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 
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 30, 2017 11:02AM
Carey – here’s two:
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. [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Chem Neuroanat. 2016 Sep;75(Pt cool smiley:43-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression.
[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]


Also, from the Electropollution post dated May 2011… these associated citings for related studies to EMF damage other than cardiac implications:

Brain Cancer: Two analyses of 25 original publications identified a 50-90% increase in risk for two types of brain tumors: glioma and acoustic neuroma (Hardell 2009, Kundi 2009).

Salivary Gland Tumors: An Israeli study found an increased risk of 50-60% for salivary gland tumors among people with the highest cell phone use (Sadetzki 2008).

Behavioral Problems: A study of 13,159 Danish children showed an 80% elevated risk for emotional and hyperactivity problems among young children who used cell phones and whose mothers also used cell phones during pregnancy (Divan 2008).

Migraines and Vertigo: A study of 420,095 Danish adults showed that long-term cell phone users were 10-20% more likely to be hospitalized for migraines and vertigo than people who took up cell phones more recently (Schuz 2009).

And one link from the referenced resource for Dr. Sinatra’s Heart MD Institute from almost 10 years ago so undoubtedly much more now.
[link.springer.com]

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
September 30, 2017 06:27PM
I haven't read these yet, and I will, but in the meantime thank you for posting actual science. :-)
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 03, 2017 08:58PM
People can make up their own minds about Mercola... I have been on this site for a long time and it has benefited me so that am well educated about my condition and therefore I am happy to read and discuss all of the information that might be relevant to AF. I'm pretty sure I;m not going to fall for some quacks supposed truths, I read read read and keep what is relevant to myself and might benefit me or others.He has published some good articles.

Can anyone recommend a good multi vitamin I can take along with the essential three, B12, D and D3, Complex B, and Theanine. Is there anything I shouldn't take? Have just been switched from Sotalol and Eliquis to Flecainide and Verapamil and Eliquis. I'm worried about the Flecainide as I stopped taking it when I read about the possible problem associated with it (I have mild CAD as well ad PD)however my Dr say it's safe ???? as I haven't had a heart attack (YET)

I am still talking to my EP re ablation as I'm getting episode four to five times a month now and some of them are real doozies. He's getting frustrated because I cant make up my mind. Any thoughts on Ablation and Vagal AG, as I'm pretty sure mine is associated with my digestion and my vagal nerve. 95% events are night time after a meal, the others from over doing exercise or just don't know. Stress probably.

Grateful for any input
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 04, 2017 10:25AM
Quote
JoyWin
I'm pretty sure I;m not going to fall for some quacks supposed truths,

Not everyone is as savvy as you. People who are totally new to afib read this forum and have no idea who Mercola is. If links to his site are posted here, they're going to follow them without knowing the author is a known fraud. There's nothing on his site that can't be found on reputable sites, so linking to him is just leading newbies to a scammer and legitimizing him. So expect that whenever I see links to sources like him posted here, I'm going to speak out.

Finding references to him here also damages the credibility of this site. When I find links to fraudulent sources like Mercola on a web site, the credibility of that site immediately drops in my mind because it means the site owners tolerate and perpetuate fake science. Don't underestimate how much credibility damage someone like him does to a web site, and the more someone knows about the subject, the more it will turn them off. Pretty much any EP who comes across that name is going to roll his eyes and walk away, probably never to return again.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 04, 2017 11:30AM
Carey - You're offering mis-information.

Mercola is just the messenger. He didn't do the science but rather referenced the study on his website... thus the source link.

The science comes from Martin L. Pall, Martin Pall (PhD), researcher and Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University.

At least Mercola was smart enough to recognize the huge impact this revelation offers for the adverse health effects of
Electropollution and share it with his readers as an awareness alert.

Learn more here with this translation of one of his recent papers on the topic:

Electrosmog: The New Environmental Health Toxin? A lecture by Martin Pall, PhD
[www.electrosmogprevention.org]

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 04, 2017 07:24PM
Quote
Jackie
Carey - You're offering mis-information.

Mercola is just the messenger. He didn't do the science but rather referenced the study on his website... thus the source link.

I most certainly am not. I'm not referring to what you quoted here. I'm referring to Mercola himself. He's a known fraud and has been for many years. Here's a sample: [www.quackwatch.org]

Do you see why I and pretty much the entire medical community consider a reference to him or his web site to have zero credibility? I won't even follow a link to this site because how can I possibly trust anything I find there? Do yourself a favor and when you find something you think has value on his site, go find it somewhere else before citing it. Citing Mercola will harm your own credibility because you're citing a proven liar and fraud.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 06, 2017 09:27AM
Carey - I understand you are hung up on the Mercola website listing. That doesn't negate the facts that Mercola quoted from Dr. Pall's published research.

