More Mercola Misinformation: Grounding In Reverse

Skeptics are well aware of a few of the more popular doctors selling woo on the web or on TV. One of the them, Dr. Mercola, is mentioned many over and over for his anti-vaccine stance and his pseudoscientific approach to medicine. In fact, Josh DeWald just caught Dr. Mercola misrepresenting dental fillings just over a week ago. Today, Dr. Mercola tweeted about his interest in “grounding aka earthing” and its “benefits.” What drives me crazy about the information in the link he tweeted is not just that he is misrepresenting the health benefits, but he makes it more difficult to undo his misrepresentation of how electricity works in a basic physics sense.

There is some science in the article he gets right. There is a section where he discusses AC and DC currents that, although incomplete, is a pretty good and accurate description of how things work. Although they don’t explain how the drift velocity cited for the flashlight example in this section was obtained, it isn’t unreasonable, and in fact is something many people don’t know about electricity. When we think of electricity, we think of it “flowing,” so it is interesting to note how slow the electrons actually “flow.”

Other than that section, the science turns to pseudoscience and misinformation quickly. The main claim in the article is that somehow, evolution intended us to walk barefoot on the Earth, and that such a process causes electrons from the Earth to enter your body where your immune system can somehow use them. It further claims these electrons protect your body from inflammation. Aside from the gross misrepresentation of the role of electrons in your body, Dr. Mercola claims the effects are well-studied without actually linking to any of the studies making this claim – well other than saying “Do you notice you feel better when you walk barefoot on the Earth?”

One of the most egregious errors is the representation of electromagnetic fields. Here’s an example of an illistration (which is really just a claim, but somehow it is supposed to make things clear):

…a variety of devices introduce spikes or transients that distort the 60 cycle electric field in the wiring, particularly when appliances are switched on or off.

To illustrate this phenomenon, we will use the example of your neighbor’s refrigerator or air conditioner switching on or off. This produces a sudden electrical “spike” that travels through the power lines to your household electrical system. A signal is also radiated into the atmosphere because the wiring acts as an antenna. Taken together the various signals and distortions to the alternating current field create what some people refer to as “dirty electricity.” Attempts have been made to link these phenomena to a variety of health effects. There has been considerable debate about this issue.

I’m not sure what point is being made. To me, the term “spike” would indicate some kind of increase. If anything, the local grid being stressed by several high power appliances would temporarily decrease the current. You can sometimes see this in your home when your own air conditioner cycles on. It depends on many factors. It does cause a measurable change in the voltage you read at an outlet in your home, but claiming this is somehow “dirty” is nonsense.

The other thing they get wrong is  “A signal is also radiated into the atmosphere because the wiring acts like an antenna.” There are two possibilities here. One is the possibility of the wire producing an electromagnetic wave, which isn’t dependent on the atmosphere, and in fact the atmosphere would attenuate any such signal. At 60 Hz, the wavelength of such a wave would be about 500 5000 kilometers, which is much too long to ever expect it to interact with the body. The second possibility is a magnetic field, which for decades people have tried to connect with various diseases. Assuming a very high current draw of an air conditioner of 30 amps, the magnetic field at 5 meters away would be about 0.012 Guass – which is about 2% of what we are exposed to 24 hours a day from the Earth’s magnetic field. If a magnetic field of that strength causes disease, the Earth is doing it to us and not any electrical device.

Another claim is that “alternating electric fields are present everywhere in the environment – they are radiated from wires, even when no current is flowing through them.” I can’t even begin to imagine how they came up with such a claim. Well, I guess I can come up with some far fetched explanations and maybe find a way to make this true. Even in those cases, the effect would be so small that it would take some pretty sensitive measurements to do so, far smaller than the background radiation naturally produced by the sun (something Dr. Mercola constantly touts as being healthy).

