Showing posts with label gadget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gadget. Show all posts

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS)

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) is a descriptive term for symptoms purportedly caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields.[1] Other terms for IEI-EMF include electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), electrohypersensitivity, electro-sensitivity, and electrical sensitivity (ES).
Although the thermal effects of electromagnetic fields on the body are established, self-described sufferers of electromagnetic hypersensitivity report responding to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (or electromagnetic radiation) at intensities well below the limits permitted by international radiation safety standards.
The reported symptoms of EHS include headache, fatigue, stress, sleep disturbances, skin symptoms like prickling, burning sensations and rashes, pain and ache in muscles and many other health problems. Whatever their cause, EHS symptoms are a real and sometimes disabling problem for the affected person.[2]
The majority of provocation trials to date have found that self-described sufferers of electromagnetic hypersensitivity are unable to distinguish between exposure to real and fake electromagnetic fields,[3][4] and it is not recognized as a medical condition by the medical or scientific communities. Since a systematic review in 2005 showing no convincing scientific evidence for it being caused by electromagnetic fields,[3] several double-blind experiments have been published, each of which has suggested that people who report electromagnetic hypersensitivity are unable to detect the presence of electromagnetic fields and are as likely to report ill health following a sham exposure, as they are following exposure to genuine electromagnetic fields, suggesting the cause to be the nocebo effect.[5][6][7]

Symptoms and severity

A 2001 survey found that people related their symptoms most frequently to mobile phone base stations (74%), followed by mobile phones (36%), cordless phones (29%) and power lines (27%). The survey was not designed to find any causal connection between electromagnetic field exposure and ill health.[8]
A report from the UK Health Protection Agency said that self-described "electrical sensitivity" sufferers have symptoms that can be grouped into two broad categories: facial skin symptoms and more general, non-specific symptoms across a range of body systems. The facial skin symptoms and their attribution to visual display units was mostly a Nordic phenomenon. The report pointed out that it did not "imply the acceptance of a causal relationship between symptoms and attributed exposure".[9]
Recently a smaller group of people in Europe as a whole and in the USA have reported general and severe symptoms such as headache, fatigue, tinnitus, dizziness, memory deficits, irregular heart beat, and whole-body skin symptoms.[10] A 2005 Health Protection Agency report noted the overlap in many sufferers with other syndromes known as symptom-based conditions, FSS (functional somatic syndromes) and IEI (idiopathic environmental intolerance).[9] Levitt proposed ties between electromagnetic fields and some of these 20th-century maladies, including chronic fatigue syndrome, Gulf War syndrome, and autism.[11]
Figures from Carlsson et al.[12] show that 1.9% of people report much annoyance from visual displays and fluorescent lighting. 2.4% report much or some annoyance with both any electrical factor and also chemicals or smells. A 1991 study by William J. Rea concluded that there is "strong evidence that electromagnetic field sensitivity exists".[13]
Those reporting electromagnetic hypersensitivity will usually describe different levels of susceptibility to electric fields, magnetic fields and various frequencies of electromagnetic waves (including fluorescent and low-energy lights, and microwaves from mobile, cordless/portable phones), and Wifi with no consistency in the severity of symptoms between sufferers.[14] Other surveys of electromagnetic hypersensitivity sufferers have not been able to find any consistent pattern to these symptoms.[8][15] Instead symptoms reflecting almost every part of the body have been attributed to electromagnetic field exposure.
A minority of people who report electromagnetic hypersensitivity claim to be severely affected by it. For instance, one survey has estimated that approximately 10% of electromagnetic hypersensitivity sufferers in Sweden were on sick leave or have taken early retirement or a disability pension, compared to 5% of the general population,[15] while a second survey has reported that of 3046 people who experienced 'annoyance' from electrical equipment, 340 (11%) reported 'much' annoyance.[12] For those who report being severely affected, their symptoms can have a significant impact on their quality of life; with sufferers reporting physical, mental and social impairment and psychological distress.[8]

