“I packed up and left everyone and everything I’d ever known. Hi, my name is Sue. Westchester County, NY was my home, when in 2010, I began to struggle with my health. By 2016, I had a dizzying array of symptoms: burning skin, headaches, extreme fatigue, tinnitus, and cardiac arrhythmia. Finally, I was diagnosed with EMR Syndrome and hired a Building Biologist to shield my house. Initially, that helped — but as my neighbor’s wireless technology grew, including powerful LEDs that penetrated my home — my symptoms became intolerable. I began to live in my car for up to 10 hours a day, even in winter. Looking back, I believe it was my innate survival instinct that made me pack up and relocate to the low-EMR Radio Quiet Zone in Green Bank, West Virginia. It was a bold and scary move... and it saved my life.”
EMR Syndrome: Real people talk about a real condition.
This website provides information and support for the millions who suffer acute health effects linked to man-made electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from cell towers, cell phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters, antennas, smart products, LED lighting, and other sources.
Bloggers, Biomarkers, and Hope
By Rob Brown, MD, FACR
Recently, a blogger wrote a series of posts correlating the radiation emanating from a power substation in Santa Clara, CA with the string of tendon injuries experienced by the San Francisco 49ers at nearby Levi's Stadium. The content garnered so much attention that mainstream media picked up on the story. Although the blog's author was quickly marginalized as a "self-proclaimed" scientist and a conspiracy theorist, what impressed me most was the traction he gained. His posts went viral on social media, with over 21 million views on X alone. My son and nephew even sent me texts about it! Concern is growing...
There was a time when EMFs — predominately extremely low frequencies of electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMF) from high-tension power lines and substations — only impacted a limited number of people. Few initially experienced symptoms from that exposure, and the majority of the population was oblivious. In retrospect, these "canaries in the coal mine" delivered a much-needed societal message: human-generated electromagnetic fields have biological effects on humans. In the last 25 years, wireless communication has increased and multiplied the population's electromagnetic radiation exposure. The obvious conclusion is that we need engineers to develop safer methods of energy distribution and distant communication. This message has been largely ignored. Instead, the "sensitive" group has been considered by some researchers to be afflicted with a psychological condition, possibly experiencing a "nocebo" effect, meaning that because these people saw something they thought would harm them, it did. Other researchers, however, studied the biochemistry and published papers describing how and why those biological effects could be due to physiological insults to the body, such as oxidative stress.
Now we find ourselves in a situation in which major population centers around the world are buzzing with high concentrations of ambient radiofrequency radiation. Studies show health repercussions may be acute and/or chronic. Symptoms, including sleeplessness, tinnitus, atrial fibrillation, memory loss, and confusion have become uncomfortably common. So much so that many now believe that these symptoms are normal. They aren't. People with what is now termed EMR Syndrome, know this because their symptoms exacerbate with exposure and lessen in a low EMF environment.
Because different diagnoses can cause similar symptoms, attributing symptoms to EMF exposure needs to be proven. We need a specific biomarker, an objective data point or diagnostic test that can document the physical impacts from EMFs. To date, most analyses have focused on the metabolites of oxidative stress. But oxidative stress can be caused by many disease processes.
Last year, I wrote a hypothesis paper describing the impact that nonionizing radiation from a cellphone can have on the blood. Blood clumping, or rouleaux formation, previously described with dark field microscopy, can now be seen with a diagnostic ultrasound machine while the blood is still flowing within the body. In studying many more subjects, we have found that rouleaux formation is more common in those suffering from EMR Syndrome. This is a promising tool providing objective data.
Public awareness that ELF-EMFs and wireless technology can be harmful is slowly building. Recently, the Department of Health and Human Services and FDA removed material on their website stating that cellphone radiation is safe. This is an important step because the FDA supplies information to the FCC, which should then use this new information to update their regulations regarding exposure limits. Hope is on the horizon.
Stay tuned!
Rob Brown, MD, FACR
VP for Scientific Research and Clinical Affairs
Environmental Health Trust
Preface to OVERPOWERED
By Martin Blank, PhD
At various gatherings, when I am inevitably asked what I do for a living, an interesting sequence often ensues. “I am working on the biological effects of cell phones, WiFi, and related devices,” I reply. That is followed by a slightly anxious, “So, are they dangerous?” After I say that there is a considerable body of evidence showing significant risk, the conversation usually ends—often with a statement such as, “Well there’s no way I am giving up my cell phone.”
