What wiring method can be used to limit EMF in a home where people can "feel" EMF?

Status
Not open for further replies.
don_resqcapt19 said:
In the NEC, I see the grounded conductor being treated as a current carrying conductor, and the few cases in previous codes where the same conductor could be used as both the grounded and the grounding conductor are for the most part been removed from the code, with exceptions for existing installations installed under previous codes. Of course on the line side of the service equipment we do use a common conductor, but the NEC cannot change that. That change would have to be in the NESC.
Click to expand...


NESC needs the biggest change (like ditching those overally glorified MGN:happyno:), but so could the NEC if we really wanted to. Even in the NEC the neutral is more of an insulated ground than anything else.


In many countries the neutral to ground separation goes all the way back to the neutral bushing on the transformer rather than the service. The neutral is simultaneously disconnected with the phase conductors at the main incomer and even branch breakers. In France for example, all branch circuit breakers are two pole (or 4 pole for 3 phase) which break both the hot and neutral in all cases. Nearly all branch circuits require 30ma RCD protection, which do catch a boat load of wring errors. Even light bulb sockets are designed so the screw shell can not be touched while energized should polarity be reversed.
 
meternerd said:
Well....I'm so far down the thread that nobody will read this, but here's my take....An elderly lady in a rest home called about twice a week to complain about the EMF in her apartment. Said it was "melting her brain". I, as the meter/relay tech was responsible for addressing complaints about EMF from customers. Most were more of a complaint from the 60 Hz hum. I used a Milligauss meter to measure EMF levels around equipment. The highest were near microwaves and electric blankets. But...none were near the electric meter or the overhead power lines. I turned off her TV, which was humming, and she thought I was a miracle worker. I cannot say that nobody is sensitive to EMF, but I've been in the utility business for over 40 years and have worked around extremely high EMF fields in substations for a long time. Neither I, nor anybody I know, ever had any issues. Yes, you could feel the static from the high voltage lines and you could measure the fields even on a Fluke if you held it in the air, but physical effects? Not convinced. Definitely can affect electronics, though. Just turn your AM radio on when you drive under a power line. If true, wouldn't an MRI machine cause people to explode?
Click to expand...


I read it. :) I think the case with the old lady was more the high pitched squeal that comes from CRT televisions rather than EMF. Some people can hear high frequency pitches. In fact, mosquito cell phone ringers operate on just that principal. They are meant to be heard by kids and not adults. Kids are far more likely to hear high frequency because as a person ages audio range diminishes a bit. In general that holds true for everyone regardless of age.

However, keep in mind everyone is different. Not everyone gets cancer from smoking cigarette, only some do. Like most things that don't cause problems immediately they just increase the risk. Risk means it may or may not ever happen. Further, things like fatigue or trouble sleeping could be attributed to old age rather than something in the environment.


I think the issue at hand is that a lot of people are lumping a valid concept that should be investigated closer with hocus pocus insanity. Kind of like saying, well I don't think asbestos is dangerous because I once heard a person with schizophrenia talk about. Insanity and science are separate ways of thinking.

Point being is EMFs and health effects are a field still in its infancy. We may not have solid proof they are safe or dangerous, but why take the risk when something as simple as quality in workmanship solves the problem.
 
mbrooke said:
I read it. :) I think the case with the old lady was more the high pitched squeal that comes from CRT televisions rather than EMF. Some people can hear high frequency pitches. In fact, mosquito cell phone ringers operate on just that principal. They are meant to be heard by kids and not adults. Kids are far more likely to hear high frequency because as a person ages audio range diminishes a bit. In general that holds true for everyone regardless of age.

However, keep in mind everyone is different. Not everyone gets cancer from smoking cigarette, only some do. Like most things that don't cause problems immediately they just increase the risk. Risk means it may or may not ever happen. Further, things like fatigue or trouble sleeping could be attributed to old age rather than something in the environment.


I think the issue at hand is that a lot of people are lumping a valid concept that should be investigated closer with hocus pocus insanity. Kind of like saying, well I don't think asbestos is dangerous because I once heard a person with schizophrenia talk about. Insanity and science are separate ways of thinking.

Point being is EMFs and health effects are a field still in its infancy. We may not have solid proof they are safe or dangerous, but why take the risk when something as simple as quality in workmanship solves the problem.
Click to expand...