Regardless... be aware that quoting Quackwatch is risky as the author, Stephen Barrett was 'busted' a number of years ago for providing bogus information and other issues....so quoting that website has no credibility. A post was offered here some years ago on Barrett's dubious background and intentions.

The focus for my post here is the science by Dr. Pall that I quoted initially... since an overload of calcium inside heart cells is something afibbers definitely need to avoid.

Jackie
Joe
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 07, 2017 05:24PM
I consider the argument put forward rather than the person.

E.g. i received dodgy advise from the cardiologist(s). Two years ago he told me that cardioversion wouldn't work with me. Well the first one only worked for one hour. The second one he reluctantly agreed to has held so far.
His sole advise was to take the poison (his words) he prescribed and have enough sleep as well as a good diet.

After that i took advise from an integrative medico and followed her advise which was very much specific as far as diet etc. was likely to be helpful or harmful.

Still, i don't think the cardiologist who also trained in the US, is well regarded locally and practiced for many years (Melbourne, Australia) is a fraud. He is doing his standard of care thing.....

Bottom line is that they really don't know how to truly fix AF. Seems to me that ablation and/or drugs are just another treatment of a symptom.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 10, 2017 08:10PM
Jackie, I used Quackwatch because it provides a lot of documentation, but point taken that I committed the same sin you did of citing facts from a dubious source. I'll agree not to use dubious sources if you will.

But I promise you that anytime I see Mercola's name cited as a source of anything, I'm going to call it out. I think he's probably the worst scammer in the afib arena, and there's a lot of competition for that title.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 11, 2017 10:06AM
Carey - You continue to kill the messenger.... in this case, Mercola. I had not seen Dr. Pall's research announcement published anywhere else as "news" about the liberation of excess calcium resulting from EMFs... and was impressed that Mercola realized it was the research important..... I will refrain from quoting Mercola.

The fact remains that this excess influx of calcium (and especially those who are marginal or depleted of IC Mg) will react adversely to the excitatory property of calcium overload and is hugely important for afibbers awareness.

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 11, 2017 10:40AM
Quote
Jackie
Carey - You continue to kill the messenger.... in this case, Mercola. I had not seen Dr. Pall's research announcement published anywhere else as "news" about the liberation of excess calcium resulting from EMFs... and was impressed that Mercola realized it was the research important..... I will refrain from quoting Mercola.

He's a messenger that needs killing. Where is Pall's research published? If Mercola is the only place you can find it, that's not a good sign. In fact, that's a very bad sign. Mercola is a liar and a fraud. If he published something and that's the only place it can be found, then I don't trust the information at all. For all I know he altered it or just flat made it up. Sorry, but I simply won't take a fraud like him at his word.

Quote

The fact remains that this excess influx of calcium (and especially those who are marginal or depleted of IC Mg) will react adversely to the excitatory property of calcium overload and is hugely important for afibbers awareness.

Just because something seems like it might be clinically significant doesn't mean it is. Where is the peer reviewed published data showing that low-power EMR is harmful? I've seen this debate for years and so far nobody has demonstrated harm despite looking for it, and proponents of this theory still can't explain why low-power EMR is harmful while the much higher power EMR we're all exposed to since birth is not harmful. Sorry, but you need to show me some convincing evidence from a reputable, peer-reviewed source if you want to make the case for this. Telling people with afib that wifi and cell phones caused their afib or make it worse isn't helpful if it's not true, and so far you have no evidence that it is true.

To summarize, I don't think wifi, cell phones and other sources of low-power EMR are harmful or have any effect on afib, but I'm open to seeing credible evidence to the contrary.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 11, 2017 01:45PM
Carey in my response to you on Sept 20, I gave you two links for Pall's study publications.... which apparently you didn't bother to note or read. Yet, you are continuing with this non-productive argument.

If you understand the basic biochemical/biophysical consequences of what that Ca influx means to membranes and tissues - specifically heart cells, then it is most obvious that can mean trouble. Certainly, you know by now the problem with intracellular magnesium deficiency and a calcium overload in heart tissue.

You have to be able to study with an open mind, the pros and cons in arguments of the differences between natural electromagetics and what man-made electropollution can mean in terms of biological interruptions and disturbances.
You have to be able to understand and then connect the dots.

Go to some of the links mentioned in the original report on Electropollution and read the data from those who are sharing their knowledge to help spare the unsuspecting public of the risks of electromagnetic radiation.