Prevalence

The prevalence of claimed electromagnetic hypersensitivity has been estimated as being between a few cases per million to 5% of the population depending on the location and definition of the condition.
In 2002, a questionnaire survey of 2,072 people in California found that the prevalence of self-reported electromagnetic hypersensitivity within the sample group was 3% (95% CI 2.8–3.68%), with electromagnetic hypersensitivity being defined as "being allergic or very sensitive to getting near electrical appliances, computers, or power lines" (response rate 58.3%).[16]
A similar questionnaire survey from the same year in Stockholm County (Sweden), found a 1.5% prevalence of self-reported electromagnetic hypersensitivity within the sample group, with electromagnetic hypersensitivity being defined as "hypersensitivity or allergy to electric or magnetic fields" (response rate 73%).[15]
A 2004 survey in Switzerland found a 5% prevalence of claimed electromagnetic hypersensitivity in the sample group of 2,048.[17]
In 2007, a UK survey aimed at a randomly selected group of 20,000 people found a prevalence of 4% for symptoms self-attributed to electromagnetic exposure.[18]
A group of scientists also attempted to estimate the number of people reporting "subjective symptoms" from electromagnetic fields for the European Commission.[19] In the words of a HPA review, they concluded that "the differences in prevalence were at least partly due to the differences in available information and media attention around electromagnetic hypersensitivity that exist in different countries. Similar views have been expressed by other commentators."[9]

Scientific evidence and etiology

World Health Organization

Following a study conducted in 2005, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded that:
EHS is characterized by a variety of non-specific symptoms that differ from individual to individual. The symptoms are certainly real and can vary widely in their severity. Whatever its cause, EHS can be a disabling problem for the affected individual. EHS has no clear diagnostic criteria and there is no scientific basis to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure. Further, EHS is not a medical diagnosis, nor is it clear that it represents a single medical problem.[1]

Studies

Although individuals who report electromagnetic hypersensitivity believe that electromagnetic fields from common electrical devices trigger or exacerbate their symptoms, it has not been established that these fields play any role in the cause of these symptoms.[20] Exposures are to intensity levels below those generally accepted to cause physiological effects, and the diverse physiological effects reported are not what would be expected from high intensity electromagnetic fields.[citation needed] Sufferers and their support groups are convinced of a causal relationship with electromagnetic fields, but presently the scientific literature does not support such a link.[20] Some professionals consider electromagnetic hypersensitivity to be a physical condition with an unclear cause, while others suggest that some aspects may be psychological.[1][3] Reviews have suggested that psychological mechanisms may play a role in causing or exacerbating EHS symptoms.[21] Research has also shown neurophysiological differences between sensitive individuals and controls. This may reflect either a psychophysiological stress response to participating in the study or a more general imbalance in autonomic nervous system regulation.[1][22][23][24][25]
In 2005, a systematic review looked at the results of 31 experiments testing the role of electromagnetic fields in causing ES. Each of these experiments exposed people who reported electromagnetic hypersensitivity to genuine and sham electromagnetic fields under single- or double-blind conditions.[3] The review concluded that:
The symptoms described by 'electromagnetic hypersensitivity' sufferers can be severe and are sometimes disabling. However, it has proved difficult to show under blind conditions that exposure to electromagnetic fields can trigger these symptoms. This suggests that 'electromagnetic hypersensitivity' is unrelated to the presence of electromagnetic fields, although more research into this phenomenon is required.
Seven studies were found which did report an association, while 24 could not find any association with electromagnetic fields. However, of the seven positive studies, two could not be replicated even by the original authors, three had serious methodological shortcomings, and the final two presented contradictory results. Since then, several more double-blind experiments have been published, each of which has suggested that people who report electromagnetic hypersensitivity are unable to detect the presence of electromagnetic fields and are as likely to report ill health following a sham exposure, as they are following exposure to genuine electromagnetic fields.[5][6][7]
One of the studies which Rubin et al. reviewed, known as the Essex study, received some criticism for its methodology and analysis, and the authors responded in full to these initial criticisms.[26] The authors noted that their study says nothing about the long-term effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields, but those affected generally claimed to respond to the fields within a few minutes.
In January, 2010 Rubin et al. published a follow up to their original review which included 15 experiments done since the last original review, bringing the totals up to 46 double-blind experiments and 1175 individuals with claimed hypersensitivity. The study confirmed the results of the original, claiming "no robust evidence could be found" to support the hypothesis that electromagnetic exposure causes EHS. The review also found that the studies included did support the role of the nocebo effect in triggering acute symptoms in those with EHS.[27]
In 2008, another systematic review reached the same conclusion as Rubin et al.[4]
A 2005 report by the UK Health Protection Agency concluded that electromagnetic hypersensitivity needs to be considered in ways other than its etiology; that is, the suffering is real, even if the underlying cause is not thought to be related to electromagnetic fields. They also wrote that considering only whether electromagnetic radiation was a causative factor was not meeting the needs of sufferers, although continued research on etiology was essential.[9]
In 2002, some controversy over the causal relationship was demonstrated by the Freiburger Appeal, a petition originated by the German environmental medical lobby group IGUMED, which stated that "we can see a clear temporal and spatial correlation between the appearance of [certain] disease and exposure to pulsed high-frequency microwave radiation", and demanding radical restrictions on mobile phone use.[28] To address some of these concerns, and others, Hocking advised in a 2006 WHO proceedings that the test type and duration should be tailored to the individual, and that washout times are needed to prevent a carry-over effect of previous exposure.[29] However, in 2005 the World Health Organization concluded that there is no known scientific basis for the belief that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is caused by exposure to an electromagnetic field.[1]