Embedded at the top of the article is a video in which Dr. Mercola and Clint Ober try to explain how all of this works and then demonstrate why you need to buy their expensive grounding equipment. In one demonstration, Clint puts an electrode on Dr. Mercola and then displays a volt meter reading about 1 volt of potential on the doctor. Clint then has Dr. Mercola place his hand on the grounding pad, and the voltage goes to about 0.02 volts (which Clint even misreads and/or exaggerates as 2 thousandths instead of 2 hundredths). This is a total sham demonstration; if you look at the setup, the other wire of the volt meter is hooked up to the grounding pad. This would be like putting both wires of a volt meter on the same side of a battery – of course it is going to read zero.

One thing Dr. Mercola didn’t think through in writing this article is he explains how electrons are the particles being moved in electricity, and then claims those same electrons will protect you from various electric fields. If your body has more free electrons, those electrons can then easily be moved by an electric field. So in a sense, your body would be more susceptible to an electric field, and you could actually induce a current in your body as you walk through electric fields.

Dr. Mercola’s question “Do you notice you feel better when you walk barefoot on the Earth,” seems to stem from Clint Ober’s website statement where he says “Go barefoot outside for a half-hour and see what a difference it makes on your pain or stress level.” As David Gorski points out, “Can you say “placebo effects”? Sure, I knew you could.” Of course a half-hour break walking on the grass on a warm day away from the stress of the work day is going to make a person feel better. I can say with certainty it has nothing to do with electrons at my feet. It has much more to do with the electrons already present in my brain.

If someone really feels they need extra electrons, just go ahead and shuffle your feet across a carpet for a minute or so. That little shock you get from touching the doorknob? That’s because you picked up a few too many electrons. You will pick up all the electrons you need from your normal interactions with the environment. You don’t need special treatments to protect you from this mythical “dirty” electricity. I imagine your health would be better if you simply stopped worrying about it. It would also help my health as I wouldn’t have to un-teach bad physics.

About Eric Hall

My day job is teaching physics at the University of Minnesota, Rochester. I write about physics, other sciences, politics, education, and whatever else interests or concerns me. I am always working to be rational and reasonable, and I am always willing to improve my knowledge and change my mind when presented with new evidence.
This entry was posted in Alternative Medicine, Health, Nature, Pseudoscience and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

424 Responses to More Mercola Misinformation: Grounding In Reverse

  1. Josh DeWald says:

    It seems every Mercola has just enough correct information at the beginning to easily lead someone to believe the rest of it is credible. Good stuff!

  2. Alan Henness says:


    An appliance switching on or off, if not properly suppressed, will cause a ‘spike’ of interference. This is entirely separate from any longer term increase or decrease in the mains voltage caused by the change in loading. This spike will have many higher frequency components and does conduct through cabling and will radiate. However, most appliances will be able to tolerate these short-term spikes. It’s quite common to refer to the mains supply as being ‘dirty’ because of these (and other) disturbances on the cabling.

    Of course, just because these disturbances exist, does not mean they cause or could cause any health effects!

    I couldn’t bring myself to watch all of the sales pitch nor to read his nonsense, but I will be writing about the advertising of Clint Ober’s products in the UK in 10 days time.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Sure, I could imagine some feedback into the circuit that could cause a very short burst of a higher frequency. But to even begin to reach a level where any interaction with a human could even be a consideration, the frequency would have to be at least a million times higher to get to a 5 meter wavelength. Even then the likelihood is extremely low (probably would need to be on the order of 10^9 or more higher to start human interaction). The duration would also be very short. As you state, in either case it wouldn’t be enough to have an effect on human health, and certainly a few excess electrons in the body wouldn’t change that.

      I’ll look forward to your writings on this!

  3. Alan Henness says:

    Also, a 60 Hz wave has a wavelength of 5,000 km, not 500 km!

  4. Samantha says:

    I am not fully convinced that Earthing has any benefits, but they certainly do make a convincing argument. Would you say that this report on is false and what parts?

    • Alan Henness says:


      Which bit do you find convincing?

    • Eric Hall says:

      The biggest falsehood is one I address in the blog and comes right from the summary:

      Our immune systems function optimally when our bodies have an adequate supply of electrons, which are easily and naturally obtained by barefoot contact with the Earth.