Valid points for sure, but then we have to say "How much is too much?" Pretty difficult to do studies on something like this because there is really no way to know what average EMF levels are and sensitivity levels of people are. I was in the nuclear field for years and they had radiation limits for quarterly, annual and lifetime dosages. But I really don't think they zapped people to see how many died at what dose. EMF is everywhere..Wifi, radio, high voltage, electronics, etc. It would be a shame to set expensive rules for a non-existent hazard. I'm just sayin'....;)
 
meternerd said:
Valid points for sure, but then we have to say "How much is too much?" Pretty difficult to do studies on something like this because there is really no way to know what average EMF levels are and sensitivity levels of people are. I was in the nuclear field for years and they had radiation limits for quarterly, annual and lifetime dosages. But I really don't think they zapped people to see how many died at what dose. EMF is everywhere..Wifi, radio, high voltage, electronics, etc. It would be a shame to set expensive rules for a non-existent hazard. I'm just sayin'....;)
Click to expand...

If the hazard is truly none existent, then Id agree. Adding cost to something none existent is more harm the good. But, I think you hit the nail on the head. Unless you were conduct some experiments that violate the Nuremberg codes I do not believe one can quickly reach a level and say this dose is safe while this inst for a person. We can guess, and yes recommended milligaus limits have been set, but the proof is weak. Ironically, again, all good studies such as childhood leukemia, involved children who were actually getting ill. I guess its along the lines of "the only way to prove its flammable is to take a match it"
 
meternerd said:
Valid points for sure, but then we have to say "How much is too much?" Pretty difficult to do studies on something like this because there is really no way to know what average EMF levels are and sensitivity levels of people are. I was in the nuclear field for years and they had radiation limits for quarterly, annual and lifetime dosages. But I really don't think they zapped people to see how many died at what dose. EMF is everywhere..Wifi, radio, high voltage, electronics, etc. It would be a shame to set expensive rules for a non-existent hazard. I'm just sayin'....;)
Click to expand...

If the hazard is truly none existent, then Id agree. Adding cost to something none existent is more harm then good. But, I think you hit the nail on the head. Unless you were conduct some experiments that violate the Nuremberg codes I do not believe one can quickly reach a level and say this dose is safe while this inst for a person. We can guess, and yes recommended milligaus limits have been set, but the proof is weak. Ironically, again, all good studies such as childhood leukemia, involved children who were actually getting ill. I guess its along the lines of "the only way to prove its flammable is to take a match it"
 
Dennis Alwon said:
ggunn you said "where someone thinks".... I believe there is more to this than someone thinking it is bad. Again there are studies-- do I think they were done in a scientific fashion-- I don't know but like everything in life there are studies that go both ways.
Click to expand...
OK, but my question is: Where do you draw the line?

Dennis Alwon said:
Using these same arguments one could say why do anything about global warming. Some studies say there is a phenomena called global warming and others debunk it. So should we do nothing or be proactive? Not wanting a political debate here. I made the proposal so when IF the cmp accept it you all can blast it in the public comment stage.
Click to expand...

The evidence for global climate change is far more compelling.
 
ggunn said:
OK, but my question is: Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...
I deon't know where the line is but there is some evidence out there. Just because we tend to not believe it does not mean we should ignore it.



The evidence for global climate change is far more compelling.
Click to expand...
To me it is also but to many it is adamantly denied. Whose right???
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I deon't know where the line is but there is some evidence out there. Just because we tend to not believe it does not mean we should ignore it.

To me it is also but to many it is adamantly denied. Whose right???
Click to expand...
20 years worth of peer-reviewed scientific papers show that 97.1% of them support human-caused global climate change. Deniers are often ridiculed (and rightly so)

EMFs have been studied for a longer period of time, and the vast majority of studies show no harmful effects. Why then do people put so much weight behind the tiny fraction that show possible effects. (I've yet to see a study that found proof-positive repeatable harm) "In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields." This same World Health Organization has stated that so-called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity does not exist, and is at best a mis-attribution of symptoms or the "nocebo" effect.

The two biggest and most powerful industries on earth are the petroleum and automobile producers. They can't sweep global warming under the rug, so why should I believe that the cell phone companies are part of a vast conspiracy to hide the toxic effects of electromagnetic fields and have been largely successful for several decades? It all goes back to the adage "You can't prove a negative"

Look at the whole vaccine/autism issue. The whole mess basically started due to one scientific paper that was later found to be completely fraudulent, yet the fear-mongering persists to this day...

 
Take Autism out of the picture. People who have children with Autism are looking for answers and everything has been to blame on it. Mercury, vaccines, electromagnetic field's,etc. There have not been reliable studies on this at all.

