Psychological Drivers of Individual Differences in Risk Perception: A Systematic Case Study Focusing on 5G

What drives people’s perceptions of novel risks, and how malleable are such risk perceptions? Psychological research has identified multiple potential drivers of risk perception, but no studies have yet tested within a unified analytic framework how well each of these drivers accounts for individual differences in large population samples. To provide such a framework, I harnessed the deployment of 5G—the latest generation of cellular network technology. Specifically, I conducted a multiverse analysis using a representative population sample in Switzerland (Study 1; N = 2,919 individuals between 15 and 94 years old), finding that interindividual differences in risk perceptions were strongly associated with hazard-related drivers (e.g., trust in the institutions regulating 5G, dread) and person-specific drivers (e.g., electromagnetic hypersensitivity)—and strongly predictive of people’s policy-related attitudes (e.g., voting intentions). Further, a field experiment based on a national expert report on 5G ( N = 839 individuals in a longitudinal sample between 17 and 79 years old) identified links between intraindividual changes in psychological drivers and perceived risk, thus highlighting potential targets for future policy interventions.

Melatonin: a Potential Shield against Electromagnetic Waves

: Melatonin, a vital hormone synthesized by the pineal gland, has been implicated in various physiological functions and in circadian rhythm regulation. Its role in the protection against the non-ionizing electromagnetic field (EMF), known to disrupt the body’s oxidative/anti-oxidative balance, has been called into question due to inconsistent results observed across studies. This review provides the current state of knowledge on the interwoven relationship between melatonin, EMF, and oxidative stress. Based on synthesized evidence, we present a model that best describes the mechanisms underlying the protective effects of melatonin against RF/ELF-EMF induced oxidative stress. We show that the free radical scavenger activity of melatonin is enabled through reduction of the radical pair singlet-triplet conversion rate and the concentration of the triplet products. Moreover, this review aims to highlight the potential therapeutic benefits of melatonin against the detrimental effects of EMF, in general, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), in particular.

Causal perception is central in electromagnetic hypersensitivity - a commentary on “Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a critical review of explanatory hypotheses’’

We highly welcome and appreciate the paper of Dieudonné, 2020 (10.1186/s12940-020-00602-0) on the important but frequently neglected topic of hypersensitivity towards electromagnetic fields (EHS). We agree with the author that the electromagnetic hypothesis (that EHS is caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields) appears scientifically largely unfounded and that other theoretical approaches focussing on psychological processes are more plausible and promising. In the view of the author, two such approaches exist, namely a “cognitive hypothesis” (derived from the comprehensive model by Van den Bergh et al., 2017) and an “attributive hypothesis” as suggested by the author. In this commentary, we want to argue (a) that the distinction between the cognitive and the attributive hypothesis is inaccurate at the conceptual level; (b) that the distinction is also misleading at the mechanistic level, due to an incorrect interpretation of the evidence related to the cognitive hypothesis; and (c) that, by using the term “cognitive hypothesis”, the existing comprehensive model is inappropriately narrowed down without fully appreciating its explanatory power for the phenomena subsumed under both the cognitive and attributive hypothesis. Therefore, the original term “comprehensive model” should be used rather than the label “cognitive hypothesis”.

Is the Electrohypersensitive Patient's Headache a Variant of the Migraine Disease Mediated by TRPA1 Receptors?

According to the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety, electromagnetic hypersensitivity affects more than 3 million people in France, and headaches are a very frequent cause of complaint in electrohypersensitive patients, to the point of dominating the clinical picture. These headaches share characteristics with migraine pathology, and clinical improvement with anti-migraine therapy has led us to consider that the headache in the electrohypersensitive patient may be a variant of the migraine disease mediated by the TRPA1 receptor, which if confirmed, would offer effective therapeutic possibilities to relieve the electrohypersensitive patient.

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a critical review of explanatory hypotheses

Background Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is a condition defined by the attribution of non-specific symptoms to electromagnetic fields (EMF) of anthropogenic origin. Despite its repercussions on the lives of its sufferers, and its potential to become a significant public health issue, it remains of a contested nature. Different hypotheses have been proposed to explain the origin of symptoms experienced by self-declared EHS persons, which this article aims to review. Methods As EHS is a multi-dimensional problem, and its explanatory hypotheses have far-reaching implications, a broad view was adopted, not restricted to EHS literature but encompassing all relevant bodies of research on related topics. This could only be achieved through a narrative approach. Two strategies were used to identify pertinent references. Concerning EHS, a complete bibliography was extracted from a 2018 report from the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety and updated with more recent studies. Concerning related topics, the appropriate databases were searched. Systematic reviews and expert reports were favored when available. Findings Three main explanatory hypotheses appear in the literature: (1) the electromagnetic hypothesis, attributing EHS to EMF exposure; (2) the cognitive hypothesis, assuming that EHS results from false beliefs in EMF harmfulness, promoting nocebo responses to perceived EMF exposure; (3) the attributive hypothesis, conceiving EHS as a coping strategy for pre-existing conditions. These hypotheses are successively assessed, considering both their strengths and limitations, by comparing their theoretical, experimental, and ecological value. Conclusion No hypothesis proves totally satisfying. Avenues of research are suggested to help decide between them and reach a better understanding of EHS.

