EMF Elimination Challenge: A Vision to Change Lives and Heal the World

Strategic Initiative #1

A place of healing, pure and bright,
Free from the world’s synthetic blight.
Where minds find peace and hearts restore,
Untouched by waves that harm no more.

Builders rise, embrace the call,
Shape a world where none shall fall.
In spaces pure, where peace is true,
We find new strength, and life breaks through.

To live, to heal, to breathe anew,
In quiet lands where life is true.
The world can shift, the tide can turn,
In radiant peace, we live and learn.

I want to share an idea that has the potential to change the world by giving people, perhaps for the first time in their lives, the chance to experience life apart from the synthetic radiation exposures endemic to modern life.

This concept could appeal to entrepreneurs, reduce suffering, improve health, and protect species. If I had the means to build one or even a dozen of these facilities, I would have done so by now, but my resources are limited due to my long struggle with electromagnetic poisoning. Despite these challenges, I'm committed to helping others move forward to make this vision a reality.

This essay will:

• Describe the need

• Convey the vision

• Provide a specific example of an early adopter (currently in process)

The Need

Depending on when you were born, you may have never experienced the richness of life in a pristine electromagnetic environment—one free from synthetic electromagnetic toxins. Do you remember a time of inner peace, a calm mind, sharper intellectual abilities, boundless energy, no ringing in your ears, and deep, restful sleep? Perhaps it reminds you of how you felt visiting your parents' home in the country, on a camping trip, or before the era of cell phones and WiFi.

Even for those old enough to recall such a life, the buildout of the synthetic EMF grid has been so gradual and incremental that many of us didn't notice the creeping decline in vitality or the rise in chronic illnesses. Today, nearly everyone seems to have one or more chronic conditions—it's become the new normal.

For others—perhaps the fortunate ones—the contrast between living 'with' and 'without' synthetic EMF was sharper and more pronounced. They experienced a clear, undeniable difference, making them acutely aware of what has been lost in this modern, strangely radiated world.

In my work, I constantly meet people who are on the path to becoming survivors of chronic synthetic EMF exposure. The pattern is always the same: a sudden realization that life is better without synthetic EMF. The specifics vary, but the stories follow a familiar theme. A school teacher falls ill when WiFi is installed in her classroom. A man gets sick after setting up a WiFi router meant for a warehouse in his small apartment. A homeowner moves to a beautiful country home, only to have her health instantly depleted by radar sweeping the area. A woman's life is forever changed after solar panels are installed on her roof. These are just a few of the many stories I've heard from my clients.

In each case, lives are transformed in obvious ways upon exposure to synthetic EMF. Nothing teaches like this kind of experience—a clear and undeniable contrast between life with and without synthetic EMF exposure.

The Vision

Since the ability to sense a contrast—living with vs. without synthetic exposures—teaches us best, can we help others achieve that 'with vs. without' experience? Let's explore the concept of a medical "challenge."

A medical "challenge" involves deliberately exposing patients to a substance or stimulus to observe and assess their physiological response, often to diagnose or confirm a condition.  This is commonly used in allergy testing, where a patient is given a small amount of a suspected allergen under controlled conditions to see if it triggers a reaction. Challenges are also used to diagnose food intolerances, drug sensitivities, or other immune responses.

The concept makes sense: exposing someone to a toxin in a controlled way helps us understand what might be harming them. However, with involuntary environmental exposures like synthetic EMF, we are continuously exposed, whether we like it or not.  This brings us to another medical challenge called an elimination challenge.

An elimination challenge or trial involves removing one or more potential triggers from a person's environment, diet, or routine to observe whether symptoms improve or resolve. This approach is commonly used for suspected food intolerances, allergies, chemical sensitivities, or other conditions where specific exposures may be causing harm.

Now, let's step away from the medical model.  Many don't feel we need permission or oversight to eliminate things from our lives and discover what doesn't agree with us.  For example, I no longer drink coffee—something I once loved. I was an enthusiast, even an addict, visiting coffee plantations, roasting my beans, and spending 40 years drinking espresso. One day, I decided to see what life was like without it. Now, my expensive, polished chrome German espresso machine sits neglected.

