Search This Blog

Saturday, August 5, 2017

Searching for a low EMF house in Israel - Mission impossible

In the last month we have been searching for a new house in Israel.
The requirements ,as far as EMF is concerned, is that the RF radiation level inside the house will be lower than 0.0007 mW/m2, and in the streed lower than 0.04 mW/m2.
The ELF levels requirements is that the levels in side the house will not be higher than 1.5mG at pick time, and that most of the time will be lower.
I am using my CORNET ED88T and the TRI FIELD 100XE for measurements.
We have seen about 20 houses so far. All of them  had RF equipment inside, so I needed to try and understand what is coming from inside and what from out side.
We liked one house the most, and I returned to it every time I was in the neighborhood to see how the contraction is going and to test the levels. The RF levels in side the house are fine but not perfect (you can't find prefect, right?). Some RF protection will be needed on the windows and joint walls. The ELF levels seemed fine at first, lower than 1 mG at worst. It is summer time here in Israel and most people and kids are at home with air condition working. This is considered high pick times. So I thought the house was cleared for ELF. But then , on the fifth time I cam to measure it, I saw the ELF levels reach 3.5mG (peak levels no RMS) on the Y Axis of the CORNET ED88T.
This was a big turn off on the house.
We were very disappointed.
But this is exactly why we EHS people must test our living environment, or soon to be living environments , before we buy/rent/move/staying in it.
In my current EHS condition, 3mG (or 3.5mG) will not kill me, but will cause me fatigue and short temper, maybe even some pain.
For example, at the time I am writing these lines, it is Saturday morning, and the levels in my current home are around 1.5mG at the living rooms and 2.5 in the bedrooms (that are closer to the electric line on the street). It is bearable , but I would like to be exposed to lower levels in my next house.
I will continue to run tests on the candidate house in order to see what are the ELF levels during different hours and different days, and in order to understand more about the exposure there, but for now, this house is going back to the end of the list (of houses that we want).
Finding a place to live for EHS is becoming harder and harder at this time or excessive wireless devices and infrastructure use. I hope we will find on little "white spot" for us to live in.

Please see the following links:
How to find a low EMF house -

Thursday, July 27, 2017

New study by Dr Hagay Levin - Sperm Quality in in western world is in decline in last 40 years

About the study :

New study by Dr Hagay Levin, review about 185 studies that were published between 1971 and  2011, shows that Sperm Quality in in western world is in decline in last 40 years.
The Study was done in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem with the Haddasa Hospital, and the Mount Sinai hospital in New York.
The results show a 52.4% decline in sperm concentration and 59.3% decline in total sperm count in men from North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand  While in South America, Asia and Africa, there was no significant decline (much less studies are available on these regions).
The researchers say that low sperm quality have been linked with exposure to chemicals used in pesticides and plastics, obesity, smoking, stress, diet, and even watching too much TV.

Since Dr Hagay Levin do not say any thing about EMF radiation exposure and low sperm quality I will bring several studies that do:

  1. Wireless laptop influence on human sperm -
  2. WIFI radiation damage reproduction organs in adults  -
  3. Drosophila oogenesis as a bio-marker responding to EMF sources. -
  4. Effect of cell phone usage on semen analysis in men attending infertility clinic: an observational study -
  5. Cancer in Korean War Navy Technicians: Mortality Survey after 40 Years -
  6. Radio frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from GSM (0.9/1.8GHz) mobile phones induces oxidative stress and reduces sperm motility in rats -
  7. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. -

Picture from -

Friday, July 21, 2017

CH10 Israeli TV - Report about EMF radiation sources at home

Yesterday (20/07/2017), at 21:00 on CH10, Israeli TV, a very long TV report was aired about EMF radiation sources and exposure.
The report was done by "Osot Heshbon" (translated close to "Making Calculation"), Linoy Bar Gefen and Sivan Klingbill. In it three professional EMF survey tester (2 of them I personally know, Liran Raz and Daniel Shvartzberg) showed the radiation levels (both RF and ELF) near home applainces and other sources.  The Reported also interview Prof' Sigal Sidesky (Head of Tnuda) and the head of Radiation and noise department at the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Prof Stelian Gelberg.

The report made very big noise in the web.
Discussions over it still continues.
I think it has brought awarness to more people.
I hope this awareness will bring some change in how people use appliances and how the public see and understand the possible risk of EMF exposure.

Link to Hebrew video -

Bellow pictures from the TV  report

Friday, July 14, 2017

Detailed Review of 2016 EHS exposure study

The following study "Effects of personalised exposure on self-rated electromagnetic hypersensitivity and sensibility – A double-blind randomised controlled trial" ( was aimed to face the criticism of older exposure studies and to once and for all test if EHS people can feel the exposure.
The study result was that overall subject could not identify the exposure in "better than chance" ratio (see section 3.2 in the full study).

