MRI and Ultrasound tests

I'm having to have some tests for back and kidney, still from
car accident.

I already know ultrasound does horrible things to me, but gotta have something to check it, and that seems the least damaging, if I don't have a stroke from it.

Just had MRI of back, the immediate effect was bad, but not as terrible as I anticipated, although the same ongoing after radiation effects as I get from xray are following at a somewhat lower level, no surprise, since they do the same thing, only rate is different.

Since this seems to come up for us a lot here, I thought I'd post a couple things I've found.

I had a disagreement with kidney Dr. (don't know if she really is, she works in urology, but who I was referred to.) who wanted an MRI or Cat done. Said I wouldn't do those due to the radiation. She argued that MRI has no radiation. I told her it did. Obviously she does not understand what radiation is, but then that's not her area either.

Also said I did not want the radioactive gadolinium. (Did not need that for back.)

Besides MRI working on the gigahertz frequencies, and doing the nasty things it does to cells, and the gadolinium also being highly oxidative and hard on the kidneys, it seems odd to me a kidney specialist, or any doctor, would want to order tests that are most destructive to the very organ that may already need help.

So here, for anyone considering MRI or ultrasound in the future:

Your next MRI could cost you your life

...U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that these drugs will now require a black box warning label--the strongest in the industry--because they can cause a rare, and sometimes fatal, condition known as nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD)....

Rather than pull the drug, the FDA is requiring stronger labeling that instructs physicians to use the drug only on patients who have healthy kidneys. It also instructs physicians to screen all patients for kidney disease prior to administering any gadolinium-containing drugs.

Back in 2006, the FDA announced that it was aware of gadolinium's dangers...  http://www.naturalnews.com/z029725_MRI_side_effects.html

No mention of any pretest for safety to me, or anyone I know of. And if it is that toxic, is really smart to use it on people with no kidney problem, knowing the harsh effects it has on them, much less the rest of the body.

And here's a bit to consider on ultrasound tests. This pertains to everyone, but especially us even more, that have the brain sensitivity too. (It also can raise bp afterwards, especially in women, and cause massive pressure in the head - I experience that after just 2 minutes of it, starting quickly after sitting up, it last for hours, and stroke is a real possibility if you have these effects, and may not happen for days afterward, but build up to it. The BBB I have read can take at least 5 days to recover from ultrasound exposure.)

Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption By Low-Frequency Ultrasound

A recent study showed a dramatic increase in cerebral hemorrhage comprising atypical locations with low-frequency ultrasound–mediated recombinant tissue plasminogen activator–thrombolysis in humans. ...

It indicates that the observed excessive bleeding rate with low-frequency sonothrombolysis comprising also atypical locations (like the intraventricular or subarachnoid space) might in fact be attributable to primary disruption of the BBB.1...
 Furthermore, ultrastructural animal studies have, among other mechanisms, proposed endothelial injury with high power, but partly opening of tight junctions already with low-power insonation.6...
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/37/6/1546

There may be times these tests are truly medically necessary, but the majority of them are not.

In fact I just read somewhere yesterday, Chicago, and then other parts of the country will be cutting back on radiation test, and the doses, and some agency will be monitoring, starting ?soon. Sorry, I don't think I saved the story.

Last, if you want a good visual picture of what these things are doing to your cells, on a smaller scale, besides altering polarity, and remembering also, we are mainly water, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zoTKXXNQIU

~ Snoshoe

My friend who does MRI's says there is no radiation. It's magnets.  Of course that is non ionizing radiation. Her husband works for the utility co.
 
What do you know about what it actually does to the body?  Loni

--- On Wed, 12/8/10, snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]>
Subject: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 10:25 PM


 



I'm having to have some tests for back and kidney, still from
car accident.

I already know ultrasound does horrible things to me, but gotta have something to check it, and that seems the least damaging, if I don't have a stroke from it.

Just had MRI of back, the immediate effect was bad, but not as terrible as I anticipated, although the same ongoing after radiation effects as I get from xray are following at a somewhat lower level, no surprise, since they do the same thing, only rate is different.

Since this seems to come up for us a lot here, I thought I'd post a couple things I've found.