One Single Question Is not Sufficient to Identify Individuals With Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity

Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance attributed to Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF) is a self-reported condition where non-specific symptoms are attributed to weak non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. Despite its expanding prevalence, there is no generally accepted diagnostic procedure or definition to identify patients with this condition, thus studies usually apply only one question as inclusion criterion. The aim of our study was to demonstrate the heterogeneity of a self-reported IEI-EMF group and to identify further self-report questions that could be applied as inclusion criteria. Cross-sectional on-line survey study was carried out with 473 participants (76.3% women; age: 35.03 ± 13.24 yrs). Self-diagnosed IEI-EMF (as assessed with a yes-or-no question), frequency of EMF-related symptom and severity of the condition were assessed, as well as somatic symptom distress (Patient Health Questionnaire Somatic Symptom Severity Scale, PHQ-15). 72 (15.2%) individuals labelled themselves as IEI-EMF, however only 61% of them remained in the IEI-EMF group after the use of three inclusion criteria instead of one. 21% of the individuals labelling themselves as IEI-EMF reported neither symptoms nor any negative impact on their daily life. A minimum of two questions appear to be necessary as inclusion criteria for IEI-EMF in empirical research. Instead of the widely used yes-or-no question on accepting the IEI-EMF label, occurrence of symptoms attributed to EMF on a regular basis and at least a slight negative impact on daily life are required. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (IEI-EMF) is often assessed by one yes-or-no self-report question. This practice is inappropriate from a conceptual and methodological point of view. At least two questions, assessing frequency of symptoms and their impact, are needed. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (IEI-EMF) is often assessed by one yes-or-no self-report question. This practice is inappropriate from a conceptual and methodological point of view. At least two questions, assessing frequency of symptoms and their impact, are needed.

GEOMEDICAL TOURISM – OUTDOOR HEALTH CARE FACILITIES ANTI-GEOPATHIC STRESS TREATMENT

Geopathic stress and electrosmog affect on the human health in different ways. The list of symptoms is varied and very impressive, but the real problems posed for the study require a specialized approach to diagnosing the main causes of its occurrence and determines the presence of a new type of disease which described by the WHO in 2002 as "Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome - EHS". Our attention as researchers focuses on the capabilities of geopathology (geobiology) to identify the causes of geopathic stress and to describe solutions for its neutralization. The aim of presented study was to create specialized tourism destination in pure nature for wellbeing and prevention of geopathic stress and electrosmog impact. The goal is to test the geomedical tourism as a special approach and problem solving. Objects of research: 16 famous Wellness and SPA destinations from 4 countries: Bansko, Sunny Beach, Pomorie (Bulgaria), Sulzberg- Bregenz (Austria), Ochrid (N Macedonia), Bad Griesbach (Germany) which were examined in 2010-2017. Methods: Test of differentiated self-assessment of the functional state (SAN), Applied Kinesiology Test, Geopathic stress Sequences (GSAS) and geomedical assessment of environment. Results: the core of Geomedical tourism destination management is a geomedical environment assessment of Climate recreation potential, Forest recreation potential- herbs, woods, lichens, Landscape recreation assessment, Environment assessment, Geopathic stress evaluation, Geological places assessment, Biomedical assessment of natural resources and Wellbeing effect. Some outlined benefits of outdoor recreation including post treatment geopathic stress analysis and Applied Kinesiology test-AK. Their positive results we can apply as an additional key for Geomedical tourism destination’s modelling. Our results from SAN test before and after treatment are very motivated to go over it. Conslusion. Geomedical tourism as a live style coaching including outdoor physical exercises, anti-stress massages, special nutrition menu, breathing treatment, forest meditation and geotherapy. Obviously, all forms of proactive and reactive healthcare including geomedical practices are part of health prevention tourism. Outcomes of Geomedical tourism: Creation and promotion of Individual Well Fare Guidelines for sustainability ecological and social life.