About the study

  1. The study concluded of 42 subjects.
  2. The subjects were given 4 questionnaires, one as baseline, second in the home visit before the exposure, third after the exposures (after the outcomes were shown to the subjects), forth as a follow up after 2 months and the fifth as a follow up after 4 months.
  3. In these questionnaires they were asked about their symptoms, level of sensitivity, certainty of being sensible/sensitive to EMF, and certainty of reacting to EMF within minutes. 
  4. Each subject was asked which type of radiation, and at what level he will be able to detect in few minutes (problem - there was no object way to know this exposure was the best to be used). 
  5. Exposures types were:  GSM 900, GSM 1800, DECT, UMTS (2100-2170), WIFI , 50Hz sine wave ELF magnetic field + four other different types of other signals in other frequencies to simulate "Dirty Electricity".
  6. Minimum level of RF was 0.2 V/m and the maximum was 6V/m.
  7. Minimum level of ELF was 0.2 uT, and the maximum was 6.6uT.
  8. 4 subjects chose ELF, other chose different types of RF.
  9. The first exposure was an open exposure to make sure that the subject can sense the radiation. 
  10. Followed by 10 sessions of Exposure+rest time(for recovery), each cycle lasting not more than 15 minutes. all cycles took not more than 150 minutes (problem - rest time is not long enough).
  11. In each session/cycle the subject was ask to guess if there is exposure or not. As soon as he concluded the guess, the resting time began (problem - it is a subjective guessing game, no physiological measurements were done on the subjects to conclude if their body reacted to the radiation or not).  
  12. 3 to 7 out of the exposures cycles were real, other were sham exposure. 
  13. Subjects were tooled that at least one of the cycle will be real exposure. 
  14. After the testing was concluded, the results were shown to the subjects and he was given a Quaternary again. 
  15. 39 subjects out of 42 were tested at home. The other 3 in a place of there selection (problem no reference EMF measurements were done in the testing environment).
  16. In order for a subject to be titled as "sensible" he needed to identify if real exposure of sham in at least 8 out of 10 cycles. Only 2 out of subjects were able to achieve this. 
  17. The study was supported by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW)

In comparison with older studies, this one is better in the following ways:

1. The trails were done in a place that the subjects felt comfortable in, so no EMF rich lab and no exposure during traveling to this lab.
2. The exposure was aimed to be to a radiation type the subject is most reactive to (we will explain what went wrong there). 

But this does not mean it is a good study.

Following are what I see as problems in this study:

  1. No Physical measurements - None of the tests included physical measurements, the subjects were only asked if they feel or sense the radiation or not.
  2. Not enough recovery time -  The researchers estimate that a Max duration  of 15 minutes will be enough time for exposure and then to recover after the exposure. 10 double blinded exposure+rest cycles were done one after the other. Each cycle consisted of exposure+rest(recovery) time, not more than 15 minutes for each cycle . Most EHS people I know will not be able to fully recover after only 15 minutes(the max possible in this study) recovery time after exposure.
  3. Wrong estimation that EHS people can sense the radiation - The researchers estimate that the subjects, which are EHS people, had the ability to "sense" the radiation after few seconds or minutes.  This assumption is wrong as most EHS people can't sense the radiation. Most EHS feel bad when exposed, sometime after few minutes, sometimes after few hours, and the recovery time is usually longer then few minutes. 
  4. Exposure type was determinate with no real tests(by....asking) - In order to determine what was the type of radiation a subject is the most reactive to, the researchers asked the subject (!). They then exposed each subject in an open session where he could see he is being exposed. If the subject said he can sense the radiation they concluded that this is the best type of exposure for him. This was concluded without physical measurements and in an open session when the subject could see he is being exposed. 
  5. Radiation levels in the test environments were not measured - The environments in which the exposure test were done, was not tested and verified to be with no radiation other than the planed exposures. 
  6. Suspicion for unbalanced approach, expecting the subject to fail - The researchers devoted a big side of the study to see if and how the subjects' conception of their EHS condition changed after they were shown the results of the exposure tests. This is a question of a psychological nature and may suggest an an-balanced approach of the researchers (It feels like the researchers weer expecting the subjects to fail the tests, this can have influenced the design and execution of the study).

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

New Testing procedure for RF radiation in schools in Israel

The new test procedure is far than perfect, but might be a small step forward.
It is far from perfect but may be a small step forward as it advice to use MAX Value measurements, to scan the class, to measure several places where student sit, to use the WIFI system under load and to use meters that can cover the frequency higher than 5GHz.
It still uses a ICNIPR based heat only standard, using MAX Values is only a recommendation and the meters are low sampling rate meters.