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 11, 2017 10:23PM
Quote
Jackie
Carey in my response to you on Sept 20, I gave you two links for Pall's study publications.... which apparently you didn't bother to note or read. Yet, you are continuing with this non-productive argument.

Pardon me for forgetting something you posted weeks ago. While I agree the argument is non-productive, I don't agree why.

Quote

If you understand the basic biochemical/biophysical consequences of what that Ca influx means to membranes and tissues - specifically heart cells, then it is most obvious that can mean trouble. Certainly, you know by now the problem with intracellular magnesium deficiency and a calcium overload in heart tissue.

Can mean trouble and does mean trouble are two very different things in medicine. The papers you cited are reviews, largely speculative, and rely heavily on old studies. The fact that no one is citing those papers speaks volumes (1 citation). His papers push an agenda, they conflate multiple issues like cancer and depression, and those are huge red flags. It likely explains why no one is citing him.

Show me peer reviewed studies showing the clinical significance of EMR on cardiac function and we won't be having a non-productive debate. My problem is you're telling people this stuff is harmful if you have afib, and there is no actual evidence to support that claim. People with afib don't need to be told their afib is caused by cell phones and bluetooth. That is not helpful because we both know it won't make one bit of difference if they stop using them.

Quote

You have to be able to study with an open mind, the pros and cons in arguments of the differences between natural electromagetics and what man-made electropollution can mean in terms of biological interruptions and disturbances.
You have to be able to understand and then connect the dots.

You know, I try to avoid lecturing you in a condescending tone. I would appreciate the same.

You have consistently ignored the point I've made repeatedly that we are bombarded 24/7 by both "natural" and man-made EMR. There is no actual difference. There are two measures of EMR: power and frequency, and both man-made and "natural" sources overlap heavily in both. Electromagnetic radiation is electromagnetic radiation. There's no difference between a 2.4 GHz radio signal from your wifi router and a 2.4 GHz signal from outer space, but if you insist on believing there is a difference then let's count how many sources of man-made EMR all of us are exposed to 24/7 from the day we're conceived:

Radio transmissions - Typically thousands of different frequencies at any given moment, both terrestrial and satellite.
TV transmissions - Typically a dozen or more in the suburbs, more in big cities.
Radio and TV receivers - However many you have nearby.
Radar - Dozens at least (weather, air traffic control, airplanes, military).
Cell towers - A handful within range in a city, maybe 1 or 2 in the countryside.
Cell phones - Hard to even estimate. In a small town or suburb probably thousands, easily millions in a big city.
Bluetooth - Anything with bluetooth within about 50 feet of you.
Wifi - Any wifi devices within a few hundred feet.
Misc - Microwave ovens, motion sensors... the list is long.

So where is the explosion of afib in the last 100 years from all those sources of man-made EMR? And that explosion should have multiplied exponentially in the last 50 years. See, that's the evidence no one seems to be able to find. Is there a concern with brain cancer, depression and so forth? Perhaps, but this is an afib forum, not a cancer or psychiatry forum. Please stick to sound science unless you make it very clear what you're posting is speculative, otherwise you're likely to have another unproductive argument with me.
Joe
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 11, 2017 11:01PM
Newton's inverse square law applies.
I have no idea if perhaps certain frequencies resonate with something in our make up or not. It is probably a good idea to apply the precautionary principle with some of the electronic equipment, i. e. don't hold a cell phone to your ear for extended periods. It certainly can be shown that there is a warming effect and perhaps worse?
Devra Davis has done some searching on this subject (went to one of her lectures at Melbourne Uni)

While it is true that we can't escape EMRs i think it's a good idea not to sit on the microwave (which we don't have) winking smiley



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/11/2017 11:02PM by Joe.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 12, 2017 12:18AM
Quote
Joe
Newton's inverse square law applies.
I have no idea if perhaps certain frequencies resonate with something in our make up or not. It is probably a good idea to apply the precautionary principle with some of the electronic equipment, i. e. don't hold a cell phone to your ear for extended periods. It certainly can be shown that there is a warming effect and perhaps worse?
Devra Davis has done some searching on this subject (went to one of her lectures at Melbourne Uni)

While it is true that we can't escape EMRs i think it's a good idea not to sit on the microwave (which we don't have) winking smiley

I completely agree with this. Common sense I won't argue with.
Joe
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 12, 2017 07:04AM
Found this an interesting observation:
Heart Rate Variability and Atrial Fibrillation Hans R. Larsen MSc ChE
Quote

The link between exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMF) and HRV is still controversial.
Some studies have found a link while others have not. Researchers at the Midwest Research
Institute in Kansas City have found that changes in HRV may occur when exposure to
electromagnetic fields is combined with stress[23]. Does this mean that your HRV could change
if you sit in front of your computer screen while under stress? I used to get very anxious after
using my regular desktop computer for a couple of hours. Several years ago I replaced the
monitor with a LCD monitor, and since then, I have experienced no problems at all. The LCD
monitor emits no radiation and it does not flicker either. I highly recommend it.

