> Hi Debbie ... please know you are not deluded, never let anyone persuade
> you of that, not even someone you trust implicitly. (Too many good people
> have fallen for the 'expert' lies about our invisble environment.)  I too
> have discovered I'm seriously affected by levels of exposure that are
> barely detectable and usually stated to be safe even for ES people like us.
>
> 5 years ago I moved to my current house in a bigger corner plot to escape
> my neighbours mobLie pollution, and have been 'electromagnetically
> reclused' from all public places for a couple of years. During this last
> year I've been increasingly under par since my neighbours whyfry invaded my
> home. Actually 'under par' is a gross understatement, I know I'm very close
> to the edge because I lost about 35% of my body weight (with no other
> apparent explanation) and my breathing is haywire unless I maintain
> conscious control of it during and after exposure, which is now all the
> time! Recently I had to take my husband to A&E to get stitched up after he
> fell from a ladder - it took me at least 2 days to bounce back after
> spending several hours in an A&E waiting room full of mobLIes.
>
> I'm just beginning to search for an isolated house to escape neighbours
> toxic spills, so have purchased a rad meter to survey any contender new
> properties with. Thing is though, (getting back to the question of actual
> levels of exposure) these past months, prior to getting the meter, I've
> been guessing which parts of my house to avoid based on symptoms/intuition
> alone - you know, hypothesising where is better, and when etc.  I pretty
> much guess/mapped out my whole house from which bedroom is safest, which
> toilet to use, right down to which chair to sit in particularly in any
> given room, and which end of the bath is best. I knew without checking
> against a meter that I'd been largely correct in my guesses cos of how much
> better I felt by avoiding the bits that I'd worked out were worst. However,
> when I started checking once the meter arrived, I was completely astounded
> by how accurately my guesswork corresponded with the detailed results of
> measuring the detectable levels. Eg. I strongly preferred one armchair over
> another just two steps away and the meter confirms my preferred chair is
> consistently receiving lower levels of exposure, but only (on average) by
> an extremely slim margin of .030 mw/m3! I know! unbelievable that my body
> could measure and let my brain know of that tiny difference ... no need to
> tell me I agree, haven't stopped saying 'please don't let this be so' it
> yet myself, and I know I can safely assume that the vast majority of
> 'scientifically' minded non-sensitive people will never believe anything
> other than I'm insane for claiming this. The bath too, surprised me, my
> favourite end only averages .200 mw/m3 less than my hated end - I just
> wouldn't have thought, when immersed in water, experiencing significant
> temperature changes and primarily preoccupied with washing, that anyone
> (much less me) could be so accurate about invisible frequencies.
>
> Anyway, for now I'm confined to one end of one room where levels are
> least, and need to get out of here fast as possible ... There's £500 thank
> you reward payable to anyone who can find me a suitable house (payable on
> completion of purchase) before I can find one myself. It's hard for me to
> even search, my computer is in the wrong room (you can't cram everything
> you need in one end of one room!) and it affects me too (even though
> there's no whyfry) Anyone interested, with time to spare, let me know and
> I'll send you my house requirements..
>
> Be light, stay bright, do right
> With best intent
> Loraine Connon
>
>
>
>
> On 5 June 2012 16:29, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> I have found the Iphones a menace !! tell me - why when I tested a HTC
>> android phone with my esmog detector with the phone transmitting did the
>> esmog
>> not register it at all ????!!
>>
>> help ?
>>
>> puk
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 05/06/2012 03:43:08 GMT Daylight Time,
>> [hidden email] writes:
>>
>> On June 4, _Debbie4God39@aol.com_ (mailto:[hidden email]) wrote:
>> > my husband just came home with a 4G phone!! he says all that's
>> > different is the bandwidth and that shouldn't make any difference
>> > with EMF's etc
>>
>> Your husband may have a fundamental misunderstanding about
>> what EMF sensitive people react to.
>>
>> The phone may indeed produce about the same amount EMFs as
>> a 2G or 3G phone, however, an EMF sensitive person may
>> be more reactive to it because of the higher bandwidth,
>> or the different frequency spectrum used, or the higher
>> processing power required to encode/decode the signal
>> and/or run the screen display.
>>
>> But every person reacts a bit differently, and I doubt
>> that all 4G phones are created equal. For example,
>> I've noticed rather obvious reactions to other people's
>> iPhones (3G), but have found "Droids" to be not
>> as bad (not a controlled test, but merely my random
>> observations being around other people with these
>> things in use)
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>  
>>
>
>