But what about EMF? No one is pumping espresso into your house 24/7 without your permission. Synthetic EMF is a different story—it's essentially a form of wireless trespass. So, how can we eliminate involuntary synthetic EMF exposure?

It used to be simple—go camping. Unfortunately, most popular camping spots now offer wireless "services" like WiFi and cellular coverage. Moreover, the flawed design of the North American electric grid, which allows AC current to flow through the Earth, means that even areas that appear pristine can be far from it.

Imagine if people could check into a particular type of short-term vacation rental—one altogether void of synthetic EMF—to experience life, even for just a few days, without synthetic EMF exposure.  This is the vision for 21st-century survival.

How many would discover that life is better without synthetic EMF exposure? Life on Earth is inherently linked to natural electrical activity, yet synthetic EMFs are fundamentally different and interfere with our well-being. My wife, for instance, never considered herself "electrically sensitive" until she began living in a pristine environment. Many others have shared similar experiences. The truth is, we are all electrically sensitive; it's just a matter of degree.

For a relatively low cost—less than the price of a full assessment and remediation of your home—you can experience firsthand how much better your life could be without synthetic EMF exposure. After this experience, you can choose the cost-benefit of various methods to achieve your personal and familial goals regarding synthetic EMF exposure.

I envision EMF elimination facilities spreading worldwide through a decentralized model, sparking a dramatic shift in awareness and driving positive change for all life on Earth.  This is no exaggeration. Entrepreneurs who embrace and promote this concept stand to benefit significantly, both in impact and opportunity.

Specific Example

I have a client and friend who lives in a low-population area with advantageous terrain and no cell service, except for a tiny spot in the upstairs kitchen where a weak signal can sometimes be found. He and his wife understand the significance of synthetic EMF pollution and its unknown, unbounded risks to health and well-being.

My friend also runs a short-term rental in a luxuriously appointed apartment on the lower floor of his home. I assessed the property, and we are currently working on remediation efforts.  Although we won't know the final results until the work is complete, all signs suggest we may achieve ideal exposure levels throughout the property without shielding.

His interest isn't in filling the rental—it already does well. Instead, he sees the potential benefits of offering guests an EMF-free experience to foster awareness through elimination. He's not seeking long-term renters, just wants to offer an 'exclusion diet' of synthetic EMF to as many people as possible.

Imagine how many people could benefit in just one year if we're successful. Now imagine several such facilities in each state.

While some properties are marketed as low EMF, I have yet to encounter one that meets measurable standards.  This highlights the need for transparency in marketing such experiences, including assessment notes from a qualified EMF Consultant. Detailed measurements in high-use areas of the facility, using appropriate equipment, are essential to ensure the space provides the promised low EMF environment.

Guidelines

Proposed Maximum Exposure Guidelines aim to provide clear standards for creating safe environments, recognizing that possibilities vary significantly based on local ambient exposure levels. Not all locations will be suitable, as the effectiveness and feasibility of mitigation can differ greatly. These guidelines cater to varying levels of benefit and sensitivity, acknowledging that what works for one individual or one location may not work for another. Establishing these standards is crucial for the marketability and consistency of a distributed, non-centralized nationwide offering, ensuring that each location meets a defined level of safety and effectiveness, regardless of its unique challenges.

Sanctuary Level 1: The ultimate protection standard, offering the highest level of synthetic EMF mitigation.

With outdoor living in mind, I propose the following guidelines outside the structure:

• AC Magnetic Field: Maximum of 0.02 mG, measured with the NFA 1000.

• AC Electric Field: Maximum of 0.0 V/m, also measured using the NFA 1000.

• Radio-Frequency Radiation: Maximum of 0.1 µW/m², measured using the Safe and Sound Pro II, with verification of the absence of lower frequencies using the Gigahertz Solutions HF 59B.