I had a disagreement with kidney Dr. (don't know if she really is, she works in urology, but who I was referred to.) who wanted an MRI or Cat done. Said I wouldn't do those due to the radiation. She argued that MRI has no radiation. I told her it did. Obviously she does not understand what radiation is, but then that's not her area either.

Also said I did not want the radioactive gadolinium. (Did not need that for back.)

Besides MRI working on the gigahertz frequencies, and doing the nasty things it does to cells, and the gadolinium also being highly oxidative and hard on the kidneys, it seems odd to me a kidney specialist, or any doctor, would want to order tests that are most destructive to the very organ that may already need help.

So here, for anyone considering MRI or ultrasound in the future:

Your next MRI could cost you your life

...U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that these drugs will now require a black box warning label--the strongest in the industry--because they can cause a rare, and sometimes fatal, condition known as nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD)....

Rather than pull the drug, the FDA is requiring stronger labeling that instructs physicians to use the drug only on patients who have healthy kidneys. It also instructs physicians to screen all patients for kidney disease prior to administering any gadolinium-containing drugs.

Back in 2006, the FDA announced that it was aware of gadolinium's dangers... http://www.naturalnews.com/z029725_MRI_side_effects.html

No mention of any pretest for safety to me, or anyone I know of. And if it is that toxic, is really smart to use it on people with no kidney problem, knowing the harsh effects it has on them, much less the rest of the body.

And here's a bit to consider on ultrasound tests. This pertains to everyone, but especially us even more, that have the brain sensitivity too. (It also can raise bp afterwards, especially in women, and cause massive pressure in the head - I experience that after just 2 minutes of it, starting quickly after sitting up, it last for hours, and stroke is a real possibility if you have these effects, and may not happen for days afterward, but build up to it. The BBB I have read can take at least 5 days to recover from ultrasound exposure.)

Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption By Low-Frequency Ultrasound

A recent study showed a dramatic increase in cerebral hemorrhage comprising atypical locations with low-frequency ultrasound–mediated recombinant tissue plasminogen activator–thrombolysis in humans. ...

It indicates that the observed excessive bleeding rate with low-frequency sonothrombolysis comprising also atypical locations (like the intraventricular or subarachnoid space) might in fact be attributable to primary disruption of the BBB.1...
Furthermore, ultrastructural animal studies have, among other mechanisms, proposed endothelial injury with high power, but partly opening of tight junctions already with low-power insonation.6...
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/37/6/1546

There may be times these tests are truly medically necessary, but the majority of them are not.

In fact I just read somewhere yesterday, Chicago, and then other parts of the country will be cutting back on radiation test, and the doses, and some agency will be monitoring, starting ?soon. Sorry, I don't think I saved the story.

Last, if you want a good visual picture of what these things are doing to your cells, on a smaller scale, besides altering polarity, and remembering also, we are mainly water, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zoTKXXNQIU

~ Snoshoe









     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> My friend who does MRI's says there is no radiation. It's magnets.  

One can react badly to magnets...

Marc

Marc,

What type of reactions to magnets?

I did react to the last MRI.  I wrote about finding
others on the net who also developed various symptoms
post MRI. It is worrying that so many years since using MRIs,
no studies published about the harm they cause, or I could
not find any!!

Ky

--- On Thu, 12/9/10, Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 2:35 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      > My friend who does MRI's says there is no radiation. It's magnets.  



One can react badly to magnets...



Marc



   
     

   
   


 



 






     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Snoshoe, great info about ultrasound!!
Am copying this on my blog and elswhere.
I did feel very strange after ultrasouds, but
didn't make the connection till now.  They are not
that accurate anyway, and apparently, miss a third of cancers,
soft tissue injuries, including broken bones.  Add to that
the competence of the radiographer.

Ky

--- On Thu, 12/9/10, Loni <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Loni <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 11:45 AM







 



 


   
     
     
      My friend who does MRI's says there is no radiation. It's magnets.  Of course that is non ionizing radiation. Her husband works for the utility co.

 

What do you know about what it actually does to the body?  Loni



--- On Wed, 12/8/10, snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]> wrote:



From: snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]>

Subject: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests

To: [hidden email]

Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 10:25 PM



 



I'm having to have some tests for back and kidney, still from

car accident.



