#84 EMF Harmonizers, Pendents, Neutralizers, Blockers, Reducers & Such Things – Are They Effective?

 It’s been about a year since I’ve visited this topic. I’ve met many people, served many new clients, built relationships with others in my field so I wanted to let you know where my thinking is now on the important topic of EMF harmonizers, pendents, neutralizers, blockers, reducers and other such things.

Electromagnetic poisoning victims brought near death, then recovering and going on to a productive life with increasing resilience and decreasing sensitivity are the primary benchmarks in my work. Others I know who fit this description have tried protection devices and, by experience, know they don’t work.

If I were another kind of man, I could make a fortune creating and selling a Keith Cutter-approved protection device or becoming an affiliate for a manufacturer with one already on the market. It would certainly be much easier than legitimate assessment and remediation.

The placebo effect is real, so people not in the benchmark group may feel better about continuing to use their tech, but I’ve never been able to measure a significant reduction in field strength. If synthetic radiation exposure is indeed harmful, it’s not helpful to feel better about continuing exposure.

We are all susceptible to effective advertising, especially if we want to believe in a magic pill.

My advice is to first spend your money on living in a pristine EMF environment and enjoying its benefits. After you’ve accomplished this if you have any money left over and want to buy a protection device, go for it.  I like the ones made of copper. I think they’re pretty.

https://keithcutter.substack.com/p/emf-harmonizers-neutralizers-blockers

Transcript

Keith Cutter: 0:01

You either want to reduce personal or familial exposure to harmful man-made electromagnetic radiation or, even worse, you need to reduce exposure. But and well inconvenient. There must be a better way, an easier way. You think you just want to wear a special necklace or put a sticker on the back of your phone or buy a device, something that will magically make everything better. The question is EMF harmonizers, pendants, neutralizers, blockers, reducers and other such things are they effective? Do they really work?

Gwyneth: 1:06

Coming up, EMF Remedy is dedicated to helping you understand which electromagnetic threats are present in your home and whether, in the context of your current home, one you're considering for purchase or building a new home with comprehensive protection designed in. Emf Remedy can help you reduce your family's exposure to harmful man-made electromagnetic radiation.

Keith Cutter: 1:40

Hi, this is Keith Cutter, host of the EMF Remedy podcast. Hi, this is Keith Cutter, host of the EMF Remedy Podcast, your trusted guide to reducing personal synthetic EMF exposures. It's been about a year since I've visited this topic. I've met many people, served many new clients, built relationships with others in my field, so I wanted to let you know where my thinking is now on the important topic of EMF harmonizers, pendants, neutralizers, blockers, reducers and other such things.

Keith Cutter: 2:44

No-transcript. These products claim to mitigate the physiological impacts of synthetic EMFs from devices like cell phones, wi-fi routers and smart meters. For clarity, we'll collectively refer to all these devices as protection devices. While the popularity of these devices reflects a growing awareness of the dangers of RF radiation, their actual benefits are illusory. My personal experience and that of others who are increasing resilience and reducing sensitivity to EMF exposure show that these devices lack measurable effects and fail to provide genuine protection. But you know what? There's some positive news here? These devices aim to provide a sense of security and well-being by claiming to harmonize or neutralize harmful emf radiation, suggesting basically that they can transform potentially harmful energy into harmless or even beneficial forms of energy.

Keith Cutter: 4:14

The abundance of protection devices available across distribution channels underscores two undeniable facts. Distribution Channels underscores two undeniable facts. Number one there is significant awareness of the potential dangers of RF radiation. That's a great thing. And people are highly motivated to take proactive steps to mitigate these risks. That's another great thing. The widespread market presence reflects a growing public consciousness about synthetic radiation harm and a collective willingness to invest in solutions. This trend is hugely important as it highlights a societal shift towards prioritizing and addressing the health impacts of synthetic radiation exposure.

Keith Cutter: 5:14

If you've purchased one of these devices, you are not alone. Despite my technical background and knowledge about proper assessment and remediation, I once bought an expensive $1,000 harmonizer. The one I bought was made of brushed copper affected by electromagnetic poisoning that I was disabled and unable to work, forcing me to sell possessions to survive. The purchase was way beyond my means. This was before I remediated my home, by the way, long before I was living in a shielded home. Long before I was living in a shielded home, I knew it couldn't work, but I wanted it to. This experience taught me an important lesson about the power of hope and the allure of the magic pill. While the Harmonizer didn't provide the relief I sought, it reinforced it. My commitment to evidence-based approaches in managing synthetic EMF exposure and helping others navigate similar challenges.

