It's been happening since mankind evolved from slimy creatures in the mud. And all these sources are far more powerful than the signals from phones and wifi routers. So if EMF is harmful, it's been harming us since antiquity and there's nothing we can do about it other than live in lead-lined homes with no TV, radio, phones, or internet.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 26, 2017 12:23PM
Quote
Carey
So if EMF is harmful, it's been harming us since antiquity and there's nothing we can do about it other than live in lead-lined homes with no TV, radio, phones, or internet.

While I admittedly can't add much scientifically or even anecdotally to this topic, I can suggest to anyone that loves a high quality drama to watch Better Call Saul. A primary character lives with what he believes to be a hypersensitivity to EMF, and it essentially destroys his life. It's a fascinating character study about what someone believes to be true, even when proven otherwise.

I literally worked next to a television transmitter, for many years. Between the massive amounts of electricity and RF, I don't believe I was ever harmed. With a brother that has had a PM/Defib for 20 years (several by now) and a mother with an arrhythmia, I know the origin of my heart's electrical abnormalities. Yet I believe that if someone buys into an external cause, with enough conviction, it can become real enough to have a negative impact.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 26, 2017 06:12PM
People… please. For a rational moment of scientific reasoning, consider the facts presented by Dr. Martin Pall and this very relevant observation:

Pall has discovered no less than 26 papers showing that EMFs work by activating voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs), which are located in the outer membrane of your cells. Once activated, they allow a tremendous influx of calcium into the cell — about 1 million calcium ions per second per VGCC.

Think about what that means in terms of Afib… an overload of intracellular calcium… (blocking the function of magnesium!!!)

Following is one of Pall’s studies…. Read through with the focus for afibbers regarding the influx of calcium into cells…and consider the escalating prevalence of atrial fibrillation compared to 20 years ago with far less EMF exposure. Now, many more younger people are being affected when it was typically older people. Why? Might it be the EMF exposure to which everyone is inundated? Schools provide iPads, cell phones on 24/7, autos contribute to the load - as just the obvious. What about the hidden sources?

It doesn’t matter if you have a genetic history or tendency for AF…. because we know from the field of Epigenetics that given the right tools and information, each individual has the potential to over-ride the genetic factor if the commitment is there to pursue.... and all the more reason to become factually educated.


Rev Environ Health. 2015;30(2):99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action.

Pall ML.

Abstract
This review considers a paradigm shift on microwave electromagnetic field (EMF) action from only thermal effects to action via voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) activation. Microwave/lower frequency EMFs were shown in two dozen studies to act via VGCC activation because all effects studied were blocked by calcium channel blockers. This mode of action was further supported by hundreds of studies showing microwave changes in calcium fluxes and intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i signaling. The biophysical properties of VGCCs/similar channels make them particularly sensitive to low intensity, non-thermal EMF exposures. Non-thermal studies have shown that in most cases pulsed fields are more active than are non-pulsed fields and that exposures within certain intensity windows have much large biological effects than do either lower or higher intensity exposures; these are both consistent with a VGCC role but inconsistent with only a heating/thermal role. Downstream effects of VGCC activation include calcium signaling, elevated nitric oxide (NO), NO signaling, peroxynitrite, free radical formation, and oxidative stress.

Downstream effects explain repeatedly reported biological responses to non-thermal exposures: oxidative stress; single and double strand breaks in cellular DNA; cancer; male and female infertility; lowered melatonin/sleep disruption; cardiac changes including tachycardia, arrhythmia, and sudden cardiac death; diverse neuropsychiatric effects including depression; and therapeutic effects. Non-VGCC non-thermal mechanisms may occur, but none have been shown to have effects in mammals. Biologically relevant safety standards can be developed through studies of cell lines/cell cultures with high levels of different VGCCs, measuring their responses to different EMF exposures.

The 2014 Canadian Report by a panel of experts only recognizes thermal effects regarding safety standards for non-ionizing radiation exposures. Its position is therefore contradicted by each of the observations above.

