Einar Flydal: What is it with the radiation that harms? Does the power really matter?

Posted on May 28, 2025 by Multerland

In this article translated from Norwegian, Einar Flydal 1  comments on:

“Radio Wave Packet“
What You Need to Know about Wireless Technology
A note by: Arthur Firstenberg (1950-2025)
President, Cellular Phone Task Force
First published: September 2001
Revised: August 2022 English / Nederlands / norsk  / français / svenska / italiano / 日本語 

What is it with the radiation that harms? Does the power really matter?

In a little-discussed note by Arthur Firstenberg, Radio Wave Packet he writes:

“It is the coherent nature of the radiation, and the information it carries, that kills, not the power level.”

In addition, Firstenberg provides a very clear and readable overview 2 of how weak power levels [more precisely called “energy intensities”] have been measured in research to have biological (harmful) effects on various kinds of biological systems, primarily laboratory mice and rats.

How should this be understood? Does it mean that the strength does not matter and that measurements with measurement devices are therefore completely unnecessary and wasted, since they only measure the power?

I have received this question from a reader. And I have myself already thought it over a few times. The reader put the question as follows:

“If it is true that it is not the power level that affects us, any form of measuring the strength, for example with a measurement device like Acousticom2, will be meaningless, and so will sleeping under a shielding canopy. At least that is my conclusion. How do you think this should be understood?”

The short answer

My spontaneous answer is: Yes, of course it is important to measure! Because with a radiation meter you can track down the source and perhaps remove or shield it, or remove yourself from it. Many people experience that when you get a source muted or weakened, the symptom disappears, completely or partially.

But there is also a longer and more theoretical and nuanced answer for those who want to understand how Firstenberg can claim that the power is not important. Here you have it:

The long answer

The various properties of EMF (electromagnetic fields) that affect biosystems are only very rudimentarily mapped, when we disregard pure heating damage from the energy intensity getting too high.

This also applies to the various mechanisms through which these various properties work, not to mention the many ways in which both properties and mechanisms may interact or cooperate.

However, according to two Ukrainian researchers (Zaporozhan & Ponomarenko 2010), there are three main explanations when it comes to explaining how we are affected by electromagnetic fields that are not so intensive that they damage by heating, and not so high in frequency that they damage tissue the way so called ionizing radiation like X-rays and radioactivity do:

  1. the plasma membrane hypothesis
  2. the free-radical mechanism
  3. the ion resonance model

1. The plasma membrane hypothesis turns around the fact that cell membranes have electrically regulated channels that regulate the flow of ions into and out of the cells, and that the cells’ chemical processes can thus be affected by EMF.

2. The free radical mechanism is about the fact that the cells’ production of oxidants and anti-oxidants, which change rapidly and must be kept in balance all the time, is disturbed by EMF. The effects can be observed, for example, in the form of acute health problems, which are the outcome of very complex mechanisms in systems that are open and dynamic, and can therefore result in very different symptoms.

3. The ion resonance model tells us how even weak energy can have a big impact if you hit the right frequency (harmonics/pure tones in music): Think of a child on a swing, and how little extra force is needed to increase the oscillations if you just push at the right time. EMFs emanating coherently, i.e. with the charges arranged so that pluses and minuses come separated and orderly, and also polarized, i.e. with waves in the same plane, will therefore have far more impact than natural radiation, which is almost always chaotic.

Only in very clear cases are the factors (the properties that work) well mapped and understood. Such a clear case is the disturbance of cells’ ion channels. Such channels are found in all biosystems, and them being disturbed from EMFs has been explored and described, in various ways since the 1960-ies, by Dimitri Panagopoulos and his colleagues since around 2000 and thoroughly demonstrated more recently (Panagopoulos 2021; 2022). As to calcium channels Martin L Pall has delivered numerous reviews of well demonstrated mechanisms since 2013 (Pall 2013).

The explanations provided by both Panagopoulos and Pall combine all three approaches mentioned above: the plasma membrane hypothesis, the free radical mechanism and the ion resonance model. And they require far less energy than needed to create measurable heating.

There are a wide range of examples where specific properties or mechanisms other than energy intensity clearly are the relevant factor. Behind some significant impacts the energy intensity is so incredibly weak that it seemed impossible, through the lens of the thermal paradigm, that it could possibly cause any effect at all. One has thought that somehow the information content must be what causes the effect in such cases.

