Swimming in Electromagnetic Soup

Imagine waking up in a fog, a low buzz of fatigue clinging to your every move. Your head feels off-balance, your thoughts a little slower, your sleep never quite deep enough. You assume it’s stress or diet or just getting older. But what if it’s something else entirely? Something invisible, all around you, 24/7? What if it's because of electromagnetic soup?

We live submerged in what neuroscientist Dr. Michael Persinger described as an "electromagnetic soup": a dense and unrelenting field of manmade electromagnetic radiation that overlaps our nervous systems in ways we are only beginning to understand, and mainstream commentators/Big Pharma appear intent to play down, or even worse, ignore completely. 

“For the first time in our evolutionary history, we have generated an entire secondary, virtual, densely complex environment—an electromagnetic soup—that essentially overlaps the human nervous system.” Michael A Persinger

From Wi-Fi and Bluetooth to 4G, 5G, and smart appliances, our bodies are exposed to layered signals like never before in human history.

This saturation has been called the “digital smog” of our era, ever-present and ever-expanding. Yet, despite the exponential rise in exposure, robust public health studies regarding the multi layered effects remain scarce, fragmented, and often ignored.

Shouldn’t we be asking tougher questions?

A Brief History: From Natural to Artificial 

For millennia, humans evolved under the gentle rhythms of the Earth’s natural electromagnetic fields: solar cycles, lightning strikes, and geomagnetic pulses. These frequencies interact subtly with our biological systems, regulating circadian rhythms, brain waves, and cellular activity.

The industrial revolution changed everything. In the 1880s, with the invention of electric lighting and telegraphy, humanity began to emit its own EMF signals. The pace accelerated in the 20th century with radio, radar, television, and eventually mobile phones and wireless internet.

Today, even a modest home is host to a spectrum of manmade EMF sources: smart meters, routers, mobile towers, Bluetooth headsets, baby monitors, and more. The layering effect, technologies stacked upon technologies, is both complex and unprecedented.

This is not about fear of progress. It’s about acknowledging that the human body, shaped by millions of years of electromagnetic stillness, is now being asked to adapt in mere decades.

Is There a Health Risk? What the Science Says (and Doesn’t)

Many regulatory agencies—including the WHO and ICNIRP—maintain that EMF levels from consumer electronics are within safety thresholds. Yet a growing body of research challenges this assumption.

In 2011, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency EMFs as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2B), citing epidemiological studies linking heavy mobile phone use to glioma, a type of brain cancer.

Since then, notable studies include:

• The National Toxicology Program (NTP) in the US, which found “clear evidence” of heart tumours in rats exposed to high RFR levels.

• The Ramazzini Institute in Italy, which reported similar findings using lower, real-world exposure levels.

Other emerging symptoms include:

• Vertigo and dizziness

• Brain fog and memory issues

• Sleep disturbances

• Tinnitus

• Arrhythmias and heart palpitations

• Chronic fatigue and low-grade malaise

One of the most polarising topics is EMF hypersensitivity (EHS)—a condition where individuals report severe symptoms in EMF-heavy environments. Though not officially recognised by most medical bodies, some double-blind studies have observed objective physiological changes in EHS participants, including alterations in heart rate variability, skin conductance, and brainwave patterns.

So why is the science still inconclusive?

The Research Gap: Why Isn’t Science Keeping Up?

Long-term, high-quality EMF studies are difficult. Exposure is constant, multifactorial, and hard to isolate. The variables—frequency, intensity, duration, distance, and biological individuality—are immense.

Moreover, research funding is often biased toward technology development rather than risk assessment. Industry influence looms large, and peer-reviewed studies critical of EMFs frequently struggle to gain traction or replication.

Another issue is regulatory capture: many national guidelines are based on ICNIRP thresholds, which focus only on thermal effects (heating of tissue) and largely ignore non-thermal biological effects—despite mounting evidence that these may be more relevant.

In many countries, even municipalities are legally prohibited from contesting mobile tower installations on health grounds. The result is scientific stagnation, with precaution traded for convenience.

So again, we must ask: should the burden be on the public to prove harm, or on industry to prove safety?

What Are Precautionary Countries Doing?

Some nations have adopted more responsible, precautionary EMF policies:

• France: Bans Wi-Fi in nurseries, restricts use in primary schools, and requires SAR values to be displayed on mobile phones.

• Switzerland: Maintains some of the most stringent EMF exposure limits globally.

• Italy and Belgium: Enforce lower thresholds than ICNIRP recommendations and have mandated public education campaigns.

• Cyprus: Launched awareness drives targeting EMF use in children, with advisories against wireless baby monitors and tablets.

These countries aren’t declaring EMFs dangerous. They’re declaring uncertainty worth respecting.

Vertigo and the Vestibular Link: An Emerging Signal?

Vertigo, the sensation of spinning or imbalance, arises from disruptions in the inner ear, brainstem, or balance-processing systems. It’s common in people with vestibular disorders, neurological issues, or viral infections.

But anecdotal reports of vertigo are rising among those working in high-EMF environments: call centres, telecommunications, medical imaging, and densely wired buildings.

Early studies suggest a possible vestibular link. For instance:

• A 2014 Japanese study observed neural activity changes in the vestibular cortex during low-frequency magnetic field exposure.