My position is this. I have had 4 or 5 customers who say they feel the effects of electromagnetic field's. Now are they all crazy- maybe but I also know that their is a wide variance in what people experience. My wife knows when there is bad weather on the way-- Is she crazy? She is right almost every time-- She is allergic to many things that most of us aren't but electromagnetic field's don't affect here as far as we know.

Simply put maybe these people do feel it so why not wire a house where this is not an issue. For me personally I find much harder to get electromagnetic field's with the use of afci however it can be done. I fixed a situation in a new home just recently where the customer said she couldn't work in the kitchen when the lights were on. I fixed it and she is cooking again... Who knows.

So maybe there is no long term affect but we don't know that for sure, but there does seem to be some anecdotal info out there that suggests some people are affected. I have heard of one person who shuts her main breaker off at night. :huh:
 
readydave8 said:
What was causing the problem? How did you fix it?
Click to expand...
This was a brand new home but the electricians worker had no experience with electromagnetic field's and they knew the woman was sensitive to it.

He had a one gang 3 way switch on one end of the kitchen that was fed and then had a 3 gang box with the other end of the 3 way switch in it. Instead of just separating the neutral fed from the one gang box to the load neutral to the light, he tied all the neutrals together in the 3 gang box. All I did was separate the neutrals for the 3 way.

There were about 3 or 4 places like that in the house. She also had 2 sp switches that were kill switches for the lights and receptacles in the master suite. When they were on there were high levels of electromagnetic field's. It was wired incorrectly in the switches so I straightened it out-- can't remember what he did but it was a similar issue where the neutral had 2 places to return to the source instead of just one.
 
EMFs have been studied for a longer period of time, and the vast majority of studies show no harmful effects. Why then do people put so much weight behind the tiny fraction that show possible effects. (I've yet to see a study that found proof-positive repeatable harm) "In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields." This same World Health Organization has stated that so-called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity does not exist, and is at best a mis-attribution of symptoms or the "nocebo" effect.
Click to expand...


Then I will ask this. Why does the US have the highest cancer rates of any country on earth?








The two biggest and most powerful industries on earth are the petroleum and automobile producers. They can't sweep global warming under the rug, so why should I believe that the cell phone companies are part of a vast conspiracy to hide the toxic effects of electromagnetic fields and have been largely successful for several decades? It all goes back to the adage "You can't prove a negative"
Click to expand...

Perhaps they don't want it swept under the rug. Why? Because you can trade in your long lasting (but inefficient) appliance, car, ect for this super efficient shiny doohickey that last only a year or two. In the end someone is still making money off of climate change. Global warming came out, so did Climate change... but have oil companies lost profit? Has climate change even been proven to be from them?
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Take Autism out of the picture. People who have children with Autism are looking for answers and everything has been to blame on it. Mercury, vaccines, electromagnetic field's,etc. There have not been reliable studies on this at all.

My position is this. I have had 4 or 5 customers who say they feel the effects of electromagnetic field's. Now are they all crazy- maybe but I also know that their is a wide variance in what people experience. My wife knows when there is bad weather on the way-- Is she crazy? She is right almost every time-- She is allergic to many things that most of us aren't but electromagnetic field's don't affect here as far as we know.

Simply put maybe these people do feel it so why not wire a house where this is not an issue. For me personally I find much harder to get electromagnetic field's with the use of afci however it can be done. I fixed a situation in a new home just recently where the customer said she couldn't work in the kitchen when the lights were on. I fixed it and she is cooking again... Who knows.

So maybe there is no long term affect but we don't know that for sure, but there does seem to be some anecdotal info out there that suggests some people are affected. I have heard of one person who shuts her main breaker off at night. :huh:
Click to expand...

Call me crazy but in my honest opinion the effects of EMF aren't those that you feel, or notice with attribute. Not saying some can not feel them (like the customers you describe can and figured out what it was) the problem, however, is that I believe the majority that are effected by EMF get tired, fatigued ect but often brush it off as stress, work or age. How many of us really know why we are tired, have insomnia, or feel foggy? Is it food, lack of sunlight, vitamin deficiency, plastic residue exposure, EMFs, amalgam fillings, not enough exercise, ect... we don't know because we cant pin point what out of a myriad of possible scenarios what could be the cause. If EMF is on of them it will be brushed off, especially when mainstream sources dub those that say otherwise paranoid of conspiracy theorists.


The rest that aren't, still can be effected in other ways. Cancer rates are through the roof in this country, but what is causing them? What if EMF do play a role in the figure? If so, I agree with you, its not something I want to bargain with, especially when the NEC has most of it already figured out. IF EMFs make not effect on cancer, great! But if they do its not ethical to leave a customer with something that I know is putting off EMF.