These experiences have shown me that in writing this book, I face a bit of an uphill battle. While people are on edge about the health issues, they are also on edge about the possibility of having to give up the amazing technologies that have become so much a part of their lives. Allow me to put you at ease right from the start: There is no need for us to abandon the devices of the electronic age.
But there is a vast continuum of ways to address the problems—from abandonment to the unrestricted use that currently exists. One has only to look at the story of aerosols to see how safer alternatives come to light once a problem is identified. When aerosols first appeared, they were seen as miracle substances, as is often the case with many technological advances. Then in the 1970s, studies showed that the propellants in aerosols were depleting the ozone layer that is critical to life on earth. National and international organizations were called to action, and there was an expanding and effective ban on the use of the most dangerous propellants. As a result, today we still have aerosols, but the emission of ozone-depleting substances is on the decline.
Whenever arguments are raised about implementing limitations, the typical corporate-sponsored line is that “there is no solid evidence of danger.” I have written this book to show you that this is not the case. There is a large body of solid science showing that the electromagnetic radiation (EMR) that is a by- product of our high-tech world has many and varied effects on our biology. It is time we replaced the common refrain of “no solid evidence of danger” with “it’s time we acknowledge the dangers and do something about it.”
The steps necessary for change are many. Two of the most important are:
1. Establish the criteria that will make the technology safer for users and for all in the surrounding environment. Fortunately, those criteria are not difficult to put in place, and there are multiple ways in which the amount of exposure can be reduced. What is required is the recognition that the change is needed and doable.
2. Create an informed citizenry. When people are informed, they are empowered. We have seen over and over again what the population can achieve when it is mobilized to act. Corporate and government policy can change dramatically.
These goals are central to the ideas in this book. By knowing the facts, you can make informed decisions about how you use technology, and you can also become part of the process required to reduce the potential harm posed by EMR.
*Preface to Overpowered: What Science Tells Us About the Dangers of Cell Phones and Other WiFi-Age Devices by Martin Blank, PhD. Permission granted by Seven Stories Press. Copyright © 2014 by Martin Blank, PhD
Go Ugly Early
By Keith Cutter
I was a slow learner.
It took me more than three decades to correlate my growing list of symptoms—symptoms that eventually left me so disabled I could no longer function—with exposure to synthetic electromagnetic fields.
By God’s grace, I found my way out.
Now helping others understand and reduce their own exposures has become my life’s work.
While I make no medical claims, and am not a doctor nor medical provider, I help people around the world focus on two simple concepts: accurate assessment and effective remediation.
These twins were all I needed. By embracing them, I experienced an astonishing transformation.
Now, I said the concepts were simple—and they are—but the implementation deserves professional help.
Accurate assessment means correctly quantifying exposure levels to the four primary synthetic electromagnetic phenomena present within a home: AC magnetic fields, AC electric fields, intermediate fields (commonly called dirty electricity), and radio-frequency radiation.
That requires accurate measurement and analysis using equipment appropriate to the task, employing specific techniques in very specific areas within the home—especially in the places where people spend the greatest amount of time.
Effective remediation follows naturally from accurate assessment.
Once the sources are properly understood, meaningful reductions in exposure can often be achieved through practical, physics-based strategies: removing sources under your personal control, increasing distance from sources not under your control, and thoughtfully applying shielding as a last resort.
Not harmonizers.
Not magic devices.
Not an endless stream of esoteric health hacks.
Just careful investigation followed by intelligent action.
And while every person and environment are different, I have now watched this same process help many others reclaim vitality.
While I’d love to say anyone can perform assessment and remediation—and I do train individuals who wish to acquire these skills—I believe most people are best served by enlisting the help of a trusted and experienced local resource.
Someone knowledgeable and capable to come alongside you, helping you learn while guiding you through the process.
Someone willing to share difficult truths when necessary.
Because while nearly all dwellings can achieve some measure of reduced exposure, not all can realistically be brought to exposure levels appropriate for every individual—particularly those most suffering with EMR Syndrome.
In some situations, despite everyone’s best efforts, relocation may ultimately be the wiser path.
I and others have gone much further—relocating to specific areas with low population density and favorable terrain features, sometimes even designing and building special homes intended to maximize reduction of synthetic electromagnetic exposures.
For some, these steps may sound extreme.
But for those who have experienced profound deterioration—and then profound recovery—the motivation becomes much easier to understand.
Now is also the appropriate time to speak plainly about convenience.
Convenience, in many respects, is diametrically opposed to pursuing a life with reduced synthetic electromagnetic exposures.