I already know ultrasound does horrible things to me, but gotta have something to check it, and that seems the least damaging, if I don't have a stroke from it.



Just had MRI of back, the immediate effect was bad, but not as terrible as I anticipated, although the same ongoing after radiation effects as I get from xray are following at a somewhat lower level, no surprise, since they do the same thing, only rate is different.



Since this seems to come up for us a lot here, I thought I'd post a couple things I've found.



I had a disagreement with kidney Dr. (don't know if she really is, she works in urology, but who I was referred to.) who wanted an MRI or Cat done. Said I wouldn't do those due to the radiation. She argued that MRI has no radiation. I told her it did. Obviously she does not understand what radiation is, but then that's not her area either.



Also said I did not want the radioactive gadolinium. (Did not need that for back.)



Besides MRI working on the gigahertz frequencies, and doing the nasty things it does to cells, and the gadolinium also being highly oxidative and hard on the kidneys, it seems odd to me a kidney specialist, or any doctor, would want to order tests that are most destructive to the very organ that may already need help.



So here, for anyone considering MRI or ultrasound in the future:



Your next MRI could cost you your life



...U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that these drugs will now require a black box warning label--the strongest in the industry--because they can cause a rare, and sometimes fatal, condition known as nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD)....



Rather than pull the drug, the FDA is requiring stronger labeling that instructs physicians to use the drug only on patients who have healthy kidneys. It also instructs physicians to screen all patients for kidney disease prior to administering any gadolinium-containing drugs.



Back in 2006, the FDA announced that it was aware of gadolinium's dangers... http://www.naturalnews.com/z029725_MRI_side_effects.html



No mention of any pretest for safety to me, or anyone I know of. And if it is that toxic, is really smart to use it on people with no kidney problem, knowing the harsh effects it has on them, much less the rest of the body.



And here's a bit to consider on ultrasound tests. This pertains to everyone, but especially us even more, that have the brain sensitivity too. (It also can raise bp afterwards, especially in women, and cause massive pressure in the head - I experience that after just 2 minutes of it, starting quickly after sitting up, it last for hours, and stroke is a real possibility if you have these effects, and may not happen for days afterward, but build up to it. The BBB I have read can take at least 5 days to recover from ultrasound exposure.)



Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption By Low-Frequency Ultrasound



A recent study showed a dramatic increase in cerebral hemorrhage comprising atypical locations with low-frequency ultrasound–mediated recombinant tissue plasminogen activator–thrombolysis in humans. ...



It indicates that the observed excessive bleeding rate with low-frequency sonothrombolysis comprising also atypical locations (like the intraventricular or subarachnoid space) might in fact be attributable to primary disruption of the BBB.1...

Furthermore, ultrastructural animal studies have, among other mechanisms, proposed endothelial injury with high power, but partly opening of tight junctions already with low-power insonation.6...

http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/37/6/1546



There may be times these tests are truly medically necessary, but the majority of them are not.



In fact I just read somewhere yesterday, Chicago, and then other parts of the country will be cutting back on radiation test, and the doses, and some agency will be monitoring, starting ?soon. Sorry, I don't think I saved the story.



Last, if you want a good visual picture of what these things are doing to your cells, on a smaller scale, besides altering polarity, and remembering also, we are mainly water, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zoTKXXNQIU



~ Snoshoe



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well I looked it up & MRI's put out a low frequency RF that is not ionizing.
 
Do you know how the magnets work?  Loni

--- On Thu, 12/9/10, Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 12:35 PM


 



> My friend who does MRI's says there is no radiation. It's magnets.  

One can react badly to magnets...

Marc








     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

The people who give administer the tests are taught there is no radiation, the majority just parrot what they are told, rather than look at the facts.

You have to really wonder, especially in the case of giving radioactive substances why they aren't grasping that. There is a brain disconnect somewhere, or a piece of information missing in their knowledge.

Not only does it have radiation, but particulate carrying it. The radiation emitted from the test is grabbing that also, so in the case of MRI's or others with substances taken, you're getting it from the inside and the outside.

Fact is they cannot function without producing emfs.
What is radiation? - A release of force, an emission of energy.)