      Our immune system is a very complex set of cells and proteins. See more here: Simply adding electrons to our body does not have some magic effect on all of those systems. I will also use my own anecdote to disprove this point – if extra electrons made us feel better, then we should feel great in the winter when the dry air allows us to build up a whole bunch of extra electrons walking across a carpet.

      The document also refers to the Earth as a source of electrons and “subtle electric fields.” You don’t need to walk barefoot to be affected by an electric field – it would penetrate right through your shoes. More signs that this is woo.

      In their conclusion – they state:

      The human body has evolved a means to kill bacteria using reactive oxygen species (ROS) that are delivered to a site of injury by white blood cells. Although very effective at this task, ROS are also highly reactive biochemically and can damage healthy tissues. ROS are usually positively charged molecules that need to be neutralized immediately to prevent them from diffusing into healthy tissues. For that purpose negative charges are needed. Nature has solved this problem by providing conductive systems within the human body that deliver electrons from the feet to all parts of the body. This has been the natural arrangement throughout most of human history. Negative charges have always been available, thanks to the Earth, to prevent the inflammatory process from damaging healthy tissues. All of this changed when we began to wear shoes with rubber and plastic soles, and no longer slept in contact with the earth.

      Even if absorption through the skin was the primary source of electrons in our body, it would be silly to think the only source is the ground and through our feet. The various processes of digestion and energy production are very good at providing electrons as needed (one example: But our skin comes in contact with all sorts of objects that can easily donate electrons if our body somehow had an excess of positive charge.

      Although I am not a medical doctor, I could argue that too much negative charge can actually be bad for you as well. If you look at the role of potassium in the body (a positive ion), too little of potassium is linked to all sorts of health problems. Adding negative charge to the body could counteract this balance. As most science-based doctors will tell you, the body is really good at regulating what it needs on its own (unless some disease prevents that for certain nutrients). There is no need for a special effort to obtain electrons, vitamins, or anything else. Just eat a good balanced diet, and your body will take care of the rest.

      • Stephen Propatier says:

        When you you talk about potassium it is a dissolved ion. With out getting crazy with medical details. It is the intra-cellular extra-cellular ion gradient that is important not the ion itself. Sodium has a high extra-cellular concentration and a low intra-cellular, potassium is the opposite. The cell membrane channels drive the gradient and it drives muscular and nerve function with “electrical” potentials. The ion itself is not the issue but the gradient. Low potassium is an issue because muscle, notably the heart, is susceptible to gradient disturbances.Significant amperage can disrupt the gradient by activating potentials independent of the gradient. there is no mechanism for the body to make use of free electrons. There is a level of charge the body can absorb through fluid resistance, and grounding. There is no effect until the charge disrupts cellular controls. If standing on the ground inactivated oxidation processes you would drop dead. Since without them you cannot form ATP and hence cellular death.The “electrons” do not know what reactions are good and which ones are harmful. Which is why your body uses enzymatic control which is protein key specific.
        Useless magical thinking. Antioxidants are chemical not conductive.

  5. Muddie says:

    I think Mercola is a crackpot on s many levels. Chemistry and physics beng the obious. then there is biology and physiology.

    The discussion in the comments s getting very silly indeed.

  6. Janice Blair says:

    Then explain the benefits that the athletes at Tour de France are experiencing by using earthing techniques!

    • Eric Hall says:

      Janice – two things are wrong with your statement. First, is there any evidence of a benefit? Is there a reporting system for athletes using earthing that is being compared to those that aren’t? Is there some other data, such as blood tests, showing some difference between athletes using earthing versus those that are not? Are those using earthing, on average, performing better in the race than those that are not?

      Second, is there are correlation/causation error here? These are athletes that train year round and their bodies are accustomed to race conditions. Is it possible that all of their training, and not earthing, is allowing them to perform at a high level? If the winner said he also sang the hokey pokey before every race, would we say the hokey pokey somehow causes athletes to perform better? Because of a lack of plausibility, the evidence would have to be pretty extraordinary to say earthing is benefiting these athletes.

