Can Wi-Fi make you allergic?

Back in the case of women allergic to Wi-Fi in France, the final decision for her would raise a big question for similar cases in the future.

Does Wifi cause allergies?

The electromagnetic field is invisible, however it is present everywhere around us. Some electromagnetic fields are caused by nature such as the Earth and Sun magnetic fields. Most other electromagnetic fields are present due to human technology devices. There is a fact that society is growing, we are getting more and more surrounded by different electromagnetic schools.

Mobile phones, wi-fi transmitters, personal computers, broadcasting stations and even television controls, they all emit around an electromagnetic field. Among them, there are 24/24 operation devices such as wi-fi modems, telephone broadcasting stations, television stations. They have certain effects on our lives.

Graph of electromagnetic spectrum emitted from devices.

Debates about the level of electromagnetic influence on human health have not come to an end. Recently the problem was flared up again when a woman who was allergic to wi-fi received a huge compensation for what she suffered.

Martine Richard, who is diagnosed with an electromagnetic allergy (EHS) , received a disability allowance when she complained about her condition. Science has never confirmed the association between symptoms of Martine Richard and electromagnetic fields.

So what is really an electromagnetic allergy? What do we know and don't know about EHS? What will our future look like after Martine Richard?

What is EHS?

Some people are said to be hypersensitive to electromagnetic fields.

EHS (Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity) temporarily translates into an electromagnetic hypersensitivity. It is a complex condition that causes symptoms such as headaches, nausea, and difficulty sleeping when exposed near devices that generate electromagnetic fields. More severe cases have been reported to negatively affect the subject, causing the person to lose the ability to work or social function.

In general, EHS status is gradually becoming popular. More and more cases have been recorded. However, there are currently no clear criteria to diagnose this situation.

Scientists got into it

Many scientists have failed to study the relationship between electromagnetic fields and reported negative health symptoms. This raises the big question: what if it is not electromagnetism?

One big possibility is the 'nocebo' effect. One can have strong belief that electromagnetic fields are harmful and when near these devices, their own psychological insecurity has caused bad symptoms.

An example of the 'nobeco' effect is very rich. In 1955, the Tokyo subway system was chemically attacked by a sect group by Sarin gas. After the news spread, hospitals flooded patients with symptoms and high risk of sarin infection, such as nausea, dizziness . However, it was those who were exposed to this sarin gas. there is no sign.

• 8 ways to increase the best Wifi signal
• Turn a Windows computer into a Wifi broadcast station

While science also fails to explain the effects of electromagnetic fields on EHS symptoms, the 'nobeco' hypothesis is receiving the most homosexuality. Most EHS reports are recorded by artificial agents. It means that someone who has EHS is aware of the presence of electromagnetic fields around him.

Research continues

While the problem has left a lot of controversy, the research continues. Scientists are going in the opposite direction, they want to show that electromagnetic fields do not cause EHS symptoms. A certain actor will have to take responsibility, a high possibility is 'nobeco'.

The Electromagnetic Bioeffects research center in Australia is one of the units that studies this issue. Until the real cause is revealed, treatment for patients with EHS remains a challenge.

There is no concrete evidence that wi-fi is the culprit of EHS.

Back in the case of women allergic to Wi-Fi in France, the final decision for her would raise a big question for similar cases in the future. The Court never stated that EHS is a legal condition for compensation.

In contrast, the media and social activists make the situation more complicated. They talk too much about the court's decision. This can make it a bad precedent.

As mentioned, EHS cases are not uncommon. However, even if science is not enough evidence to explain EHS, we cannot conclude anything about electromagnetic fields in general or wi-fi in particular can affect human health. In Martine Richard's case, was the court too hasty?