Microwaves are ionizing, and that has been known for a long, long time.  However, getting current science to correct itself in the general populace takes far too long, especially when money is involved.

Look how long it took to change the earth to the sun as the center of the solar system. :)

No link at the moment, but I run across it now it and then, so if you do a search for a picture of a comet assay of microwaves on brain cells, there's a picture out there somewhere. It compares the effect of xrays on a cell and microwaves on a cell. They are identical!

The only difference being the rate of change, or time of exposure to produce the damage.

They could make a differentiation between high and low ionizing, but to say it isn't, is a flat out lie by the powers that know.

Also, look up the definition of ionization. Chemical reactions also produce that.

I suspect some of it could be reengineered to be more helpful than it is, by changing polarity and doses, so it at least does less damage.

Afterall, electric and magnetic fields are also used to heal bones and muscle injuries in atheletes, etc.

But, making us well is not the name of the game in the medical industry, it is bringing in money.

:) Hope that helps some.

~ Snoshoe

--- In [hidden email], Loni <loni326@...> wrote:

> What type of reactions to magnets?

I don't know what all the various reactions can be.  I do know
that I once picked up a small magnet and had an immediate and
strong adverse reaction to it (chest pains, anxiety).  I also
know that people who promote "magnetic therapy" say that having
one side of a magnet facing the body can have a beneficial
effect, while the other side can have a harmful effect.

Marc

Yes it does, thanks! I had a brain MRI & was in there for a long time. No wonder I'm so EHS now.  Loni

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]>
Subject: [eSens] Re: MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 7:13 AM


 



Hi,

The people who give administer the tests are taught there is no radiation, the majority just parrot what they are told, rather than look at the facts.

You have to really wonder, especially in the case of giving radioactive substances why they aren't grasping that. There is a brain disconnect somewhere, or a piece of information missing in their knowledge.

Not only does it have radiation, but particulate carrying it. The radiation emitted from the test is grabbing that also, so in the case of MRI's or others with substances taken, you're getting it from the inside and the outside.

Fact is they cannot function without producing emfs.
What is radiation? - A release of force, an emission of energy.)

Microwaves are ionizing, and that has been known for a long, long time. However, getting current science to correct itself in the general populace takes far too long, especially when money is involved.

Look how long it took to change the earth to the sun as the center of the solar system. :)

No link at the moment, but I run across it now it and then, so if you do a search for a picture of a comet assay of microwaves on brain cells, there's a picture out there somewhere. It compares the effect of xrays on a cell and microwaves on a cell. They are identical!

The only difference being the rate of change, or time of exposure to produce the damage.

They could make a differentiation between high and low ionizing, but to say it isn't, is a flat out lie by the powers that know.

Also, look up the definition of ionization. Chemical reactions also produce that.

I suspect some of it could be reengineered to be more helpful than it is, by changing polarity and doses, so it at least does less damage.

Afterall, electric and magnetic fields are also used to heal bones and muscle injuries in atheletes, etc.

But, making us well is not the name of the game in the medical industry, it is bringing in money.

:) Hope that helps some.

~ Snoshoe

--- In [hidden email], Loni <loni326@...> wrote:








     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I had a brain MRI after I was having es issues and got the contrast dye and felt fine afterwards.
If I had to pick between an MRI and CtScan I would pick the MRI everytime.
Steve

--- In [hidden email], Loni <loni326@...> wrote:

Hi, Snoshoe,
 
Just a thought....  might help or not:  Would finding a stone which attracts microwaves help after the ultrasound test, to pull radiation out of your body???  (You could clear and prepare this--or these--stones in advance and have them ready to use as soon as you got out of the medical facility.)  Also, homeopathy--maybe there is a remedy to help negate microwave radiation that you could have on hand?  And particular foods I would think would help, as well as particular supplements.  We ought to do some research on these to post here, as this is an oft-mentioned problem with us.  Last year when I had my hand accident and subsequent surgery, I had no choice but to take the tests and forego the consequences, but had I had all this thought and planned out, I could have had these things on hand for such an emergency.
 
Son left today and so I might have more time to check things out toward the middle of the week.  I need to get caught up with all my email, too.  (Like you don't know this, eh?  lol)  How soon do you need to have this info, Sno?
 