Proper Disclosure

It is possible that to same extent I had some influence on the new test procedure for RF radiation in schools that was released this year. Last year Prof Stelian Gelberg, the head of radiation and noise department in the Israeli ministry of environment protection, asked my to help guide two students for first degree in Public health as they were analyzing the existing procedure, determining the week points and improving it to a new test procedure.  I meet with them several times, I explained the problems, what can be done and what should be done. We also did some testing together and a long.
The new testing procedure might relay on their work.

Old Procedure

For the past few years, myself and other activists, have been criticizing the way RF tests were done in schools (after WIFI systems were installed - low duty cycle) using the test procedure that was meant to RF radiation from cellphone tower (high duty cycle signal), using very slow sampling rate meters (2-5 samplings per seconds), using the meters in Average mode, and doing the tests only in several points, usually next to the router.
These tests usually showed no radiation at all, a prof that there were not done correctly.

First look at the new procedure

First look at the new test procedure I can note few improvements but there is still a long way to go.


  1. There is a recommendation to use MAX value setting on the meter (not Average).
  2. The tests should be done in several points in the classroom where students sit. 
  3. The test should start with background RF testing.
  4. The tests should be done while the WIFI network should have heavy traffic. 
  5. The meters' frequency band must cover the frequency off all sources in the class, including 5GHz WIFI routers.

Still problematic:

  1. Using the meter in MAX Value setting is not a must, only a recommendation.
  2. In every point in which the tester will see high values, he is required to Average them (which is the best way to bring the numbers down).
  3. The outcomes of the tests are then compared to a ICNIRP based standard (will give the OK to every outcome, even if in Bio-active level). 
  4. There is no direction on the test procedure to use high sampling rate meters (I don't think there are any approved meter that have high sampling rate) which is a key issue when measuring low duty cycle signal as WIFI.
  5. There is no attention to the students' use of cell phones in the class. If such a use is permitted, the radiation from the cell phones should also be measured while active and transmitting.

What now?

The Environment Protection ministry should be congratulated on the steps done, and I will continue to criticize it for the problematic issues that still need to be addressed. Meanwhile we wait for the first test reports done by the new test procedure. 

In the picture, the new test procedure, in Blue the new steps

Friday, July 7, 2017

Activity Summary Report 06/2017 - "No Radiation For you" -

Activity Summary Report 06/2017

"No Radiation For you"

Hello readers, activists and EHS people.
Please see below the summary report of my activities in the sites and blogs I manage in the fields or EMF and EHS.

Main events in last month

English blog - (since 2008)

New posts

06/2017 - More than 1728 views

Main site (since 2010)

New pages

Pages that were updated

Statistics :

06/2017- 2803 visits, 4222 pageviews

For EHS By EHS site – (since 2012)

This site offers special items for EHS people that will enable them to improve their quality of life.

New Pages:

Page that were updated:

  1. Minor updates and changes
  2. Inventory updates
  3. Share buttons were moved to the upper part of each page.


06/2017- 1113 visits, 2895 pageviews

YouTube channel - (since 2009)

New clips

  1. RF Radiation from active  GPS antenna-
  2. RF Radiation from a in car Bluetooth hand-free device - Hebrew -
  3. -
    RF Radiation from a in car Bluetooth hand-free device    
  4. Amir Borenstein, an EHS person living at home, TV article -


06/2017 - 6315 views in all videos.

Hebrew info site – (since 2010)

  • 3 new pages
  • 6 pages were updated


06/2017 - 3492 visits, 5899 Pageviews

Hebrew eStore site – (since 2013)

New Hebrew site was created for the eStore.
  • 1  new pages were created
  • No changes to other page


06/2017 - 503 visits, 1022 Pageviews

Hebrew blog -  (since 2006)

The hebrew blog was moved to  a new platform, from Tapuz to Blogger.
  • 5 new posts

06/2017 -New Blog more than 1341,  Old Block - more than 1438 views

The End!
Thanks for reading and see you next time!
Amir Borenstein

Saturday, June 24, 2017

The reason for RF emission from new DVD/GPS Car unit - Active GPS antenna

Few weeks back I got a new Car DVD/GPS unit for my small Fiat Panda.
I am an EHS person and the car was already tested and found to be low EMF car.
In addition I have installed  RF protection film over the windows to block the RF coming from cellphone towers along the side of the road.
2 weeks ago I installed the new system in my car and was amazed that the system emitted RF radiation even after the WIFI was turned OFF and the Bluetooth was not operating.
I reported that on my latest post:
It took me few days of trial and error  + testing the unit with an RF meter to find out where the radiation is coming from, it was the GPS antenna.