• Swedish animal research indicated disorientation behaviours in rats exposed to rotating magnetic fields.

• Case reports have described transient dizziness, ear pressure, and loss of balance during proximity to mobile towers or smart meters.

While causality is unproven, these signals merit deeper investigation—particularly in light of the growing EMF burden.

How AV Edge Supports the Precautionary Approach

AV Edge was founded on a simple but decisive philosophy: that performance and wellness must evolve in harmony with the modern environment.

Our wearable EF Technology, featuring wristbands, horse and dog patches, and cell phone/device filters, aims to support balance, focus, and calm in the face of overstimulation.

We don’t block EMFs, nor do we claim to. What we do is potentially help the body respond better: restoring equilibrium, improving proprioception, and reducing common symptoms associated with EMF-heavy lifestyles.

Our customers often report:

• Reduced dizziness and nausea

• Improved sleep

• Decreased anxiety

• Better postural stability

As we grow, we are actively pursuing ways to gather formal case data and partner with researchers to explore these effects in structured trials.

So, What Can You Do?

Whether or not you feel symptoms, it’s wise to reduce unnecessary EMF exposure. Here are simple, low-cost steps you can take:

• Turn off Wi-Fi at night or use a mechanical timer

• Use ethernet for computers instead of wireless

• Keep phones on airplane mode when carrying in pockets or near the body

• Avoid Bluetooth earbuds for extended listening sessions

• Position your router away from bedrooms or common rest areas

• Use speakerphone or wired headphones for calls

• Choose EMF filters or shielding fabrics for high-exposure areas

• Get outside—natural environments are known to calm the nervous system and reduce electro-stress

It’s not about fear, it’s about being aware, measured, and adaptive.

Conclusion: The Case for Personal Responsibility

I am not suggesting that technology is evil. I am suggesting that we’ve stepped into a new electromagnetic landscape without a map.

The science is not settled, and that alone should be enough to drive inquiry. Yet the pace of technological deployment often outstrips the pace of ethical science.

Allow Dr Persinger's words to resonate for a second; a secondary environment that overlaps our own nervous system... Shouldn’t we pause and examine what that means? Should we not be demanding better research, more transparency, and technology that evolves with our biology, not at its expense.

Because if we wait until the science "catches up", it might be too late to act.

About the Author: Nathan Carter

Nathan Carter is a Level 5 Sports Performance Coach, Level 3 Personal Trainer, Level 3 British Weightlifting Coach, and Master Flexibility Coach (student), with further professional qualifications in clinical massage and sports massage therapy. With over two decades of experience in the health, fitness, and wellness space, Nathan has founded and led multiple successful training facilities and wellness companies.

He currently operates his weekly RestoreX pain clinic at Aspire 2.0, combining cutting-edge recovery modalities such as Far Infrared (FIR) therapy, Cryotherapy, Body Tempering, Dynamic Compression, and targeted massage. His clinic supports clients ranging from those suffering with chronic aches to athletes recovering from high-demand training or injury.

Nathan’s holistic, science-backed approach blends biomechanics, strength training, and soft tissue therapy to help individuals restore movement, reduce pain, and improve performance naturally.

As a co-founder of AV Edge, Nathan brings his deep practical expertise to the exploration of wearable, frequency-based technologies that support circulation, balance, and sleep — empowering people of all ages to feel better and move with confidence.

References

1. IARC Classification (2011)

   • Statement: RF-EMFs (radiofrequency electromagnetic fields) are classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).

   • Source: IARC Monograph press release, May 31, 2011. 

2. NTP (National Toxicology Program) Study (2018)

   • Statement: Clear evidence of heart tumors (malignant schwannomas), and some evidence of brain tumors (gliomas) in male rats after high-level RFR exposure.

   • Source: NTP overview and fact sheet. 

3. Ramazzini Institute Study

   • Statement: Lifetime exposure of rats to 1.8 GHz GSM from mobile base stations linked to increased incidence of heart schwannomas and brain tumors.

   • Source: Falcioni et al. (2018) and Ramazzini Institute overview. 

4. Vestibular Cortex & ELF Magnetic Field Impacts

   • Statement: Low-frequency magnetic fields can affect vestibular (balance) brain activity—suggesting a possible mechanism for vertigo-like symptoms.

   • Source: Bouisset et al. (2022) review. 

5. Electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and Autonomic Responses

   • Statement: EHS individuals exhibit measurable changes in heart rate variability and skin conductance under exposure, per double-blind assessments.

   • Source: Andrianome et al. (2017), J Appl Physiol.

6. ELF Magnetic Fields & Neural Effects

   • Statement: Extremely low-frequency magnetic fields influence neuronal and cognitive functions in both animal and human studies.

   • Source: SCENIHR report; Frontiers in Neuroscience review; consensus panel review.

7. Behavioral Distraction by Weak ELF Magnetic Fields

   • Statement: Even Earth-strength ELF fields (0.06 mT) can distract animal behavior, indicating subtle nervous system interference.

   • Source: Ziegenbalg et al. (2025). 

8. ICNIRP Critical Evaluation of Carcinogenic Studies

   • Statement: ICNIRP reviewed and critiqued the NTP and Ramazzini studies to assess carcinogenic claims.

   • Source: ICNIRP commentary (2020).