Wishing you the best of the best,
Diane 

--- On Thu, 12/9/10, snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: snoshoe_2 <[hidden email]>
Subject: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 12:25 AM


 



I'm having to have some tests for back and kidney, still from
car accident.

I already know ultrasound does horrible things to me, but gotta have something to check it, and that seems the least damaging, if I don't have a stroke from it.

Just had MRI of back, the immediate effect was bad, but not as terrible as I anticipated, although the same ongoing after radiation effects as I get from xray are following at a somewhat lower level, no surprise, since they do the same thing, only rate is different.

Since this seems to come up for us a lot here, I thought I'd post a couple things I've found.

I had a disagreement with kidney Dr. (don't know if she really is, she works in urology, but who I was referred to.) who wanted an MRI or Cat done. Said I wouldn't do those due to the radiation. She argued that MRI has no radiation. I told her it did. Obviously she does not understand what radiation is, but then that's not her area either.

Also said I did not want the radioactive gadolinium. (Did not need that for back.)

Besides MRI working on the gigahertz frequencies, and doing the nasty things it does to cells, and the gadolinium also being highly oxidative and hard on the kidneys, it seems odd to me a kidney specialist, or any doctor, would want to order tests that are most destructive to the very organ that may already need help.

So here, for anyone considering MRI or ultrasound in the future:

Your next MRI could cost you your life

...U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that these drugs will now require a black box warning label--the strongest in the industry--because they can cause a rare, and sometimes fatal, condition known as nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD)....

Rather than pull the drug, the FDA is requiring stronger labeling that instructs physicians to use the drug only on patients who have healthy kidneys. It also instructs physicians to screen all patients for kidney disease prior to administering any gadolinium-containing drugs.

Back in 2006, the FDA announced that it was aware of gadolinium's dangers... http://www.naturalnews.com/z029725_MRI_side_effects.html

No mention of any pretest for safety to me, or anyone I know of. And if it is that toxic, is really smart to use it on people with no kidney problem, knowing the harsh effects it has on them, much less the rest of the body.

And here's a bit to consider on ultrasound tests. This pertains to everyone, but especially us even more, that have the brain sensitivity too. (It also can raise bp afterwards, especially in women, and cause massive pressure in the head - I experience that after just 2 minutes of it, starting quickly after sitting up, it last for hours, and stroke is a real possibility if you have these effects, and may not happen for days afterward, but build up to it. The BBB I have read can take at least 5 days to recover from ultrasound exposure.)

Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption By Low-Frequency Ultrasound

A recent study showed a dramatic increase in cerebral hemorrhage comprising atypical locations with low-frequency ultrasound–mediated recombinant tissue plasminogen activator–thrombolysis in humans. ...

It indicates that the observed excessive bleeding rate with low-frequency sonothrombolysis comprising also atypical locations (like the intraventricular or subarachnoid space) might in fact be attributable to primary disruption of the BBB.1...
Furthermore, ultrastructural animal studies have, among other mechanisms, proposed endothelial injury with high power, but partly opening of tight junctions already with low-power insonation.6...
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/37/6/1546

There may be times these tests are truly medically necessary, but the majority of them are not.

In fact I just read somewhere yesterday, Chicago, and then other parts of the country will be cutting back on radiation test, and the doses, and some agency will be monitoring, starting ?soon. Sorry, I don't think I saved the story.

Last, if you want a good visual picture of what these things are doing to your cells, on a smaller scale, besides altering polarity, and remembering also, we are mainly water, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zoTKXXNQIU

~ Snoshoe









     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

They did the MRI & a full body CT scan on me. Loni

--- On Sat, 12/11/10, torch369 <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: torch369 <[hidden email]>
Subject: [eSens] Re: MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Saturday, December 11, 2010, 10:19 AM


 



I had a brain MRI after I was having es issues and got the contrast dye and felt fine afterwards.
If I had to pick between an MRI and CtScan I would pick the MRI everytime.
Steve

--- In [hidden email], Loni <loni326@...> wrote:








     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Marc and Kooky,
 
I, too, react with many symptoms to magnetic frequencies: as Marc said, chest pains and anxiety; also plummeting bp, blood sugar surge, irregular heart beat, chills and sweats...(pretty much lt affects all my ANS--autonomic nervous system--symptoms).  I don't react this badly to holding a magnet, but in high magnetic fields I do.  Here in Pa, there are places of high iron ore content, in particular.  Magnetic frequencies seem to "pool" there.  My body goes bonkers in these areas.
 