      • Janice Blair says:

        There are pictures of wounds healing quite quickly with these athletes. There are blood tests that have been done on ordinary people showing the red blood cells before and after earthing, there are studies with pictures of people with diabetes that have had sores for months that a wound clinic couldn’t heal but were healed once the person started using earthing, and, in my opinion, the best proof is my body which has been wracked with pain for years and which is improving with the use of earthing. I’ve tried other things with hope and confidence just to have them not work. This is working. Until you’ve been there, don’t knock it. Frankly, if someone had told me that singing the hokey pokey would lessen my pain, I would have tried it! Pretty sure it wouldn’t have done a damn thing though.

        • Eric Hall says:

          What I am looking for is actual evidence. I did a search on PubMed for grounding and earthing. I get 4 articles, all by the same people, all in the Journal for Alternative and Complementary Medicine. One of the 4 is a commentary. I looked at one study that claimed inflammation being reduced. Their proof is infrared images before and after a grounding patch is applied to a “hot” area. How this proves a reduction of inflammation is a bit lost on me – since what is being measured is relative temperature. Cooling the skin’s surface relative to the surrounding area could be done by applying water to the area just as well as a grounding patch. There is no proof of a reduction in inflammation, only temp.

          You are also making a very common mistake of using anecdote as proof. People in the past used to bleed themselves when they were sick because that’s what everyone did and claimed it worked. People used to drink mercury claiming it made them feel better. Evidence is what is missing.

          Often – people mistake some sham treatment as the reason for their cure when it has more to do with their focus on health. I see all the time people claiming some magic shake diet makes them lose weight – but it turns out they are reducing their calories, eating more fruits and veggies in the shakes, and exercising more. The shake reminds them to be more healthy.

          Finally – if you read my article – you will see grounding doesn’t even make sense electromagnetically. We exchange electrons with our environment all the time. There is no need for special patches, wires, machines, etc. – we stay pretty balanced all on our own.

          • Janice Blair says:

            Well, I’ll let you continue to doubt as that is your right. But I believe some of the best ideas by some of the greatest men in history were scoffed at and ridiculed. Maybe in your mind the science doesn’t make sense, I don’t know because I never claimed to have a scientific mind. And you stated above that you aren’t a medical doctor so that eliminates that area of expertise. But I will continue to use this method with the hopes of attaining some relief. Can’t hurt anything.

          • Eric Hall says:

            It can hurt your wallet. And if you are saying it is up to me to disprove the benefits – can you disprove harm? In fact – interesting point I thought of – if you are attaching yourself to a wire – you are basically making an antenna. If you are worried about the harm caused by EMF and strange voltage – you are possibly attracting more of such things? Harm?

          • Janice Blair says:

            ” If you are worried about the harm caused by EMF and strange voltage – you are possibly attracting more of such things? Harm?”

            I’m not worried about EMF and strange voltage (although I do work in an IT department surrounded by computers, servers, and other electronics. What I care about is the fact that I am living my life in considerable pain which barely allows me to continue to work. Outside of that, I have no life due to the pain and exhaustion from the pain. I just want to rid myself of pain. You don’t get it – no one who hasn’t experienced it can understand. I am willing to try just about anything and since i do feel better with earthing that is ALL that matters to me. If I didn’t have the $200 to do this, I would have followed instructions that I found online on how to make the devices myself. But frankly, $200 is nothing compared to what the Pain Management doctors cost me without doing what this has accomplished.

          • Eric Hall says:

            What is the plausible explanation for this being the reason for your improvement? Why not say it is your positive outlook? Maybe you contracted a disease masking your pain and you are not getting the help you need for that disease.

            Janice – I am sorry about your pain. But I cannot in good conscience endorse any sham treatment with no evidence and limited plausibility. I want to protect people from harm – whether real harm from the treatment, or people simply having their wallets raided. Your anecdote is not evidence, and I implore you to reexamine your situation – I bet there is some other cause for improvement other than the grounding.

