International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering & Management (IJIREM) ISSN: 2350-0557, Volume-2, Issue-5, September 2015
How to Approach the Challenge of Minimizing Non – Thermal Health Effects of Microwave Radiation from Electrical Devices
Martin L. Pall, PhD
… Many have assumed that it is possible to predict the effects of such EMFs based simply on EMF exposure intensities but such assumptions are clearly false. Empirical observations have shown that four types of factors greatly influence biological responses to microwave EMFs , with all four reviewed by Belyaev  and 3 of the 4 each reviewed elsewhere [24,25].
1. One of these is that pulsed fields are in most cases more biologically active than non – pulsed fields. The literature on comparing pulsed fields with non – pulsed fields goes back to the 1960’s  and continues right up to the present [24 – 26,28,29]. One example of pulsation effects is from studies of therapeutic effects of non – thermal microwave frequency EMFs , when they are of the right type and intensity and focused on the right tissue. Such therapy was standardized using pulsed microwave fields back in the mid – 1970s because these pulse fields were more active, a standardization that continues to the present day . There are some 4000 studies of pulsed microwave therapy which make up the largest literature on non – thermal biological effects. Unfortunately we don’t have enough detailed knowledge of these pulsation effects to be able to predict how biologically active EMFs with different patterns of pulsation will be. With very complex pulsed fields like those from smart meters or smart phones, prediction becomes still more difficult. Panagopoulos et al  have argued that complex pulsation patterns are consistently more biologically active than are simpler patterns. There is some evidence that very low frequency pulsations (10 Hz or less) may lower biological responses, which if confirmed may be useful for lowering biological effects of electronic devices. Because all wireless communication devices communicate via pulsations, pulsation effects may be inherent factors with such devices.
2. There are non – linearities in dose response curves and specifically there are specific intensity windows of exposure which produce greater biological effects than exposures of either higher or lower intensity [24,28,29] . In one experiment, an effect seen within a window was studied and it was found that increasing intensity to even to 150 times high er intensity of exposure lead to lower biological responses than was found in the window. Clearly these intensity windows also create important uncertainties in trying to predict biological effects of EMF exposures.
3. It has also been shown that different frequencies have diff erent biological effects . While this is a simpler issue, than
either pulsations or the window effects, it may well add substantial complexity in combination with each of these other two factors.
4. Perhaps most importantly, artificial EMFs are polarized and can be linearly or circularly polarized. However most naturally occurring EMFs are non – polarized or only weakly polarized. Polarized fields can produce much stronger forces on charged groups, which, as discussed below, are likely to have central roles in producing non – thermal biological effects [28,29]. One of the other effects discussed by Belyaev  is that circularly polarized fields can be either right handed or left handed and that the handedness of specific fields have extremely large effects on the biological responses, such that fields that are identical in intensity and frequency and differ only in their handedness of circular polarization can have almost completely different biological effects….
DNA right handed chirality
Human sweat duct right handed chirality
GPS right-hand circular polarization https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1782