Indoor Exposure Guidelines:

• AC Magnetic Field: Maximum of 0.02 mG, measured with the NFA 1000.

• AC Electric Field in Sleeping Areas: Maximum of 0.0 V/m, also measured with the NFA 1000.

• Radio-Frequency Radiation in Sleeping Areas: Maximum of 0.000 µW/m², measured with the Safe and Sound Pro II, with verification of the absence of lower frequencies using the Gigahertz Solutions HF 59B.

• Dirty Electricity: 25 GS units maximum

Sanctuary Level 2: Advanced protection with stringent synthetic EMF guidelines.

With outdoor living in mind, I propose the following guidelines outside the structure:

• AC Magnetic Field: Maximum of 0.05 mG, measured with the NFA 1000.

• AC Electric Field: Maximum of 1.0 V/m, also measured using the NFA 1000.

• Radio-Frequency Radiation: Maximum of 1 µW/m², measured using the Safe and Sound Pro II, with verification of the absence of lower frequencies using the Gigahertz Solutions HF 59B.

Indoor Exposure Guidelines:

• AC Magnetic Field: Maximum of 0.05 mG, measured with the NFA 1000.

• AC Electric Field in Sleeping Areas: Maximum of 0.0 V/m, also measured with the NFA 1000.

• Radio-Frequency Radiation in Sleeping Areas: Maximum of 0.000 µW/m², measured with the Safe and Sound Pro II, with verification of the absence of lower frequencies using the Gigahertz Solutions HF 59B.

• Dirty Electricity: 25 GS units maximum

Sanctuary Level 3: Basic protection suitable for general synthetic EMF reduction.

With outdoor living in mind, I propose the following guidelines outside the structure:

• AC Magnetic Field: Maximum of 0.10 mG, measured with the NFA 1000.

• AC Electric Field: Maximum of 1.0 V/m, also measured using the NFA 1000.

• Radio-Frequency Radiation: Maximum of 10.0 µW/m², measured using the Safe and Sound Pro II, with verification of the absence of lower frequencies using the Gigahertz Solutions HF 59B.

Indoor Exposure Guidelines:

• AC Magnetic Field: Maximum of 0.10 mG, measured with the NFA 1000.

• AC Electric Field in Sleeping Areas: Maximum of 0.3 V/m, also measured with the NFA 1000.

• Radio-Frequency Radiation in Sleeping Areas: 0.000 µW/m², measured with the Safe and Sound Pro II, with verification of the absence of lower frequencies using the Gigahertz Solutions HF 59B.

• Dirty Electricity: 25 GS units maximum

Conclusion

I know others are working to establish or preserve "white zones"—areas still fit for life from an EMF perspective. I wish them success, but I doubt that the powers that be will allow such sanctuaries. I advocate for a low-profile, distributed approach, focusing on areas that can't be easily radiated from terrestrial sources, with just a few or even a single unit per enterprise.

There are many details to consider, but sharing this concept now is crucial so others can begin exploring it. Key points to consider:

• Not all areas are suitable for this type of facility.

• Terrain and distance from populated areas are critical factors.

• While radio-frequency radiation is the most obvious concern, other forms of synthetic EMF are equally important.

• A decentralized model is essential.

• Mobile solutions offer strategic advantages, like tiny houses.

• Off-grid cabins without electricity in remote areas are ideal for those ready to embrace off-grid living skills.

• Church summer camps during the off-season could be perfect locations, and they could also provide opportunities for "digital detox" weeks or weekends.

I hope this vision inspires you. Imagine the shift in awareness when people realize that life can be better without involuntary synthetic EMF exposure and all that might follow this realization on a societal basis!

Postscript

I have no financial interest in my friend's project beyond providing EMF assessment and remediation consulting. I wish I had the financial resources to build one or two such facilities myself, to be part of this movement and help people in this unique way. I'm sharing all of this now because the world can't wait—this is an idea whose time has come. If you feel inspired and are in a position to support or invest in such initiatives, your contribution could help bring this vision to life and make a meaningful impact.