          • Janice Blair says:

            I appreciate your well wishes but I have done nothing different to account for the improvement other than earthing. And if you could see an x-ray of my spine with its 9 vertebrae fused together, a vertebra that is 50% slid off the one below it and multiple other ones that are damaged you would understand what I’m saying. I have seen multiple doctors since my surgery 4 years ago. I had a positive outlook immediately following my surgery because I thought that I would heal but instead I almost died from a MRSA abscess over my spine in my neck causing even more nerve damage. My outlook is not improving. I don’t expect you to endorse it. I’m not sure what I expect, to be honest. I guess I just wanted to explain my viewpoint. I wish you well.

          • Janice Blair says:

            I tried to send a reply letting you know that you can just delete my last post! I just got home from work and my brain has apparently already stopped working. I wasn’t trying to suggest that earthing could in any way improve my spinal condition. What has improved is the muscle/nerve pain from it and fibromyalgia. I think I will quit while I’m behind.

          • Jake says:

            well, maybe you would want to actually go see the experiments for yourself rather than making uninformed comments about them?

            accepted science details that we know less than 10% of what goes on in the universe, and every year demonstrates that grandly…..of course it only shows that to those that are willing to listen or look at the information.

            it still amazes me no matter how constant the failures of “science” throughout history from the world is flat crowd to the bloodletting crowd, to today’s latest close minded, afraid to go see for themselves “skeptoid” crowd, how afraid people are to let go of their ideas. what do we have to fear besides letting go of fear itself, besides blazing a new trail.

            fascinating also that we have a worse and worse health as a nation in the united states yet the insanity that keeps people doing the same nonsense with ever worsening results plods on….more inflammation, more heart disease, more arthritis, more cancer, more diabetes (no longer called adult onset we officially market the nonsense as type 2 now because so many 15 year olds have it), continuing to eat food devoid of nutrition, eating isolated elements where in a whole food there are numerous phytonutrients and co-factors that have been studied to the nth degree…..yet the propaganda machine of sick care rolls on.

            is this the science you speak of?

            and more frankly, there are any number of studies around the world now comparing those with grounding, and those without. anyone not willing to explore the information simply has an agenda or worst yet a flat earth mind. but, whether someone says its so or not that you can identify with, someone from the bloodletting crowd that seems to measure success and understanding by having ever poorer health results while espousing the same failed policies over and over, it really doesnt matter. everything that has been so called discovered has to be put in perspective……it was always there….always…..and mankind just got around to finally being a little smarter, or usually a little less close-minded to be able to see it.

            we couldnt measure subtle energies in the body until recent history, yet we do now and there are numerous studies on the topic with more clarity each year….yet the flat earth “real science” crowd still drones on and on and on and on show me the studies. its sad really. i have no interest in helping people who obviously cannot help themselves.

            congratulations, your website and community will have what you have, and will be left behind like many others before it.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Do you have some source for your 10% figure? The thing is – it is pretty hard to measure what we don’t know. So I call bullocks on that stat.

            Science has had and continues to have “failures” all of the time. In fact, that is the process of science. One makes a hypothesis based on observation, then designs a repeatable test for the hypothesis. If the data does not show the hypothesis to be correct, the null hypothesis stands. I don’t consider that a failure. It is science.

            You start with the premise of all of these conditions increasing in frequency, and try to say it is because we no longer walk in bare feet? There are some pretty good hypotheses on why this is – including the fact that modern medicine has dramatically reduced mortality due to many of these conditions, so people live with them much longer. The hygiene hypothesis holds some promise, although the evidence is far from conclusive at this point. It is possible modern pollution levels play a role. Likely it is a complex mix of all of these different factors, which is where the scientific process should be applied so we can tackle these issues in order of importance.