99.9% of EMF is reduced when circuits are wired correctly. If someone wants to further tackle the .01% twisting the wires and inserting them into EMT/GRC conduit will reduce them to practically zero. If one truly wants to rid EMF on top of all this just shut down the whole circuit when not needed. This is how on goes about mitigating EMFs, and are valid practices.


The rest seen on U tube and the internet regarding EMFs from 50/60hz power sources is IMO total disinformation. Companies wanting to sell fake products to people who may have a legitimate question but are being led down a road of insane 'magical' thinking.


Anyway, my 2 cents.
 
iwire said:
We are not the only country using electrcity.
Click to expand...

But one of the few where ground faults are common and earth current dominates.




iwire said:
Actully this thread has been about changing the NEC, so that is simply untrue.
Click to expand...


Changes that would make sure the current code is followed. Ie making sure free of defects is proven. Yes I am aware Denis mentioned eliminating the separate NM rule, but the rest when done to code is a none issue. The issue when someone walks away from a job site with code violations. So Id say, yes, the NEC panel has good reasoning for keeping ground and neutral separate, conductors kept together in most cases, no crossing of circuits, ect ect.
 
I myself have always tried to keep an open mind about things in life, just because I don't experience something I know that others maybe can, I have been blessed with a family line free from cancer, heart problems, and other health problems that plague many in the world, my mothers dad lived to 110 years smoked his whole life, her mom passed away at 103, my dads father passed away at 94 when he fell off the second floor of their farm house putting on a new roof, he also smoked his whole life, so even though I have been exposed to things in life I don't feel it's fair to compare myself with many who are subject to things that could compromise their health because of their genes they have been born with, but that is just it, I feel it has more to do with family lines and health issues in the medical history of their family lines then what we are or can be exposed to.

With that said myself I can say that I have been exposed RF radiation in the form of radio transmitters to the level that I could feel my body starting to heat, and never felt or had any adversed effects (other than the heat to which I hit the kill switch ASAP), I have worked on transmitters as high as 25kw in the general FM broadcast band as well as some work on AM and SW bands, as well as numerous commercial radio systems and even one RF pattern sealer that used 50kw @ 27.145 (RC ch 15A in the 11 meters band) that heat formed and sealed fiber to car door panels that we made at a company called Fiber Bond in the late 70's, but because of my family medical history and the lack of health problems, I know I can't say that this would not have been a problem with other people.

The problem I see is that if we start making rules sort of one size fits all that restricts everyone the same we start to remove our Constitutional rights that many may enjoy that just a few may not be able to because of medical health line history, take peanut oil, at one time all most all potato chips were cooked in peanut oil, which is what gave them the buttery flavor they used to have that made them so good, McDonald's fries were also cooked in it, when it was found that a few had allergic reactions to peanut products they were made to use alternative oils that took away this flavor that made them taste so good, to me this deprived many of us who loved our potato chips and or our fries cooked in peanut oil which we should have had the choice to have just because a few who couldn't take the time to read a warning label and not eat them if they had a health problem that would or could be dangerous to them, so instead we all had to pay the price because of just a few.

The same can be said about the smoking issue, they banded all smoking in restaurants and bars here a few years back, why not allow an establishment to choose if it wants to be smoking or not and if they want to have smoking then require them to post a sign to warn others that it is a smoking establishment and do not enter if you don't want to be around smoking, we even had a few towns band smoking anywhere outside in the down town area, I asked a counsel member which would he like to be left in a room with my running car or a lit cigarette? he immediately states "but the car will kill me" then I said but you have no problem with cars running in the downtown area do you? but you have a problem with smoking in the open air, I told him if the air can dilute the dangerous car exhaust to a point it doesn't kill us how can it not dilute the cigarette smoke to a safer level which most of it will flow up and away from others, but no they remove all our rights again just for a few.

Let me ask since there are some who need a ADA wired house would we like this to be applied to all housing?? I would hope not, I would hope we will always have a choice in how we want our house wired, in saying this I hope it never comes down that it becomes a requirement that we have to start wiring houses to totally eliminate EMF's such as special shielded cabling and other methods just because of a few who may have a problem with EMFs, besides I don't think I would like a wheel chair ramp to my front door at least until such is needed.

So keep addressing the EMF problems for those who need them and make money doing it, but lets not make it a requirement for all who don't need it.

And give me back my peanut oil cooked potato chips and McDonald fries dang it!:rant:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top