Well, the whole article is interesting. Especially the breathing techniques. I mentioned that to the team of doctors who saw me when i was in hospital (about 2 years ago). A young doctor piped up saying that there is a relationship but he was shut down by a senior doctor who said that breathing techniques have nothing to do with afib.
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 12, 2017 03:16PM
Yes, Joe. Unless the physician has done extra certification training in functional, integrative, restorative type medicine, chances are those suggestions...and especially from a patient... are (unfortunately) dismissed. However, there's a huge number of physicians now who have gone beyond the traditional medical training and are helping many who had given up hope for many ailments often rooted in nutritional deficiencies and imbalances so routine, traditional testing misses the diagnoses.

You're correct, though, the HRV report is relevant and breathing techniques can help. In my early AF years, I took classes in the Buteyko Eucapnic breathing technique which was helpful in reducing my stress load from work and to relax at bedtime as well as when I would start an AF event as well. It's helpful to have that or the EFT or Tapping technique to rely on immediately to help reduce the anxiety and all.

I'll be adding to this post on the excess IC calcium consequences soon.

Jackie
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 15, 2017 12:30PM
Joe -

Following are some links to studies and reports that you may find interesting if you’d like to pursue this topic as it relates to potentials for arrhythmia and other consequences of Electropollution:


[scientists4wiredtech.com]
- more details on Dr. Martin Pall’s research findings on biological changes and health effects from EMFs…
Specifically #3 which states

“ Cardiac effects influencing the electrical control of the heart, including changes in ECGs, producing arrhythmias, changes that can be life threatening. “

See also:

Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 14914.
Published online 2015 Oct 12. doi: 10.1038/srep14914
PMCID: PMC4601073
Polarization: A Key Difference between Man-made and Natural Electromagnetic Fields, in regard to Biological Activity
Dimitris J. Panagopoulos,a,1,2,3 Olle Johansson,4 and George L. Carlo5

For a helpful explanation of the affect on the body.

In the present study, we analyze the role of polarization in the biological activity of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)/Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR). All types of man-made EMFs/EMR in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR - are polarized. Polarized EMFs/EMR can have increased biological activity, due to:

1) Ability to produce constructive interference effects and amplify their intensities at many locations.

2) Ability to force all charged/polar molecules and especially free ions within and around all living cells to
oscillate on parallel planes and in phase with the applied polarized field. Such ionic forced -oscillations exert additive electrostatic forces on the sensors of cell membrane electro-sensitive ion channels, resulting in their irregular gating and consequent disruption of the cell’s electrochemical balance. These features render man-made EMFs/EMR more bioactive than natural non - ionizing EMFs/EMR.

This explains the increasing number of biological effects discovered during the past few decades to be induced by man-made EMFs, in contrast to natural EMFs in the terrestrial environment which have always been present throughout evolution, although human exposure to the latter ones is normally of significantly higher intensities/energy and longer durations.

Thus, polarization seems to be a trigger that significantly increases the probability for the
initiation of biological/health effects


Also:
List of 142 Reviews on Non-thermal Effects of Microwave/Intermediate Frequency EMFs
By Martin L. Pall

“Among the scientific Reviews documenting these various non-thermal health effects
are 142 that follow. Each of these reviews cites at least a dozen primary literature
citations showing non-thermal effects, with many citing 100 or more going up to the
3rd reference which cites over 1000 such citations. It can be seen from this that the
primary literature citations supporting the existence of various non-thermal health
effects cited in these reviews go into several thousands.

This list is not and is not intended to be a list of all important such reviews.
However, it gives some measure of the size of the literature that contradicts
the industry contention that there are no non-thermal effects of microwave frequency EMFs.”


Source: [ehtrust.org]

Jackie
Joe
Re: Electronic Devices increase intracellular calcium and more
October 15, 2017 08:23PM
Thank you Jackie!
I listened to Dr Pall's talk. He is right, a lot of it goes over my head but there is enough to show the non thermal effects of EMFs, and in particular the pulsing ones.
Interesting him mentioning that magnesium helps to mitigate EMF exposure effects - if i understood him correctly.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login