Your thoughts, Ladies?

Your thoughts, Ladies?

Mini
Mini

January 4th, 2005, 8:20 pm #1

Eternal Life? This thing has been in magazines and on tv shows, and apparently can restore your youth. If the breast development process was interrupted during puberty, or if the breasts lost their shape after preganancy, they would be restored?

http://www.alexchiu.com/affiliates/clic ... id=castuse

I'm sceptical. Your thoughts?
Reply
Share

Mini
Mini

January 4th, 2005, 8:32 pm #2

I know of the Di Vinci code, where they have found historical events in Bible, but a mathematical God? That it is written that immortals will walk on earth? I've never heard anything like it.

Did anyone see actually catch one of these tv shows? I think it was on an Rosanne Show?

Reply
Share

Cindiee
Cindiee

January 5th, 2005, 12:28 pm #3

Eternal Life? This thing has been in magazines and on tv shows, and apparently can restore your youth. If the breast development process was interrupted during puberty, or if the breasts lost their shape after preganancy, they would be restored?

http://www.alexchiu.com/affiliates/clic ... id=castuse

I'm sceptical. Your thoughts?
Not sure how much they cost, never gotten into the details, but as it goes, I do also have some desert land to sell anyone outthere which will be beach front lots in the year 2099. Just send me $100 reservation fees.
Cindiee
Reply
Share

John Bayko
John Bayko

January 7th, 2005, 1:47 am #4

Eternal Life? This thing has been in magazines and on tv shows, and apparently can restore your youth. If the breast development process was interrupted during puberty, or if the breasts lost their shape after preganancy, they would be restored?

http://www.alexchiu.com/affiliates/clic ... id=castuse

I'm sceptical. Your thoughts?
Magnets have been advocaged by various groups or entepreneurs for centuries. Any controlled studies have shown no measurable effect in general, except for certain specific types of electromagnetism - some suggestions that power lines affect attitude or behaviour, a few suggestions that radio waves from cell phones may cause tumours (certain types of relatively beneign ones are the most likely - others have been suggested, but no conclusive evidence has been found yet).

The main difference is that those are oscillating electromagnetic waves, which have a measurable effect on certain types of molecules, the same way that microwaves heat water. Static magnetic fields may exert a force on a magnetically reactive substance, but only a static force. It would be similar to a change in gravity - more specifically, on a person's fingers or toes. Having certain molecules weigh either more or less in one's fingers doesn't strike me as having any sort of meaningful effect.

Then there's the issue of what sort of effect a magnetic could have on living tissue. In brief, there are no magnetically reactive molecules in the human body. Although it's well known that haemoglobin contains iron, iron is normally magnetic only because there are "gaps" in its electron structure, the end result being that many electrons are single (each acts as a tiny magnet, and can be aligned to make the whole material magnetic), where in non-magnetic materials all electrons are paired up (the paired electrons cancel each others magnetic fields). However, the bonds which hold molecules consist of one atom filling electron gaps in the other one, which means that when iron is bonded to haemoglobin, all the gaps are filled, electrons are no longer single, and it is no longer magnetic.

This is pretty much why scientists dismiss all claims of "magnetic healing" - static magnetics do nothing interesting, and don't affect human tissue anyway.

I seem to recall that birds have some deposits of raw iron in parts of their brains - this is how they can use the Earth's magnetic field to navigate. So one of these things might have an effect on a bird, but not a particularly good one, as they might end up flying in circles, or perhaps groundward instead of South.
Reply
Share

BigAl
BigAl

January 7th, 2005, 10:23 am #5

"Then there's the issue of what sort of effect a magnetic could have on living tissue. In brief, there are no magnetically reactive molecules in the human body".

Well, controversial research in the early 1980's claimed that humans gave clusters of iron(iii)oxide crystals called magnetite inside the nose - and that a magnet placed on the forehead can disorientate them. As far as I know, this is still unproven. (Reported bt Dr Victoria Braithwaite of Edinburgh University at Edinburgh International Science Festival, April, 1998).