Keith Cutter: 6:41

People often seek quick fixes to continue the habits they know are unproductive. Hoping for a magic pill to make everything okay are unproductive. Hoping for a magic pill to make everything okay. This tendency is evident in many aspects of life, such as managing chronic pain. Instead of addressing the root cause of the pain through the foundations of health, many people rely on pain relievers to mask the symptoms. Many people rely on pain relievers to mask the symptoms. These medications provide temporary relief but do not solve the underlying issues, leading to a cycle of dependency, unsustainable pain management. Sorry that sustainable pain management requires addressing the root cause and making necessary adjustments. The appeal of a quick and effortless solution remains powerful. Similarly, people are drawn to EMF protection devices that promote effortless solutions allowing them to continue their current behaviors without addressing the root cause, without reducing personal exposure. Buying harmonizers is another example of the magic pill concept.

Keith Cutter: 8:15

Let's talk about the placebo effect. People are often more attracted to expensive or elaborate EMF protection devices, a phenomenon that mirrors placebo research devices. A phenomenon that mirrors placebo research, where studies show that individuals respond more positively to treatments they perceive as sophisticated or costly. So, for instance, research on placebos has demonstrated that people report better outcome from taking elaborate sugar pills or receiving a saline injection compared to plain sugar pills. The sugar pills do get an effect. The fancy sugar pills get a better effect and the highest effect is from saline injections. This tendency highlights the psychological influence of perceived value and complexity on the effectiveness of treatments, even when the treatments have no active therapeutic ingredients. No active therapeutic ingredients.

Keith Cutter: 9:33

I would ask if there really is harm caused by synthetic EMF exposure Is simply feeling better about continuing to be exposed helpful, exposed, helpful. So now I'd like to turn to you. Know if your protection devices actually worked? Your tech wouldn't. So I learned something from and value every client of EMF Remedy I truly do.

Keith Cutter: 10:11

Still, I find the most incredible wisdom from those who, like me, have been brought near death, shown their mortality, but are now gaining resilience to synthetic radiation and experiencing reduced sensitivity, the hallmarks of true healing from electromagnetic poisoning. These individuals have embarked on a challenging journey towards recovery, often experimenting with various solutions along the way. Many of them, like myself, have tried harmonizers and similar devices in their quest for relief. But here's the thing None of them continue to use these products as, like me, they've found that finding or creating a pristine environment is necessary and, I believe, sufficient for improvement. Their experiences underscore the critical importance of reducing exposure to synthetic radiation to achieve genuine healing and resilience.

Keith Cutter: 11:26

Despite the widespread reach of modern telecommunications, there are still a few pristine places where EMF exposure is minimal. These rare locations typically feature low population density, natural terrain features that block EMF signals, difficult access and significant distance from major population centers. Finding such a sanctuary can be challenging, but within these environments, the most profound healing and resilience building can occur. For those severely affected by electromagnetic radiation. These remote areas offer a crucial refuge from synthetic EMFs, allowing for proper recovery and well-being. The alternate approach to creating a pristine EMF environment involves living in a purpose-built low-EMF home situated in a relatively low-EMF area. These homes minimize both low and high-frequency synthetic exposures. A genuinely low-EMF environment is essential for those seeking real improvement. While it may not be feasible for everyone, it remains, in my mind, the definitive solution. So, with that in mind, I'm skeptical.

Keith Cutter: 13:09

My career in high tech has provided me with a robust foundation in scientific and technical principles. I hold a bachelor's degree in mathematical sciences specializing in applying mathematics to scientific disciplines. Over 16 years, I've held technical positions at Apple Computer and Hewlett-Packard, where I can assure you every decision and project required rigorous scientific and engineering justification. This quantitative approach to problem solving has deeply informed my perspective on the efficacy of EMF protection devices. My experience has taught me to prioritize evidence-based solutions and measurable outcomes, which is crucial when assessing the true impacts of these devices. The true impacts of these devices.

Keith Cutter: 14:10

The advertising of protection devices is compelling. There's talk of subtle healing, scalar energies, electrons, protons, but absolutely no substance, nothing that would stand up in a conference room full of engineers. So I can't measure effects, is what I'm saying. Through my testing of various protection devices, I've never detected a significant effect on field strength. My methodology is straightforward I measure the EMF field strength without the device and again with the device in place. The results consistently show no measurable reduction in field strength, indicating these devices do not provide the protection they claim. This has been my experience across numerous products and different locations.