I say this not to discourage you, but to prepare you.
Because in this modern age, the path of convenience almost always leads toward greater immersion in technologies and infrastructures that increase exposure.
Cellular service, for example, means living within a continuous sea of man-made radio-frequency radiation.
Modern electric service introduces its own set of electromagnetic phenomena into the home.
Wireless convenience layers upon wireless convenience.
And over time, extraordinary exposure levels are normalized.
Yet these exposure conditions—now considered ordinary—have never been meaningfully demonstrated to be without biological effect over long periods of human life, especially in combination and across generations.
This is why many who begin this journey eventually realize that meaningful reduction in exposure often requires trade-offs.
Different choices.
Different priorities.
Sometimes different places to live.
Sometimes a willingness to exchange a measure of convenience for a greater measure of peace, clarity, resilience, or functionality.
That realization can be difficult at first.
But for many of us, it eventually became obvious that the conveniences themselves were not free.
Reclaiming a life with lower exposures will be inconvenient—prepare yourself.
About now you may be wondering:
What levels of which exposures are right for me?
The truth is, I’m not certain anyone can answer that question for you with precision.
What I can tell you is this:
If my symptoms appear sooner, become more intense, and recovery takes longer, I know I am moving in the wrong direction.
If my symptoms take longer to appear, are less intense, and recovery becomes faster, I’m moving in the right direction.
And if those trends are not improving over time, I know changes are necessary.
Over time, I realized that for me, meaningful recovery could largely be described by two very personal metrics:
Decreasing EMR Syndrome — symptoms take longer to appear and are less intense during exposure.
Increasing resilience — recovery happens more quickly afterward.
I simply learned to pay attention.
For example, there was a time when I could not sit inside a specific restaurant for more than a few minutes before becoming ill from the combination of Wi-Fi systems and the wireless devices people carried with them. I could force myself to endure perhaps ten minutes, but I always paid dearly afterward.
Today, after years of careful reduction in exposure, I can peacefully enjoy a meal there with my wife for more than an hour in the same environment with only trivial consequence.
Likewise, recovery itself changed dramatically.
At one point in my life, significant exposures could leave me impaired for days or even more than a week, requiring isolation in an extremely low-exposure environment to recover.
Now recovery from the same exposures may take minutes, hours, or perhaps overnight—even after difficult client environments filled with multiple wireless systems and elevated field levels.
Those changes told me something important:
my EMR Syndrome symptoms were decreasing and my resilience was increasing.
That became my compass.
One last idea I’d like to share comes from my twelve years working in emergency medical services on an ambulance.
We had a phrase:
“Go ugly early.”
The idea was simple.
In potentially severe situations, it was often wiser to launch a large initial response immediately rather than wait until a situation spiraled out of control.
Listening to a report over the radio, I could make the decision to launch a helicopter, close a highway, place a trauma team on alert, or bring in additional resources—all before arriving on scene.
Why?
Because it was always easier to back off resources later than to realize too late that we had under-responded to a genuinely serious situation.
I’ve come to think similarly about EMR Syndrome.
In that context, “go ugly early” means make the large, inconvenient, materially effective reduction first—before months or years are lost to tiny adjustments that leave the person immersed in the same harmful environment.
The oft-repeated recommendations—switching from wireless to wired internet, placing phones in airplane mode, and similar measures—are not entirely without value. But in many severe cases, they consistently fall short of achieving the degree of exposure reduction truly needed to begin moving in the right direction.
Many make some reductions, few achieve levels needed for real improvement.
The greatest improvements do not come from timid half-measures.
They come from a willingness to make substantial, often both inconvenient and expensive changes.
There is much more to be said about recovery from EMR Syndrome, but what I’ve shared here is, I believe, foundational.
Where should you go for help?
Over the years—through conversations with the afflicted, scientists, EMF consultants, and physicians both locally and around the world—I’ve come to believe that long-term improvement is almost always tied to specialized knowledge and practical experience.
Little of what ultimately proved valuable to me was found through newspapers, television, or general internet searches, so be thoughtful and discerning about where you seek advice.
I continue to believe the most important first step is the same:
Accurate assessment and effective remediation of your home environment—ideally with the help of a trusted and experienced local resource.
Keith Cutter
Membership and Contact Form
Join the EMR Syndrome Alliance today. Our growing numbers will send a message of strength, advocacy and evidence. As a member, you will also be placed on our mailing list to receive selective news and updates.



