This reminds me, I think I mentioned this to Kikkie, but incase I didn't, this is one of the problems she could possibly be experiencing where she lives.  If you are unlucky enough to live in a high iron ore area and you have intolerance to magnetic frequencies, you would likely be a medical mess and have absolutely no idea why.  Spending anytime at all in these areas were life threatening to me.  [It might still be, but I avoid these areas completely, even now that I am better ES-wise.] 
 
Diane
 


--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:55 AM


 



> What type of reactions to magnets?

I don't know what all the various reactions can be. I do know
that I once picked up a small magnet and had an immediate and
strong adverse reaction to it (chest pains, anxiety). I also
know that people who promote "magnetic therapy" say that having
one side of a magnet facing the body can have a beneficial
effect, while the other side can have a harmful effect.

Marc








     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Mark and Diane

What happens if someone has a high level of ferritin?

Ky

--- On Sun, 12/12/10, Evie <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Evie <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, December 12, 2010, 1:04 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      Hi Marc and Kooky,

 

I, too, react with many symptoms to magnetic frequencies: as Marc said, chest pains and anxiety; also plummeting bp, blood sugar surge, irregular heart beat, chills and sweats...(pretty much lt affects all my ANS--autonomic nervous system--symptoms).  I don't react this badly to holding a magnet, but in high magnetic fields I do.  Here in Pa, there are places of high iron ore content, in particular.  Magnetic frequencies seem to "pool" there.  My body goes bonkers in these areas.

 

This reminds me, I think I mentioned this to Kikkie, but incase I didn't, this is one of the problems she could possibly be experiencing where she lives.  If you are unlucky enough to live in a high iron ore area and you have intolerance to magnetic frequencies, you would likely be a medical mess and have absolutely no idea why.  Spending anytime at all in these areas were life threatening to me.  [It might still be, but I avoid these areas completely, even now that I am better ES-wise.] 

 

Diane

 



--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:



From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests

To: [hidden email]

Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:55 AM



 



> What type of reactions to magnets?



I don't know what all the various reactions can be. I do know

that I once picked up a small magnet and had an immediate and

strong adverse reaction to it (chest pains, anxiety). I also

know that people who promote "magnetic therapy" say that having

one side of a magnet facing the body can have a beneficial

effect, while the other side can have a harmful effect.



Marc



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting.  The Russians use magnetized
water for some health ailments...

I tried one sip of magnetized water,
and it made me ill...

Ky

--- On Sun, 12/12/10, Loni <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Loni <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Re: MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, December 12, 2010, 12:52 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      They did the MRI & a full body CT scan on me. Loni



--- On Sat, 12/11/10, torch369 <[hidden email]> wrote:



From: torch369 <[hidden email]>

Subject: [eSens] Re: MRI and Ultrasound tests

To: [hidden email]

Date: Saturday, December 11, 2010, 10:19 AM



 



I had a brain MRI after I was having es issues and got the contrast dye and felt fine afterwards.

If I had to pick between an MRI and CtScan I would pick the MRI everytime.

Steve



--- In [hidden email], Loni <loni326@...> wrote:

>

> Yes it does, thanks! I had a brain MRI & was in there for a long time. No wonder I'm so EHS now.  Loni

>

> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, snoshoe_2 <snoshoe_2@...> wrote:

>

>

> From: snoshoe_2 <snoshoe_2@...>

> Subject: [eSens] Re: MRI and Ultrasound tests

> To: [hidden email]

> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 7:13 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Hi,

>

> The people who give administer the tests are taught there is no radiation, the majority just parrot what they are told, rather than look at the facts.

>

> You have to really wonder, especially in the case of giving radioactive substances why they aren't grasping that. There is a brain disconnect somewhere, or a piece of information missing in their knowledge.