The Report is assessed here in several ways including through Karl Popper's assessment of strength of evidence. Popper argues that the strongest type of evidence is evidence that falsifies a theory; second strongest is a test of "risky prediction"; the weakest confirms a prediction that the theory could be correct but in no way rules out alternative theories. All of the evidence supporting the Report's conclusion that only thermal effects need be considered are of the weakest type, confirming prediction but not ruling out alternatives.

In contrast, there are thousands of studies apparently falsifying their position. The Report argues that there are no biophysically viable mechanisms for non-thermal effects (shown to be false, see above). It claims that there are many "inconsistencies" in the literature causing them to throw out large numbers of studies; however, the one area where it apparently documents this claim, that of genotoxicity, shows no inconsistencies; rather it shows that various cell types, fields and end points produce different responses, as should be expected.

The Report claims that cataract formation is produced by thermal effects but ignores studies falsifying this claim and also studies showing [Ca2+]i and VGCC roles.

It is time for a paradigm shift away from only thermal effects toward VGCC activation and consequent downstream effects.

PMID:25879308
DOI: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

And…..

Consider the story of Integrative Cardiologist, Stephen Sinatra’s son who nearly died as a result of
Electro-Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) from the exposure he received while working in a Wall Street office. When Steph
finally recovered, Dr. Sinatra teamed up with Magda Havas, PhD, well known for her work in educating about the health risks of Electrosensitivity. Both have written extensively to share the science behind the risks.

On wireless radiation, Dr. Sinatra says: "We are bioelectrical beings by nature, and our hearts and nervous systems are especially vulnerable to electrical disturbances. Wireless radiation, with its non-harmonious jagged waveforms, can disturb our natural biorhythms. From a cardiac perspective, wireless radiation may affect the rate and rhythm of our heartbeats, which can cause arrhythmias or heart palpitations; some complex or malignant arrhythmias can lead to sudden death."

Previous post on the Electropollution/Toxic Frequencies topic:
[www.afibbers.org]

And this one for background and findings by those who understand the science
[heartmdinstitute.com]


Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 26, 2017 08:22PM
Quote
Jackie
People… please. For a rational moment of scientific reasoning, consider the facts presented by Dr. Martin Pall and this very relevant observation:
Jackie

I certainly wasn’t trying to make light of this and I apologize if it was taken that way.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 26, 2017 09:51PM
Jackie, you cited yourself? Really?

I'm still waiting for evidence from an objective, peer reviewed source. Why is that hard to find if what you say is true?

I'm also waiting for an explanation of why high-energy EMF that we've all been exposed to since before birth is harmless, but low-energy EMF from cell phones and wifi is deadly. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 26, 2017 10:32PM
Carey:

You said that you had 6 ablations--- that is a lot didn't you do your scientific homework?

Liz
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 27, 2017 12:15AM
Quote
Elizabeth
You said that you had 6 ablations--- that is a lot didn't you do your scientific homework?

Yes, I failed spectacularly when it came to the most important homework I ever needed to do. I did a lot -- a hell of a lot more than you can probably imagine, but I ended up being wrong until the very end when I think I finally got it right.

I hope you find health without going through the failures first, and I'll do what I can to help you achieve that. If my posts seem like they're not intended to help you and everyone else here, then I apologize for communicating poorly.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 27, 2017 02:17AM
I notice that I feel alot calmer, out in Country, or when I am in a big building that has much Concrete, especially, if I am down in the Basement area. I think it has something to do with too much stuff impacting the Senses or Brain. This is very noticable to me, I am sure of it.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 27, 2017 02:48PM
Carey - Please explain your statement that I cited myself. I am quoting studies by others and previous posts quoting others with the corresponding links provided. Sorry I've confused you. The facts are there. The studies published.
The other topic not discussed here is the thermal risks and dangers from these EMF emitting devices. That's a whole other concern.

For this forum, the alert is the risk of the overload of calcium entering the cells.

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 27, 2017 03:40PM
Quote
Jackie
Carey - Please explain your statement that I cited myself. I am quoting studies by others and previous posts quoting others with the corresponding links provided. Sorry I've confused you. The facts are there. The studies published.
The other topic not discussed here is the thermal risks and dangers from these EMF emitting devices. That's a whole other concern.