Keith Cutter: 15:15

While I concede that I have not tested every device on the market and therefore can't categorically rule out the existence of a genuinely effective protection device, it remains unknown to me, my colleagues and my clients who are actively working to gain resilience and reduce sensitivity to EMFs. There may indeed be a black swan, but the current evidence does not support the claims made by the protection devices I have tested. I have tested. This lack of measurable impact underscores the importance of relying on proven, evidence-based strategies for managing synthetic EMF exposure. If any of these protection devices truly worked, my technical background and international context in engineering and marketing would allow me to make a fortune selling them. Instead of demanding assessment and remediation work, I could make a fortune selling protection devices. My continued focus on assessment and remediation underscores my conviction that these devices don't deliver on their promises. If a reliable solution existed, I would champion it, leveraging my experience, connections and personal healing journey to provide real value and protection against synthetic EMF exposure. I just it isn't there.

Keith Cutter: 17:48

If protection devices indeed worked, by fundamentally altering synthetic EMF into something harmless or beneficial, it would logically disrupt the function of the technology producing the EMF. For instance, wi-fi routers, cell phones and other electronic devices rely on specific electromagnetic frequencies and modulation schemes to operate. If a protection device could transform these into something non-harmful or even helpful, it would also interfere with the device's ability to communicate and function properly. This paradox highlights the implausibility of such claims. If protection devices were effective, our tech wouldn't work, rendering everyday electronic communication and connectivity impossible. This inherent contradiction casts significant doubts on the efficacy of these protection devices. You know what? If they did work, industry could limit their liability. If they did work, industry could limit their liability. If protection devices worked, cellular providers could significantly limit their legal liability related to synthetic EMF exposure, which is disclosed annually in their risk management and regulatory documents.

Keith Cutter: 19:04

Take a look at any of the major carriers' latest 10-K statements. So, for example, in Verizon's latest 10-K statement I find the following, and this is I'm quoting a portion of what's being said Our wireless business also faces personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits related to alleged health effects of wireless phones or radio frequency transmitters. We may incur significant expenses in defending these lawsuits. In addition, we may be required to pay significant awards or settlements. So that's the end of the quote. An effective protection device near each operating cell tower could mitigate potential health risks and legal repercussions.

Keith Cutter: 20:11

Protection devices would provide a straightforward and cost-effective strategy for industry. The absence, I would argue, of such use by cellular providers further underscores the skepticism around the efficacy of these devices. If they truly worked, as claimed, it stands to reason that large telecom companies would have already implemented them to minimize liability. And I would just say ditto for the cell phone manufacturers. Right, if they could just etch a little pretty geometric pattern on the back and call it sacred, something or other, and that it charms the radiation and it actually worked, why wouldn't they do that? All right. So in conclusion, electromagnetic poisoning victims brought near to death, then recovering and going on to productive life with increased resilience and decreasing sensitivity are the primary benchmarks in my work.

Keith Cutter: 21:22

Others I know who fit this description have tried protection devices and by experience, know they don't work. I just haven't talked to one. I haven't found one that says it does. If I were another kind of man, I could make a fortune creating and selling a Keith Cutter approved protection device or becoming an affiliate for a manufacturer with one already on the market. It would certainly be much easier than legitimate assessment and remediation. Than legitimate assessment and remediation, the placebo effect is real, so people not in the benchmark group may feel better about continuing to use their tech, but I've never been able to measure a significant reduction in field strength. If synthetic radiation exposure is indeed harmful, it's not helpful to feel better about continuing exposure. Right, we are all susceptible to effective advertising, especially if we want to believe in a magic pill. My advice is to first spend your money on living in a pristine EMF environment and enjoying its benefits. After you've accomplished this, if you have any money left over and want to buy a protection device, go for it.

Keith Cutter: 23:08

I like the ones made of copper. I think they're pretty All right. I hope this has been helpful. If you have found value, you can help me by becoming a financial supporter through the emfremedycom website. Please take the time and effort to leave a review on Apple Podcast, Most important. Join me in praying that this podcast will be a blessing to many. Keith Cutter, emfremedycom. See you next time.

Gwyneth: 24:00

The EMF Remedy Podcast is a project of EMF Remedy LLC. We'd like to be your trusted guide for achieving a better EMF environment in your home. The contents on this podcast are provided for informational purposes only and are not intended to substitute for the advice provided by your doctor or other healthcare professional. It is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, healthcare or medical advice. Opinions of guests on this podcast do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the EMF Remedy Podcast.