>

> Not only does it have radiation, but particulate carrying it. The radiation emitted from the test is grabbing that also, so in the case of MRI's or others with substances taken, you're getting it from the inside and the outside.

>

> Fact is they cannot function without producing emfs.

> What is radiation? - A release of force, an emission of energy.)

>

> Microwaves are ionizing, and that has been known for a long, long time. However, getting current science to correct itself in the general populace takes far too long, especially when money is involved.

>

> Look how long it took to change the earth to the sun as the center of the solar system. :)

>

> No link at the moment, but I run across it now it and then, so if you do a search for a picture of a comet assay of microwaves on brain cells, there's a picture out there somewhere. It compares the effect of xrays on a cell and microwaves on a cell. They are identical!

>

> The only difference being the rate of change, or time of exposure to produce the damage.

>

> They could make a differentiation between high and low ionizing, but to say it isn't, is a flat out lie by the powers that know.

>

> Also, look up the definition of ionization. Chemical reactions also produce that.

>

> I suspect some of it could be reengineered to be more helpful than it is, by changing polarity and doses, so it at least does less damage.

>

> Afterall, electric and magnetic fields are also used to heal bones and muscle injuries in atheletes, etc.

>

> But, making us well is not the name of the game in the medical industry, it is bringing in money.

>

> :) Hope that helps some.

>

> ~ Snoshoe

>

> --- In [hidden email], Loni <loni326@> wrote:

> >

> > Well I looked it up & MRI's put out a low frequency RF that is not ionizing.

> >  

> > Do you know how the magnets work?  Loni

> >

> > --- On Thu, 12/9/10, Marc Martin <marc@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > From: Marc Martin <marc@>

> > Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests

> > To: [hidden email]

> > Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 12:35 PM

> >

> >

> >  

> >

> >

> >

> > > My friend who does MRI's says there is no radiation. It's magnets.  

> >

> > One can react badly to magnets...

> >

> > Marc

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Kooky,
 
Interesting question!  You think like I do.  lol  I have wondered that also, and also wondered about too little iron and whether that some how set me up for problems around high iron areas. 
 
I would suspect too much iron might attract more magnetic frequencies and make these symptoms worse.  But for me personally, I have not tolerated these high iron areas from the time I was at least a small child and I always have been very anemic till about 4 years ago.  I have reacted worse than when I was younger and more anemic in high iron areas, but I don't know that I could call this proof that it makes you more reactive; any number of things could have played into making me more reactive over the years.  I have seen no medical info on this subject, however. 
 
My 2 cents, for what it is worth,
Diane

 

--- On Sun, 12/12/10, furstc0404 <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: furstc0404 <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, December 12, 2010, 1:20 PM


 





Mark and Diane

What happens if someone has a high level of ferritin?

Ky

--- On Sun, 12/12/10, Evie <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Evie <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests
To: [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, December 12, 2010, 1:04 PM

 

Hi Marc and Kooky,

 

I, too, react with many symptoms to magnetic frequencies: as Marc said, chest pains and anxiety; also plummeting bp, blood sugar surge, irregular heart beat, chills and sweats...(pretty much lt affects all my ANS--autonomic nervous system--symptoms).  I don't react this badly to holding a magnet, but in high magnetic fields I do.  Here in Pa, there are places of high iron ore content, in particular.  Magnetic frequencies seem to "pool" there.  My body goes bonkers in these areas.

 

This reminds me, I think I mentioned this to Kikkie, but incase I didn't, this is one of the problems she could possibly be experiencing where she lives.  If you are unlucky enough to live in a high iron ore area and you have intolerance to magnetic frequencies, you would likely be a medical mess and have absolutely no idea why.  Spending anytime at all in these areas were life threatening to me.  [It might still be, but I avoid these areas completely, even now that I am better ES-wise.] 

 

Diane

 

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [eSens] MRI and Ultrasound tests

To: [hidden email]

Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:55 AM

 

> What type of reactions to magnets?

I don't know what all the various reactions can be. I do know

that I once picked up a small magnet and had an immediate and

strong adverse reaction to it (chest pains, anxiety). I also

know that people who promote "magnetic therapy" say that having

one side of a magnet facing the body can have a beneficial

effect, while the other side can have a harmful effect.

Marc

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









     

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]