Diagnosis

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is not currently an accepted diagnosis. At present there are no accepted research criteria other than 'self-reported symptoms', and for clinicians there is no case definition or clinical practice guideline. There is no specific test that can identify sufferers, as symptoms other than skin disorders tend to be subjective or non-specific. It is important firstly to exclude all other possible causes of the symptoms. Researchers and the WHO have stressed the need for a careful investigation. For some, complaints of electromagnetic hypersensitivity may mask organic or psychiatric illness and requires both a thorough medical evaluation to identify and treat any specific conditions that may be responsible for the symptoms, and a psychological evaluation to identify alternative psychiatric/psychological conditions that may be responsible or contribute to the symptoms.[1][30]
A WHO factsheet also recommends an assessment of the workplace and home for factors that might contribute to the presented symptoms. These could include indoor air pollution, excessive noise, poor lighting (flickering light) or ergonomic factors. They also point out that "[s]ome studies suggest that certain physiological responses of [electromagnetic hypersensitivity] individuals tend to be outside the normal range. In particular, hyper reactivity in the central nervous system and imbalance in the autonomic nervous system need to be followed up in clinical investigations and the results for the individuals taken as input for possible treatment."[1]

Possible treatment and symptom alleviation

For individuals reporting electromagnetic hypersensitivity with long lasting symptoms and severe handicaps, treatment therapy should be directed principally at reducing symptoms and functional handicaps. This should be done in close co-operation with a qualified medical specialist to address the symptoms and a hygienist (to identify and, if necessary, control factors in the environment that have adverse health effects of relevance to the patient).[1]
Those who feel they are sensitive to electromagnetic fields generally try to reduce their exposure to electromagnetic sources as much as is practical. Complete avoidance of electromagnetic fields presents major practical difficulties in modern society. Methods often employed by sufferers include: avoiding sources of exposure; disconnecting or removing electrical devices; shielding or screening of self or residence; medication; and complementary and alternative therapy.[8]
The UK Health Protection Agency reviewed treatments for electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and success was reported with "neutralizing chemical dilution, antioxidant treatment, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, Acupuncture and Shiatsu".[9] It was noted that:
The studies reviewed suffer from a combination of the small numbers of subjects included and the potential variation both within and between study populations. Little information is given as to the attributed exposures of the subjects. These factors limit their general applicability outside the immediate study group. For those studies where detail was available, only two were placebo controlled [Acupunture and nutrition intervention].
It was also noted in the review that success may have more to do with offering a caring environment as opposed to a specific treatment.

