INTERACTIVE LESSON & SIMULATOR
Interactive Comparison: FCC / ICNIRP vs. Building Biology Limits
Explore the 10,000,000-fold logarithmic gap between official thermal heating guidelines and non-thermal biological thresholds (SBM-2015).
What EHS describes
People report headaches, fatigue, skin symptoms and other complaints they attribute to nearby EMF sources — Wi-Fi, phones, power lines. WHO notes that electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) has no agreed clinical definition and no diagnostic test; it describes a pattern of self-reported symptoms and their attribution, not a confirmed medical diagnosis.
What blinded studies have found
In double-blind provocation studies — where neither the participant nor the person running the test knows whether a real EMF source is active — people who identify as having EHS generally cannot detect the exposure any more accurately than chance, and their reported symptoms do not reliably track with whether the field was actually switched on.
What might be happening instead
WHO points to several possible contributors unrelated to EMF exposure itself: genuine anxiety or expectation of harm (a documented “nocebo” effect, where the expectation of a symptom can produce a real one), other environmental factors such as lighting or indoor air quality, and underlying conditions with overlapping symptoms.
Why this isn't the same as dismissal
The symptoms aren't treated as imaginary by WHO or by these studies — they're treated as real experiences whose cause the current evidence points to elsewhere. If you experience this pattern, that's a reason to discuss the whole picture with a clinician, not proof one way or the other about any specific device.