For this forum, the alert is the risk of the overload of calcium entering the cells.

You cited this post in your post above, which seemed like you're citing yourself. [www.afibbers.org]

The facts are where? Where are these studies you keep alluding to? I've asked for evidence of harm by EMF from a reputable, peer reviewed source. Why is that hard to find? The reason it's hard to find is because it doesn't exist. And it's not because the question hasn't been studied. It has, and no evidence of harm has been found.

I've also asked why low-power EMF is harmful while the high-power EMF we've been exposed to our entire lives is not, which makes absolutely no sense from an electrical or biological perspective. No answer on that either.

Calcium entering cells is an interesting observation, but does that translate into afib? There's no evidence that it does, so using it as evidence that EMF causes, triggers, or worsens afib is unjustified.

I have no idea what you mean by thermal risks. If you're close enough to an energy source powerful enough to induce temperature changes in your body, I recommend that you keep a safe distance from high-energy transmitters like TV transmitters, microwave repeaters, radar antennas and the like. (By safe distance I mean feet, not miles.)
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 28, 2017 09:20AM
Carey - that link to the Electropollution post that I authored does contain reference links to the experts talking about the risks of EMFs. You have to read the post and open each of the links for the details.

The focus of this current thread is to emphasizes the connection to arrhythmia via the influx of calcium since we know that intracellular calcium domination in heart cells does exactly that... thanks to Dr. Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University who is " a published and widely cited scientist on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields and speaks internationally on this topic."

Now, the Dr. Pall reference leads to many more study links about these risks... the letter to the California legislation by Ball outlines those.

Pall states:
EMFs act by activating channels in the membrane that surrounds each of our cells, called voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs). The EMFs put forces on the voltage sensor that controls the VGCCs of about 7.2 million times greater than the forces on other charged groups in our cells [4,6,7]. This is why weak EMFs have such large biological effects on the cells of our bodies! EMFs works this way not only on human and diverse animal cells [1-7] but also in plant cells [7] so that this is a universal or near universal mechanism of action.

Thousands of published studies show biological and health effects from electromagnetic fields. We now know the mechanism that can explain these effects. The mechanism is a function of the electromagnetics of each cell — not solely about heating effects from the radiation (on which present FCC guidelines are based).

(Then from his links, there are the referenced studies you'll see once you get into the research.)

You may want to read the books by Robert O. Becker, MD for some background ....
Robert Otto Becker, MD (1923 – 2008) – 5 decades of electromedical research by a man far, far ahead of his time.
The father of electromedicine and electrochemically induced cellular regeneration; a pioneer of silver plated nylon bandage in chronic wound care and regeneration of tissue. His entire bibliography with links to PubMed is offered for your education and not intended as promotional material for EarthPulse™.
[earthpulse.net]

The Body Electric - by Robert O. Becker, MD [www.emfresearch.com]
Cross Currents The Perils of Electropollution. The Promise of Electromedicine Robert O. Becker, M.D. Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc., 1990
and...
Cell Phones - Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age by George Carlo, PhD, JD.

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 28, 2017 10:25AM
Quotes and books to read, but still no published research. Why do I need to purchase and read entire books?

All I'm asking for is some peer reviewed research from a credible source that I don't have to buy somebody's book to read and isn't found on a web site dedicated to pushing an agenda.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 28, 2017 06:22PM
Carey - If I had the time, I'd go to all the references provided and then copy/paste the published studies references that are on point, but I don't at the moment. Sorry.

The take-home message for other readers who have an abundance of exposure to electromagnetic radiation exposure
... ie, man made emitted from cell phones, smart meters, WiFi and other wireless technology.... and also have Atrial Fibrillation or a lot of ectopics... past or present, it makes sense to be aware of the findings about the influx of calcium into cells as a potential cause or contributor to arrhythmia.

As I've said for a long time now, I consider Afib to be our "Canary in the Coal Mine" alerting us to something that is amiss in our body... something out of balance. The challenge is, obviously, determining what that influence is.

Thus, my enthusiasm for sharing this info on the VGCCs as a significant connection because the biochemistry/physics makes perfect sense.