I.M.O It is possible that this could account for the ability of some humans to have a 6th sense; as fish, birds and some mammals use an internal magnetic compass to migrate.

NASA have found that astronauts returning to Earth were often sick and debilitated. Research found that they were suffering withdrawal from Earth's magnetosphere - which allows the blood to circulate properly and be thoroughly oxygenated. NASA now place static magnets inside the spacesuit, to stimulate what is known as the 'Hall Effect'.

Apparently a device the size of a British £2 coin (licensed by the U.K.'s Medical Devices Agency) clips onto the users underwear to sit over the uterus. This eases period pains caused by Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (POCS) It is the strong contractions of the uterus as it expels the lining of the womb that causes the cramping that many women experience during their periods. Nobody knows how the magnets work, but a placebo-controlled trial conducted by Britain's MDA showed that 66% of users took 'significantly less medication' when wearing a magnet on the first day of their period; and as much as 90% when worn one day before the start of the periosd.

Researchers at Univ of Iowa Medical School have shown how magnetic rods can be used to treat prostate tumours in men.

Also being used used to reduce severity of ffits in severe epilepsy (reduices fits by 20%-50%)

Doctors in Texas have been testing magnets for treatment of 'Poist Polio Syndrome' In a placebo-controlled trial 70%-80% of users reported 'significant relief'.

The Hale Clinic, London are using magnets to treat insomnia, low energy, chronic fatigue.
Also Queen Cleopatra is said to have worn a magnet on her head to keep her beautiful and young.

Reply
Share

John Bayko
John Bayko

January 9th, 2005, 2:19 am #6

" "Then there's the issue of what sort of effect a magnetic could have on living tissue. In brief, there are no magnetically reactive molecules in the human body".

Well, controversial research in the early 1980's claimed that humans gave clusters of iron(iii)oxide crystals called magnetite inside the nose - and that a magnet placed on the forehead can disorientate them. As far as I know, this is still unproven. (Reported bt Dr Victoria Braithwaite of Edinburgh University at Edinburgh International Science Festival, April, 1998).

I.M.O It is possible that this could account for the ability of some humans to have a 6th sense; as fish, birds and some mammals use an internal magnetic compass to migrate."

Well, to be a little less brief, yes, you'll find a variety of dissolved or deposited substances in the body in very small amounts. Which is fortunate, because in larger amounts, most of them will kill you. These range from elements like mercury to compounds like arsenic.

As I said, it's not unheard of for some animals to have some magnetic substances to make them sensitive to magnetic fields. It has not been demonstrated reliably for humans, however.

"NASA have found that astronauts returning to Earth were often sick and debilitated. Research found that they were suffering withdrawal from Earth's magnetosphere - which allows the blood to circulate properly and be thoroughly oxygenated. NASA now place static magnets inside the spacesuit, to stimulate what is known as the 'Hall Effect'."

I love how quack science so often cites "NASA" as some validating authority for whatever they're selling. Even the entertaining "Weekly World News" regularly gives them credit for amazing wacky discoveries. They can do this because few people ever bother to actually check any of these claims. A web search shows this bit of information prominently on the home pace of "Magnets 4 Health" - obviously, the more people they can convince, the more money they will make. A search of NASA shows nothing of the kind.

The main argument against this is that the Earth's magnetic field extends well beyond near Earth orbit - the only astronauts who have ever been outside it were those who went to the moon. No "magnetic withdrawl" was seen - the only concern was that once outside of the Earth's magnetic field, they would be unprotected if there were a solar storm during that time (there was one in 1972, but no missions were in progress at the time - if there were, the astronauts would have been dead before or shortly after arriving back on Earth, depending on which part of the mission it occurred at, a risk they were all aware of).