A 2006 systematic review identified nine clinical trials testing different treatments for ES:[31] four studies tested cognitive behavioural therapy, two tested visual display unit filters, one tested a device emitting 'shielding' electromagnetic fields, one tested acupuncture, and one tested daily intake of tablets containing vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium. The authors of the review concluded that:

The evidence base concerning treatment options for electromagnetic hypersensitivity is limited and more research is needed before any definitive clinical recommendations can be made. However, the best evidence currently available suggests that cognitive behavioural therapy is effective for patients who report being hypersensitive to weak electromagnetic fields.
Some Americans with the condition have moved to the United States National Radio Quiet Zone where wireless is restricted.[32][33]

Conferences

In 2004 the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted a workshop on electromagnetic hypersensitivity.[34] The aim of the conference was to review the current state of knowledge and opinions of the conference participants and propose ways forward on this issue. The meeting was conducted by the WHO International EMF Project as part of the scientific review process to determine biological and health effects from exposure to EMF. The purpose of these workshops is to bring together expert scientists so that established health effects and gaps in knowledge requiring further research can be identified. EHS has been a particularly contentious issue for a number of years.

See also

Saturday, August 23, 2014

Evan Blass: King of the leakers


Evan Blass: King of the leakers

WATCH: The man who shares the industry's secrets

Related Stories

Can you keep a secret? The technology industry sure can't.
As new products are being prepared for launch, there is no shortage of leaked material spoiling the surprise.
Sometimes it comes from a production line in China, or maybe a warehouse worker who opens a box and takes a quick snap.
And sometimes an Apple executive will leave a new device in a bar.
Whoops.
Whatever the source, a good, accurate leaked image of new technology travels the world in moments.
And throughout the years, one man has emerged as the king of leakers. In a world of hoaxes, his leaks are the ones that made technology journalists and enthusiasts take notice.
He is Evan Blass - @evleaks - and he is calling it a day, retiring from the cut-throat leaking game. He's never done an on-camera interview - that is, until the BBC's technology programme Click went to visit him at home in Philadelphia.
For BBC News Online, we asked Evan to share what he felt were the most significant leaks he brought to the public's attention.
line break
Nokia Lumia
Nokia Lumia 820/920 - August 2012
Evan: "Little known fact: I leaked six to eight devices in July of 2012 before taking my Twitter account offline for nearly the entire month of August.
"When I returned to leaking at the end of August, these Nokia leaks really jump-started my career - putting the feed on the map, so to speak."
line break
LG G2
LG G2 - May 2013
"At the time, no-one was sure that this device would eventually become the G2, but due to the epic thinness of the side bezels, suspicions ran high.
"I've never seen a mystery device capture the interest of an audience the way that blue-screened, in-the-wild shot did, several months before launch."
line break
HTC M8 Prime
HTC M8 Prime - May 2014
"As it turns out, the M8 Prime was seemingly killed in utero by HTC, even though it had promised to be HTC's best-ever handset.
"But what really appeals to me in this leak isn't the phone itself, but the quality of the 3D-rendered image.
"I still find myself staring at sometimes, completely hypnotised."
line break
HTC First
HTC First - April 2013
"Leaks are always more rewarding when the devices are heavily anticipated.
"Although not many people ended up buying the so-called Facebook phone, the fact that HTC designed it to the social media giant's specification ensured that the HTC First got more than its fair share of coverage and buzz."
line break
Moto X
Moto X - July 2013
"What interests me about this story is the fact that, despite its (accurately-) rumoured, non-flagship specs, the Moto X from Motorola saw even greater engagement than its quad-core, full-HD rivals of the same year.
"It takes a pretty special phone to generate that kind of anticipation with less-than-category-besting specifications."
line break
Sony Xperia Z1s
Sony Xperia Z1s - October 2013
"This 'mini' version of the Xperia Z1 was a somewhat unique case in that its specs were not severely hamstrung like most of the 'mini' takes on flagship handsets.
"Sony discovered that there was actually quite a large niche of people who wanted the same power as full-size devices, but with more single-handed capabilities."
line break
Asus Padfone 2
Asus Padfone 2 - October 2012
"For me, the Padfone 2 itself wasn't as special as the fact that I'd already leaked the original Padfone the previous year when employed at Pocketnow.
"And the next year, I was able to leak the Padfone mini, as well."
line break
Logitech Powershell
Logitech Powershell for iPhone - October 2013
"Before leaking this gamepad, I had no idea that accessories could draw as much or even more interest than many actual phones.
"As this tweet inched past 200 and then 300 retweets, I realised that certain phones are so popular that even their dedicated accessories can cause quite a stir."
line break
Google Nexus 7
Google Nexus 7 - July 2013
"Nexus devices have a huge following - which is particularly evident when you have the misfortune of revealing a planned demise for the product range.
"So naturally the follow-up to a popular Nexus tablet was going to see a lot of engagement.
"At the time, it was my most retweeted tweet ever, and even after a heavily-engaged retirement post, still remains among the most popular of all time."
line break
Nokia X
Nokia X - December 2013
"No-one could believe that Microsoft-affiliated (and then -owned) Nokia would actually go to market with a Google Android handset.
"But there are some pundits who believe that the threat of the mobile maker fleeing Windows Phone for its arch rival in green was actually the main impetus behind Microsoft pushing so hard for the acquisition of Nokia earlier that year.
"It made for great theatre."