            We couldn’t measure subtle energies until recently? Can you cite a source for this statement? Because, according to the video on Mercola’s website, they are measuring voltages in the hundreds of millivolts range. That is something we have been able to measure for decades now. I could measure that voltage difference with a $40 voltmeter over 20 years ago. Galvanometers have been able to measure those voltage levels for much, much longer. Perhaps you misunderstand what Mercola is measuring.

            While there are many things we still don’t know about science, Electromagnetism is one we have understood very well for about 150 years (search Maxwell’s equations). Electromagnetism is something physics students spend several semesters studying. While I explained it at a very basic level in my post, I have a pretty good understanding of the subject. What is interesting is while you attacked all of science as a whole, you failed to address nearly every one of the pieces of evidence in my post. If you can find specific errors with the science in my post, I will be glad to correct them. Otherwise, I stand by my science and reject your conjecture.

        • Hello Janice,
          I am using this forum to contact to you because your story moves me and I don’t know any other way to communicate with you. I sincerely hope that the moderators of this forum will allow this comment to be posted even though its content has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. If not, then I hope that they can get it to you by some other means. Perhaps you checked the request to be notified via email when follow up comments to your comments were posted.

          I empathize with you because I have lived more than 40 years with physical pain. I have some information which might be helpful to you. It concerns a very gentle technique devised by a chiropractor which can eliminate all pain in the body even in cases with structural anomalies as grave as – or even much worse than – yours. His work is endorsed by literally hundreds of health care professionals (which include other chiropractors, physical therapists, massage therapists, doctors with incredible credentials, etc.) very many of whom use his techniques with their patients and/or have been personally treated by him. These professionals who endorse his work can be contacted directly and I have personally contacted many of them and talked to them on the phone. The ones I contacted all said the same thing, essentially that the techniques are fantastic. What’s more, a personal friend of mine, a physical therapist in Vermont, has learned his techniques and she confirms that they really do work and she is having considerable success with them.
          If you are interested, I will be glad to email you more in-depth information, links, etc.

          My email address is expatcortona(at)yahoo(dot)com.

          I live in Italy and here there are no practitioners of these techniques, so I cannot take advantage of them, but you, who live in the States, can most likely find a practitioner not too far from where you live .

  7. Janice Blair says:

    Watch the video for statements made directly by athletes at Tour de France who are experienced with training and racing and how the use of earthing has benefited them.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Again – they are claiming benefit – but where is the control? What about the athletes not using it?

    • I don’t know that I’d take the word of Tour de France participants on medical matters, given that the man who won the race seven years in a row was cheating and stripped of his titles.

      • What on God’s green earth do the actions of one man have to do with the validity of the ”word” of all the other participants? Your comment implies that if one lies, they are all likely to lie, and you use this false conclusion to debunk the validity of anything that anyone in this video is saying.
        Did you actually watch the video? If so, then please comment comment on impressions of the content and not on the ”presumed” character of those who were interviewed.

    • Stephen Propatier says:

      I agree with mike they are far more likely to tell you that imaginary stuff helps rather than admit that they are using a doping method that is more difficult to detect. Given the history of the Tour, that is the most likely answer to that claim. Like Mark McGuire and the “andro” supplement helping his hitting. Not that anecdote ever proves anything.

      • Well, Stephen, do you have any scientific confirmation which supports your hypothesis concerning what Tour de France cyclists are ”more likely to tell you…?”

        • Reg says:

          In passing, I’m with you Peter. Just as Talleyrand’s reputation as a turncoat does not invalidate his observation that enthusiasm always leads to excess. Something that certainly applies here.

    • LIVING PROOF says:

      Hang in there Janice!! You are doing the right thing!!
      “proof, proof..” {Eric Hall}. Guess what, our minds ARE Finite. You and science will Never be able to prove or disprove sh*t.

      ~Eric – you want your physical absolute proof?? – whach the latest documentary Grounding 2014, where a diabetics blood vessels show regrowth within hours of being grounded. Oh God forbid it was some “other” lifestyle choice or drug that was the real cause.
      Pathetic, block minded engineers, incapable of getting past certain things. Ugh.