I also love how quack science also mis-uses technical jargon, or simply throws out terms, probably without even knowing what they mean, hopeing nobody else does either. The "Hall effect" states that electric currents are deflected when they move through a magnetic field. It is used in certain electronic devices which detect magnetic fields. However, except for extremely sensitive instruments (which generally need to be cooled with liquid helium, since the thermal noise of atoms completely swamps the Hall effect), you need magnetic fields hundreds or thousands of times more intense than that of Earth (say, a rubbery fridge magnetic) to be even detectable.

Not to mention that the electrical signals in the human body are far too short, far too weak, and electrically charged ions in the body move far too slowly for even the type of high intensity magnetic field used in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners to have any noticable effect. MRI fields are so intense that could rip a steel nail swallowed by a patient right through their flesh (MRI clinics are very dangerous places if you don't make sure to remove absolutely every magnetic object).

So in short, this "Hall effect" claim is also ridiculous.

I'll leave the rest of the unsubstantiated claims (mostly unmeasurable, subjective symptoms anyway), except this one:

"Researchers at Univ of Iowa Medical School have shown how magnetic rods can be used to treat prostate tumours in men."

I suspect you're confusing that with "seed therapy", in which small radioactive rods are inserted around a tumour. The radiation kills the cancer cells, and after a period, the radioactivity decays to a safe level, so the "seeds" can be left in. There are trials going on now to see if this can treat breast cancer (prostate cancer is extremely slow growing, and can be left untreated for decades in some cases without threatening a patient's life - I know someone with it).

Some opinions which I disagree with, I have patience for. For medical quackery, I have none.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

January 9th, 2005, 2:47 am #7

So if the human body has no magnetic properties- why all the concern about the health effects of low frequency EMF? - Studies that have found that people living near HV power lines and electrical equipment have more leukemia and other cancers are currently being used as reason to block the construction of new power lines, substations and radio towers.
Reply
Like
Share

John Bayko
John Bayko

January 9th, 2005, 4:33 am #8

"So if the human body has no magnetic properties- why all the concern about the health effects of low frequency EMF? - Studies that have found that people living near HV power lines and electrical equipment have more leukemia and other cancers are currently being used as reason to block the construction of new power lines, substations and radio towers."

Those are not static magnetic fields, they're oscillating.

There are two types of oscillating EM fields, ionizing and non-ionizing, which depends on the frequency. Radio waves are non-ionizing.

The effect that non-ionizing fields have is on the molecular bonds, and atoms which are electrically polar - that differs from magnetic polarity, and is unaffected by static magnets. Water is a polar molecule. The effect is from the electrical portion of an EM wave, not the magnetic part. A microwave oven produces an EM oscillation which causes water molecules to all align one way, then align the other way, in time to the oscillation - this movement causes the heat which is transferred to food.

The human body is about 70% water (some quack science claims ridiculous figures such as 90% or 98% water), which means that microwaves will heat tissue, and prolonged heat in itself can disrupt chemical reactions needed by living tissue. They can also cause atomic bonds to oscillate as well, and with enough intensity and the right frequency, those bonds can vibrate enough to break - DNA is one of the more fragile bonds, which explains how cancer may be triggered, but it's an unanswered question because the intensity needed is thought by many to be much higher than you'd get explosed to a 60Hz power line (others think it's perfectly high enough to cause problems, and even if there's a question, better to be safe about it).

Electromagnetic waves can even directly effect brain activity. A researcher in Montreal has devised a helmet which can deliver computer controlled EM waves to specific brain areas, triggering experiences ranging from out-of-body experiences to panic attacks.

Non-ionizing frequencies are everything below near ultraviolet light. Higher frequency ultraviolet light is ionizing, and is energetic enough to kick electrons off atoms and molecules (turn them into ions). This can directly break up even sturdy molecules, such as plastics or paint and dyes, after a while in direct sunlight. It will definitely break up DNA, and is the reason sun exposure causes skin cancers.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

January 9th, 2005, 4:56 am #9

You will note that I specifically specified low-frequency (in this case 60-Hz) EMF. No one can dispute the effects of high freq EMF- it's effects on the body have been known ever since the days radar was being developed and several early technicians went blind from thermal damage to their retinas. It was this heating effect that lead to the development of microwave ovens by Raytheon.