More on This Story

Related Stories

  Podcast: 
  
Marques Brownlee and Evan Blass Podcast Improved Quality

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Digital Marketing Executive

What's it really like?

Virgil Ierubino is a 25 year old Digital Marketing Executive, currently working at the publisher Cambridge University Press.

Virgil Ierubino - Digital Marketing Executive

Here he explains his career so far:
 I graduated in 2008 with a degree in Philosophy from Cambridge University. As arts students will know, apart from academia, there is no obvious career path for graduates in this subject. However, philosophy taught me to think logically and write creatively, and both these skills ended up being invaluable for my marketing career so far. Apart from philosophy, I had always taken a huge interest in the digital field. I have always been very technical, and my knowledge of software made me an ideal candidate for digital marketing roles.

After I graduated, I secured the role of Marketing Manager at a company which sells animation software. I managed the brand, devised marketing campaigns and controlled the company’s website. Just under a year later, I left the company and for a brief period decided to be a freelance web designer. I then took up my present role as digital marketing executive at Cambridge University Press, where I market the catalogue of English Language teaching books and software, in a medium-sized team with other marketing colleagues.

My typical day in the office involves lots of varied tasks for different projects. I work on a lot of documents such as marketing plans, sales support guides and website briefs for suppliers. I also attend team meetings to discuss upcoming products and how best to promote them. Once a month I login to various systems to generate sales reports, and circulate them within the team together with an executive summary and commentary. I also login to social networking sites frequently and post appropriately.

I like the job a lot because of how varied it is — I am involved with a number of different projects at once so I never have to get bogged down in one thing. I also like the opportunity I have to influence and define the company’s direction for new types of digital products. The main thing I like though is the chance to be creative and experimental: because digital products and digital marketing is a quickly evolving field, there’s a chance to promote very interesting new products and be really innovative in campaigns.

Even though there is plenty of room for creativity, there are some more mundane aspects of the role which I don’t enjoy so much, such as generating sales reports. Also, because I am in a very traditional company that isn’t used to digital marketing, I often have to persuade people of marketing initiatives that they don’t immediately agree with. The other frustrating thing about this is that digital marketing and marketing for software is not always given the same priority and budget as traditional marketing or the marketing of books.

My advice to anyone seeking a career in digital marketing is to be very aware of what is happening in the digital scene. Know all the digital jargon and latest developments in gadgets such as mobile phones. It is worthwhile developing your skills in computer software too. Once you get the role, chances are you will be in the same team as people who don’t have digital marketing interests. Make yourself an expert and don’t be shy in taking the responsibility for all things digital in your team.