electromagnetic pollution is a controversial subject
and the following links document events and groups
who are concerned. 'electrosensitivity' or electrical
sensitivity (or electromagnetic) does not seem to be
recognized at all in the .US, officially. though in
Europe/EU and northern Europe (Sweden, especially i
think) lead in the study of electromagnetic fields
and their influence upon people. today's concerns
surrounding cellular phone radiation is related to
earlier and ongoing concerns with the high-voltage
electrical powerlines that feed the global grids.
interesting is to invest in an EMF meter so as to
achieve a visualization of the fields outside of
their 'traditional' physical boundaries. they leak
radiation, if televisions, microwave ovens, power
cords, even if not turned 'on.' though some devices
when turned off, really flood the area with waves,
such as microwaves, and it is not a great idea to
be standing in front of the thing while it cooks.
other devices have very large fields if comparing
not to legal thresholds but for measuring them by
using a meter and seeing strength as a function of
space, distance, and volume that of these fields.
a room can be overlapped by various emissions from
various devices, if densely packed enough. computer
boxes and monitors are especially of concern, as a
lot of the fields are upon the hands, and also with
women, they can be sitting infront of a monitor or
besides a CPU which overlaps areas of that epidemic
of breast cancer. there are no studies which state
that there is a definitive connection to any of it.
there's a lot more money to be made by ignoring it.
the common sense is this: industries and concerned
groups apparently agree on one thing about threshold
levels of EMFs, where they endanger human health:
long-term exposure above a certain threshold. it is
a different number for the .EU and the .US and likely
other countries too. though at this level there is a
lot more lost to probable impacts upon insurance and
other health-ailments that could be avoided, as pre-
cautionary behavior, so as to not exacerbate known
problems. sleeping on an electrical cord is probably
not a good idea, though nothing is stopping anyone
from doing this, getting sick as a result of some
'other reason' and trying to live long and prosper.
it is just not a good idea. it is preventable to be
interacting with known toxic environments, and the
role of design could be to limit these interactions
by, for example, using traditional architectural
detailing such as molding to carry electrical wire
and conduit out of the way and through a more safe
interior infrastructure, in terms of EM fields and
visual coherence which lacks from Edison's progeny
of plugs, lights, sockets, and cords, cords, cords.
in my mind there are two areas- one for the experts
who will battle it out until definitive proof can
be politically accommodated for given controversial
and sensitive issues and subsequent very expensive
changes involving the industries making huge profits
and who have special interest in keeping things as
they are. adding together electronics waste, toxic
pollution, and EMFs as a health concern, it may be
a high-stakes gamble and outcome that arrives at
the way this will all shake-out in terms of what
actually is going on -- EMFs, it would seem, are
largely an artificial phenomenon, besides space
particles zipping through us, and light and other
rays, we invented the technologies which fills up
the space with this noise-- yet it is assumed to
be non-toxic by default because we do not know
enough about it to really know, or are not willing
to accept that what may be good may also be evil,
(or used for less than good purposes, on purpose).
the second area would be for common sense, knowing
enough about EMFs to grok that bathing in them is
probably not a good idea for the vast majority of
humanity, and to design accordingly to not only
protect, but dilineate better ways of existing in
the current and future environments, while also
accommodating the current trends of living in a
time where the number of unknowns are greater than
knowns in the cultural equation, yet with what is
known that there are many things that can be done
to change patterns and behaviors and increase the
likelihood of fostering the beneficial aspects of
electromagnetism without unconscious support and
extension of the worst aspects (such as, flooding
a domestic space in wireless technology, just
because on can avoid wires, when this may be a
problem on many other levels (like living in a
radio broadcasting booth, and adding to already
toxic neighborhoods). it would be interesting to
see a map of a suburban block if seeing only the
electromagnetic fields in a dwelling. there would
be fields coming from the front-yard underground
electrical conduit, all lighting, all e-devices,
some spaces would be saturated, others largely be
barren (garage). there is so much potential for
the talents of architects and imaginations that
could change the reality of this situation, yet
none are called to greater purposes by those who
are, or were, supposedly leading the profession.
without electromagnetic knowledge, architecture
is largely outside of the present foundation of
culture and its reality. if only it were harmless.
it is as fundamental as water, moreso to how the
present uniquely exists, and it does not exist in
minds of architects as anything more than a dream.
it is a dream design assignment, there is a whole
environment awaiting to be reconsidered, seen, a
new realm to inhabit, reveal in forms, relations,
how to do that, ways of designing it, inventing
it, the electromagnetic context awaits architects.
related links
1) google: "cellular task force" in medicino calif.
2) google: bioelectromagnetism list
3) google: Italy, Vatican, electromagnetic pollution/smog
4) google: "Sutro Tower" +"new antenna" +controversy
On Monday, January 31, 2005, at 10:17 PM, Michael Kaplan wrote:
Does anyone know of the specific dangers of living in proximity
of such antennas?