But getting back to low-freq EMF, which until recently was considered harmless to the body. It was only about ten years ago that the EPA established any exposure limits for even radio-frequency RF (100Khz-300Mhz). Before that it was thought EMF below 300-Mhz was harmless because the wavelength was too long to resonate with the body.

In any case, rather the field is static or alternating, if it has an effect on human tissue then it proves human tissue has magnetic properties.
Reply
Like
Share

Wayne
Wayne

January 9th, 2005, 5:18 am #10

"So if the human body has no magnetic properties- why all the concern about the health effects of low frequency EMF? - Studies that have found that people living near HV power lines and electrical equipment have more leukemia and other cancers are currently being used as reason to block the construction of new power lines, substations and radio towers."

Those are not static magnetic fields, they're oscillating.

There are two types of oscillating EM fields, ionizing and non-ionizing, which depends on the frequency. Radio waves are non-ionizing.

The effect that non-ionizing fields have is on the molecular bonds, and atoms which are electrically polar - that differs from magnetic polarity, and is unaffected by static magnets. Water is a polar molecule. The effect is from the electrical portion of an EM wave, not the magnetic part. A microwave oven produces an EM oscillation which causes water molecules to all align one way, then align the other way, in time to the oscillation - this movement causes the heat which is transferred to food.

The human body is about 70% water (some quack science claims ridiculous figures such as 90% or 98% water), which means that microwaves will heat tissue, and prolonged heat in itself can disrupt chemical reactions needed by living tissue. They can also cause atomic bonds to oscillate as well, and with enough intensity and the right frequency, those bonds can vibrate enough to break - DNA is one of the more fragile bonds, which explains how cancer may be triggered, but it's an unanswered question because the intensity needed is thought by many to be much higher than you'd get explosed to a 60Hz power line (others think it's perfectly high enough to cause problems, and even if there's a question, better to be safe about it).

Electromagnetic waves can even directly effect brain activity. A researcher in Montreal has devised a helmet which can deliver computer controlled EM waves to specific brain areas, triggering experiences ranging from out-of-body experiences to panic attacks.

Non-ionizing frequencies are everything below near ultraviolet light. Higher frequency ultraviolet light is ionizing, and is energetic enough to kick electrons off atoms and molecules (turn them into ions). This can directly break up even sturdy molecules, such as plastics or paint and dyes, after a while in direct sunlight. It will definitely break up DNA, and is the reason sun exposure causes skin cancers.
There is another mechanism that can cause trouble at lower energies, but I have never seen it mentioned, and I have long wondered why no one is talking about it. You mentioned vibrating molecular bonds, and the possiblity of breaking such bonds. However, just vibrating a bond can have an effect. Many of these bonds vibrate naturally, and the higher the temperature, the greater the amplitude of the vibration. There are some chemical reactions that are impossible if the bonds are not vibrating, but are possible, because of changes to the molecular geometry, during vibration. More vibration from electomagnetic fields means some reactions that wouldn't normally occur at body temperature can now occur. I presume that this is the cause of the effects that some researchers have seen and others have not.

I would expect this to be hard to reproduce if you didn't understand the mechanism, because when you don't know what is going on you often make major mistakes in trying to duplicate an experiment. That is, you assume that some things make a difference and others don't.

I remember the French astronomer who came to the US to show the Americans how to duplicate his results; they had failed. Then he found that he couldn't duplicate them while he was here. It turns out that his telescope had been seeing reflections of his French matches and this had been contaminating his results. When he came to America, he bought American matches, which used different chemicals. Nowhere in his description of what he had done did he mention lighting his pipe with French matches. He didn't think that had anything to do with his results. WRONG.
Reply
Share