This a video I did after finding out that the GPS antenna was emitting the radiation

I first thought that it must be a mistake, or a bug since I thought there should not be any RF emission from a GPS Antenna, since GPS units do not emit any RF, right? wrong!
Today I found-out that the GPS antenna main pin has 3.3V on it, I was begging to think why.
Later on tonight I came to the conclusion that the antenna must be an ACTIVE ANTENNA.
Did some research and it turns out that there are Active antennas for GPS out there and that some GPS units need them, and some come-with them.

So this in an other thing to test when you buy a car or a DVD/GPS unit for the car, does the GPS unit is Active or Passive.

I am still trying to work this out , maybe it is possible to just connect a passive antenna and all will be OK, maybe I will need to find a switch in the software or GUI. I hope I will manage to do it and to make this unit a NO RF EMISSION unit so I can use it in my car.

In the picture - the DVD/GPS Car unit in question, on my lab desk

The Solution:
I got and installed a passive GPS antenna.
Then I tested the RF radiation emitted from it, there was no radiation measured.
The GPS receiver gets all the data and gets the signal from the satellites.
It seems that the RF emitting Active Antenna has no added value.
This is perfect example of RF Exposure without any real need.

In the picture - Active (right) Vs Passive (left) GPS antenna

In the picture - no RF emission from the Passive antenna

Why is it radiating?
The unit I have has WIFI (which I turned off) and 3G data if you use dongles for communication (for getting updates of traffic) so I don't think there is a real function to the RF emission. I think it is just a RF signal that should not be there.
I don't think it was part of a tracking system as well (which is usually also relaying on UMTS or GPRS modems).

Active GPS external antenna gets 3.3V on the coax cable and use it to run a LNA (Low Noise Amp), basically a filter+amplifier.
The unit identify it is active by the load, and push the 3.3V over the coax.
If there is no load (in case of passive antenna) the unit does not find load, and does not push the 3.3V over the coax.
Please see -

I am guessing the Active GPS antenna that I got with my DVD/GPS car unit was one of the following:
1. Badly designed not to include an RF Faraday cage over the LNA amplifier in side it .
2. Badly designed to have the 3.3V reach the antenna it self and not just the LNA.
3. A malfunction antenna.
4. Maybe all active antenna are working this way - this is way I urge you all to use your RF meter to test as your GPS units with external antennas.

In this case, I used the RF meter right a way to make sure I turned the WIFI and Bluetooth correctly.
Then I saw the RF from the active antenna. 
It took me a while to understand what and where from, but if I did not use a RF meter it would have take me a lot more time and cost me many more headaches. 

So, the Bottom line is:
1. Use your RF meter every time you need to buy, install, operate a new device, you can never know.
2. If you have a GPS unit with external antenna make sure it is not active. If it is active measure it with the RF meter and let me know what you saw.
3. If you are find the external antenna to radiate, and you prefer it not to, try to change it with a passive antenna.

Friday, June 16, 2017

How can people stand Radio Frequencies emitting devices in side the car?

I love consumer electronic.
I love audio systems.

2 years ago I even built my own set of floor stander Audio speakers to go with my Cambridge Audio Receiver and CD Player. I made sure they will be low ELF speakers (magnetically shielded) and I use low ELF speakers cables.
I also love Car audio systems.

4 years ago I got DVD+GPS unit for my old Mazda 3 car (which I since then sold). The device came with build in WIFI+Bluetooth card. It was not possible to turn the Bluetooth or WIFI OFF in this device. At the end, I had to removed after making sure it could not be turned OFF .

2 years ago I got an 4.4 Android car DVD+NAV system from my Mazda 6. This device allowed me to turn off the WIFI+Bluetooth from the GUI setup with no need to crack it open and remove the cards.

Few weeks ago I ordered an additional new Android DVD+NAV 2DIN system for my secondary car (my Fiat Panda). It cam by the mail few days ago, and tonight I managed to install it.
So far I found no way to turn the Bluetooth of this device off, and it keep scanning for devices, emitting RF radiation in side my partially RF protected Fiat Panda.
I relay hope to find a way to disable the Bluetooth without taring it open and taking the card or chips a part.

I can't imagine how people can drive with the Bluetooth and WIFI turned on inside their car, with a smart phone and not feeling the radiation, it is so strong, as specially if you have a 4G smartphone.
I imagine that even if they don't feel it, it effects them and reduce their driving capabilities and performance.  I am an EHS person, so I can't stand the radiation from the Bluetooth hand-free unit or the smart phone (if I had one) for more then few minutes, but other people drive with these devices scanning and transmitting in side the car metal box for house.

For more about EMF in cars, please press here...

In the picture above - an android multimedia
system that allows you to turn off the WIFI

Video - RF emission from a Bluetooth Hand-free unit in a car