      • Why do you think it is surprising or miraculous that”diabetic blood vessels” regenerate? Since that is a common body function even in diabetics no grounding required. That is like saying look those fingernails grew in a diabetic after they were grounded. NO they repair themselves with out without the magic pad. These problems the body repairs all the time. The reality of diabetes is….. that overall units damaged exceed the units repaired. Not that individual structures are damaged then become irreparable and must be magically regenerated.
        Really, this concept is by far a demonstration of how people just never bother to learn how their own body works to even the tiniest degree.

      • Eric Hall says:

        How do you measure the limit of our “minds?” If they are finite, please tell me what the limit is specifically.

        I watched a section of grounding 2 – in which they specifically address this blog. I responded here:

        I as a scientist know it is likely that complete knowledge of the universe will never be possible. It doesn’t mean we don’t have a pretty good idea about many of the concepts of the universe.

  8. We DO have to worry about stray magnetic fields when earthing/grounding in order to not become a conduit. I worry about the lack of information, as well as the complete dismissal of the idea and benefits of grounding. In particular, we have a gross lack of info about the effects of RF and EMF radiation. We evidently haven’t needed any science about safety in order to put field generating devices next to our heads and in our homes, either.

    • Eric Hall says:

      We actually have a very good idea of the effects of RF and EMF radiation. Radio waves (RF) are part of the Electromagnetic (EMF) spectrum. RF is much too long in wavelength to have an effect on our body. EMF is of course a concern – but in higher frequencies such as UV (from the sun), X-ray and gamma (from nuclear sources or bursts from the solar system). All of the bunk about Wi-Fi sickness and the like have been thoroughly debunked. (See for example this Skeptoid episode).

      My mention of the wires and such connected to the grounding device is founded, however. If the concern is truly balancing the charge on a human to be neutral, than being directly attached to a wire could possibly prevent that. If it acts like an antenna, it could induce a voltage on the wire causing it to put more charge back on the person. Now obviously that is a pretty silly notion, because the amount of charge would be negligible – but just as silly as claiming there is some large charge buildup on humans that needs to be discharged by this special method – when we are being discharged and/or charged slightly all the time just by touching things.

    • Alan Henness says:

      As Eric rightly points out, we do know an awful lot about the effects of electromagnetic radiation on the body. This simple explanation has just been published: Why the Sun can harm you and WiFi can’t (and how microwave ovens cook your food)

  9. Anonymous says:

    This article doesn’t site any links to your knowledge, so I am just suppose to believe your smarts too. You don’t prove anything nor does Dr. Mercola, you both could be the biggest douches out there!!

    • Eric Hall says:

      Go to your local university or college and look for this book:

      That has all the info discussed here.

      • Crystal says:

        Just as you criticized Mercola, put your own “links” in your own article. After being called out on this, you link a book from and say “read this”…. really?

        That being said, your article is interesting and holds value in this debate. I believe that in order to advance in our understanding of science or health, we need the feedback of ALL the players in this game… Doctors (including Mercola, a doctor who has faults like all others, that I wouldn’t personally mind having as my own!), Scientists, Product makers and every day people like Janice Blair. The final consensus will be determined by the results reported by ALL of them collectively.

        You stated that believing this “farce” of earthing can hurt the checkbook and waste valuable time worrying about it…. but here you are investing valuable time in this debate. That is a lot of “worrying” on your own behalf about a subject that has very strong arguments on BOTH sides of the coin. How are you different from those who invest their own concern on the subject of their own health.

        The arguments are STRONGLY supported on both sides of this subject…with inaccurate statements being given ON BOTH SIDES. You were even corrected in this thread on your own statistics, just like the Clint Ober accidentally read the volt meter.

        You stand on one side and sometimes throw insults at the other side, which include smarter people than yourself.

        As I said though, your particular points are made well and I will take note of them as I collect more facts from both sides. However, unless you begin putting ” ” and links from where you get your facts…I will only remember so much of what you say. I don’t have time to go read a book from Amazon. I’m here now, online researching, “waisting” enough valuable time on a subject that is not proven life-threatening nor is it larger than life.