In the major review of the scientific literature up to the 1970s by the Russian researcher Presman (1970), there are a number of examples of how information seems to be the decisive factor behind biological processes at such extremely weak intensities, for example, causing birds to lose their sense of orientation. The power, or energy intensity, appears to be of no importance.

Quantum biological explanations

Today, there are also quantum biological 3 explanations describing radical pairs and electronic spin, where one particle can become two and be in several places at the same time… To go into more detail is too ambitious for this blog post – not the least for me. However, if you want to get to grips with the basics of such quantum biological explanations, I recommend (McFadden & Al-Khalili 2014 4), or shorter and for free: (Warnke 2007).

Some properties of the radiation itself

In his note NTP-analysis – Part II: design laws and conclusions, 20.04.2018 5 , Arthur Firstenberg lists some examples of properties of the radiation itself that have been explored with regard to how they affect:

“It is not the power level that does the harm. It is the degree of coherence, type and depth of modulation, wavelength, number of frequencies, number of signals, bandwidth, shape of the waves, pulse height, pulse width, rise and fall time, and other properties of the radiation. The unimportance of power levels for effects other than heat has been shown many times.”

In the by the Norwegian law firm Erling Grimstad 6 and Einar Flydal in 2018 published book “Smart meters, the law and health”, (free download of English translation from Einar Flydal’s blog 7 ), Part 2, section 4.2.5 onwards, I expand on this topic, with examples taken in particular from how “weather sickness” and some epileptic seizures can be linked to specific extremely weak coherent, polarized pulses with very specific frequencies, arising from weather fronts, with specific impacts on collagen.

These frequencies twist collagen, affecting metabolism. It is even so complex that these pulses are the “meta-frequencies” you get when you trace the peaks of the pulses from the weather fronts, the so-called “envelope curves 8 ”, as shown in the figure.

It follows that….

…our understanding of cause and effect is only partial, and that no definitive “mechanistic” proof is possible, except for the very basic one of tissue overheating, where at least a fairly clear energy intensity threshold can be defined, as to when it becomes harmful.

This only partial understanding makes clear how important it is to find a careful balance between a precautionary policy versus hindering technological / material / economic progress (an issue raised in the ICNIRP guidelines of 1998 and 2002).

Let me then try to answer the question more directly:

The question: “If this is true, any form of measurement of the strength [i.e. energy intensity levels], for example with a measuring device like the Acousticom2, would be meaningless, and so would sleeping under a shielding “canopy”. At least that is my conclusion. How do you think this should be understood?“

Answer: When Firstenberg writes, “It is not the power level [i.e. the strength/energy intensity] that causes the damage,” I think he has the mice and rats in the NTP study 9 in mind, not that power level is generally unimportant, because……

Energy intensity clearly matters

Energy intensity clearly matters in the very simple way that it can lead to destructive heating (over minutes as well as milliseconds if the increase is high and fast enough).

Many also note that power matters a lot: If it is weakened, health problems may disappear. It is also reasonable to assume that intensity will be a component in a more subtle way in the many complex and mostly unknown ways in which EMFs can affect biosystems. In any case, it cannot be ruled out.

Conventional measuring equipment

Conventional measuring equipment only measures energy intensity levels, or worse, only the most powerful source among the many sources that surround us (as consumer equipment does), and not the sum of them. They are therefore extremely crude tools, and only capture a fragment of what may have a destructive effect, typically the fragment related to the danger of damage from overheating, on which ICNIRP’s guidelines are based.

Nevertheless, these are the best measuring tools we have and they measure something that everyone agrees has an effect, even if they only capture this one factor.

Therefore, one should absolutely supplement such measures with experience-based information as to how different kinds of radiation may affect, as done in the EUROPAEM standard (2016), which specifies experience- and precautionary-based values. (It can be downloaded in English for free.)

Certification needed to provide absolute and indisputable “proof of harm”

The lack of good tests that can cater for the complexity without the need of fully mapping it was thus the reason behind what Martin L Pall suggested to me while I was driving him to the airport after his lecture in Oslo in 2014 on the mechanism that disrupts calcium channels and leads to oxidative stress (a particularly good lecture that you can find on the EMFacets channel on YouTube 10 

A certification body and a certification procedure should be established for all electronic/electrical equipment, and it should be based on the most sensitive and general biological reaction available – in vitro exposure to human cells, to test for calcium channel disturbance leading to oxidative stress.