Be well,
Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 28, 2017 09:30PM
Quote
Jackie
Carey - If I had the time, I'd go to all the references provided and then copy/paste the published studies references that are on point, but I don't at the moment. Sorry.

I saw no references anywhere except books and stuff published on agenda sites. Can you please give me a single example of a peer reviewed study published in a credible journal? Just one?

Quote

Thus, my enthusiasm for sharing this info on the VGCCs as a significant connection because the biochemistry/physics makes perfect sense.

Medicine has a long, glorious history of utterly incorrect theories that made perfect sense. Just because an increase in calcium ion influx has been observed doesn't mean it has clinical significance, and I've seen zero evidence that it does.

I'm all in favor of informing people about the things that can make their afib worse, but there's enough for afibbers to worry about without adding unproven theories that lack evidence to support them. People new to afib in particular tend to grasp at anything to explain and deal with their afib, which makes them ripe targets for scammers, so I think it's important to stick to sound science. We should be denouncing frauds like Mercola instead of promoting them. The only time I see that guy's name on an afib forum should be when someone is telling newbies to avoid him.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 28, 2017 11:15PM
Carey:

What do you think caused you to have AF? I do know what caused my first AF episode, I take synthroid (thyroid med) an increase in the med caused the episode, it seems that the heart remembers and over the years I started getting more of them.

I have had AF episodes off and on for 20 years, i sometimes can go 2 or 3 months without an episode then it happens. Right now I haven't had an episode for 2 months, I believe it is due to my diet in the summer months, I eat a lot of fresh fruits and vegetables which I raise. A lot of people take potassium as a supplement, it is not the same as getting potassium from fresh fruits and veggies. When I get an episode of AF, it doesn't last very long, I attribute that to what George N.. said on this site, he said to chew your med (I take Propafenone) when you feel an episode of AF coming on, I have been doing that and it has helped to greatly shorten the episode.

I don't know about calcium getting into our cells can cause AF, or Electronic Devices causing AF--my mother had AF, she lived on a farm (long, long time ago) they did not have any electricity, she never had a cell phone or any of the electronic devices which we have today, so what caused her AF?

Liz
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 29, 2017 04:23AM
Quote
Carey

You said that you had 6 ablations--- that is a lot didn't you do your scientific homework?


Yes, I failed spectacularly when it came to the most important homework I ever needed to do. I did a lot -- a hell of a lot more than you can probably imagine, but I ended up being wrong until the very end when I think I finally got it right.

I hope you find health without going through the failures first, and I'll do what I can to help you achieve that. If my posts seem like they're not intended to help you and everyone else here, then I apologize for communicating poorly.

Carey: I would be interested in the 6 Ablation story, if you haven't posted before on it. It has been a frequent topic here, of trying to get Ablations done successfully, and avoid the scenario of multiple unsuccessful ones. I am thinking that major unresolved underlying issues contribute to this. Also specifically, if you have had any reduction in Atrial contractibility as a result of all of these Ablations.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 29, 2017 10:29AM
Quote
Elizabeth
What do you think caused you to have AF?

The same thing that causes most people to have AF: genetics.

My mother had AF the last 20+ years of her life, and my older sister has been in longstanding persistent afib for about 25 years now. I take after both of them more than I do my father, who did not have afib. Another older sister who takes after him also does not have afib.

I don't know that with certainty, of course, but I think afib is a genetic disposition we're born with and ultimately the cure will be found in gene therapy.

There are exceptions, of course. Valve disease, heart surgery, hyperthyroidism, ischemia, and sleep apnea appear to be causes for some people, but those don't apply for most.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 29, 2017 10:50AM
Quote
The Anti-Fib
Carey: I would be interested in the 6 Ablation story, if you haven't posted before on it. It has been a frequent topic here, of trying to get Ablations done successfully, and avoid the scenario of multiple unsuccessful ones. I am thinking that major unresolved underlying issues contribute to this. Also specifically, if you have had any reduction in Atrial contractibility as a result of all of these Ablations.

You know, that's a really good question and I think the answer is something a lot of people here need to hear, so I'm going to answer your question later today when I have more time and make it a separate thread. Look for it tonight.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login