Sniffers to check for increased oxidant production are cheap, cells are commercially available, testing is quickly done, and laboratories are available. Such a certification procedure for “EHS-safe equipment” [EHS: electrical hypersensitivity 11] would circumvent the current and unsatisfiable demands form ICNIRP 12 , ICES/IEEE 13  and WHO 14 and their supporters as well as the industry to provide absolute and indisputable “proof of harm” before regulations are tightened.

Their demands would require, among other things, a full understanding of the mechanisms behind the effects of such open, complex and dynamic systems as biosystems, which is simply unattainable. Instead, a simple certification procedure would shift the focus to a common, rapid effect that is well proven and occurs before the very many and quite diverse symptoms  occuring downstream in the causal chain, ranging from mental fog to cancer.

Such certification is also a business idea that could result in a push for better/stricter regulation and competition to reduce EMF pollution levels. However, it would not be a practical strategy for providing the public with better tools for general use. It is therefore still sensible to measure exposure levels, in addition to trying to avoid modern communication equipment even when emissions are quite low. –Measuring should be done knowing that it just captures what it captures, parts of the energy intensity, which is just part of the story.

References:

Original blog post in Norwegian: Hva er det som skader? Har strålingens styrke egentlig noe å si?

FOOTNOTES

  1. Einar Flydal (cand. polit. & Master of telecom strategy) is a Norwegian retired telecom researcher and strategy adviser. He writes and translates papers, articles and books about the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation from wireless devices, electromagnetic hypersensitivity and how to protect against the harmful artificial, man made radiation. 1. LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/einar-flydal-04241134/ 2. Blog: https://einarflydal.com 3. Steigan: https://steigan.no/author/einarflydal/
    4. Books: https://einarflydal.com/utredninger-boker-m-m-a-laste-ned-bestille/ ↩︎
  2. Overview page 2 and 3: PDF https://multerland.blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Radio-Wave-Packet_page2_page3.pdf ↩︎
  3. Quantum biology – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_biology ↩︎
  4. Life on the Edge: The Coming of Age of Quantum Biology by Jim Al-Khalili (Author), Johnjoe McFadden (Author) – https://www.amazon.com/Life-Edge-Coming-Quantum-Biology/dp/0593069323 ↩︎
  5. Arthur Firstenberg – Report on National Toxicology Program’s Cell Phone Study / 2018 – PDF https://multerland.blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/AFirstenberg-20180412-NTP-analysis-PartIII.pdf ; Norwegian translation: https://einarflydal.com/?sdm_process_download=1&download_id=84540 ↩︎
  6. Law firm Erling Grimstad https://www.governance.no ↩︎
  7. Free download of Einar Flydal and Advokatfirmaet Erling Grimstad AS: Smart Meters, the Law and Health, book, 210 pages. ISBN 978-82-692792-3-8. PDF, download for free: https://bit.ly/3Mely96, or full link:  https://einarflydal.com/sdm_downloads/download-smart-meters-the-law-and-health-pdf/ ↩︎
  8. Wikipedia – Envelope(waves) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envelope_(waves) ↩︎
  9. See footnote 5 ↩︎
  10. How mobile radiation, WiFi & EMF harm us – Prof. Martin Pall : How WiFi & EMFs Cause Harm – Lectured on October 2014, Oslo, Norway – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwWGB-eGMTw  ↩︎
  11. Dr. Erica Mallery-Blythe on Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and EMF Limits – https://multerland.blog/2025/05/14/dr-erica-mallery-blythe-on-electromagnetic-hypersensitivity-and-emf-limits/ ↩︎
  12. International Commission on the Biological Effects of EMF: ICNIRP exposure limits are inadequate – https://icbe-emf.org/fcc-and-icnirp-limits/ ↩︎
  13. ICES / IEEE https://www.ices-emfsafety.org ↩︎
  14. Experts challenge WHO research – https://icbe-emf.org/experts-challenge-who-research-on-cell-phone-radiation-and-cancer-risk/ ↩︎

SHARE THIS

Discover more from Multerland

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

About Multerland

Multerland is a blog about care for nature, natural health, holistic medicine, holistic therapies, deep ecology, sustainability, climate change, life processes, psychology, spirituality, and awareness. Since 2017 only articles about the hidden dangers of wireless and cell phone radiation have been published. Since April 2023 a new branch has been added: "Sustainable Politics". URL: backups.blog
This entry was posted in EHS, Protection, Public Health and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.