        Being a mom to my child is larger than this subject, and makes a bigger impact on this planet on many levels. Which is why I don’t stress about this subject so much.

        I also own an earthing mat myself which didn’t hurt my check book. It wasn’t because of Dr Mercola or anything he said that made me buy one either. I’ve read plenty of arguments on both sides and studied the optimum way to use it safely. Now I’ll get back to the important things and see where the research continues to go…as I too am open minded.

        Take care and good luck in your own pursuit of truth.

        • Eric Hall says:

          I linked to the book because I am not going to be able to give a complete overview of Electricity and Magnetism in a blog post or in the comments. My evidence is basic physics. I guess the link was my attempt at humor. But I suggest either taking a few weeks to study E&M or trust me in that Ober and Mercola have grossly erred in their basic understanding of the subject. Ober claims to have worked in the communications industry, but it turns out as an executive, not necessarily someone who is an expert on the actual workings of the subject.

          You are setting up a false equivalency. The amount of information from both sides does not translate to a strong argument. Perhaps you’ve heard of a saying about baffling people with BS? While I might have made a typo – I am willing to fix it. Ober and Mercola leave their misinformation up there as is.

          Their theory lacks both plausibility and also is very poor physics. It has a very low likelihood of being correct.

          • Crystal says:

            I did not say the arguments were “equal”… I said they are each strongly supported. There is more about this subject than just electrons or your points above.

            I stated you make a solid case. Like I said, it is duly noted as collective research…. But if you expect these guys to back up their claims with “links/studies” you need to do the same regardless of the depth of subject.

            Before reading on, keep in mind that I am not a strong proponent of earthing mats. I go outside as much as I can. Also, on the very rare occasion that I use mine…I wire it into the actual ground outside, not a wall outlet. It rains a lot where I live so I go long winters indoors. I also get irritated at the sight of that curly wild-haired guy with the necklace, who walks around barefoot…(who also sells earthing mats).

            Now, even though you make a strong case in the area of electrons…are you ready to systematically refute every topic discussed on the subject of grounding? Is it ALL 100% not true and against every law of the earths energy?

            I don’t believe you can confidently say that your argument about electrons, or above, unequivocally voids EVERY SINGLE positive earthing study. You also cannot tell every single person who reports major, or small, benefits that they are experiencing placebo.

            What is your thought on decoupling blood samples after grounding… or how the flowers react grounded vs not? (experiment by Gary Schwartz PhD)

            Whatever this phenomenon is, even if these guys are grossly incorrect in their description, how can you dismiss this clear reaction?

            Sure, your argument on this particular rule of physics is solid…I stated that already. I don’t even know who Ober is, but I think he and Mercola need to respond to this. If they need to change the way they describe the process, I’m with you…they are liable. But you did not knock down EVERYTHING they report on this subject.

            You asked someone on another thread to ask “Gianni” (whoever that is) to play one of your recorded convos…

            It sounds like he talked with you so why don’t you air it yourself?

            No one knows ALL of the intricate workings of the earths energy to completely void all findings on this subject. There are way too many variables… Where someone lives, the wiring quality in their home, their own health to begin with, whether they plug the ground into the wall or run a cable into the earth outside…to name a few.

            All I can applaud you for is the solid argument that you bring to the table. Like I said, all of this debating and collective research help round out the subject for now…so it can be approached with caution.

            I’m fully aware of the skill of “baffling people with BS” and don’t fall victim to it. I make a judgement call when needed and try things based on my own curiosity…and research avidly.

            As cautious as I am about BS, I have an equally strong aversion to pricks…no matter what side of the argument they support. Even if they’re in agreement with my ideas, if they are rude and insulting I tell them to stay off my side… because anyone that pompous is bound to have too much bias.

            You have way too many of these guys on your thread. The conversation weaves in and out between legitimate opinions and snarky comments…like a bunch of frat boys sitting around insulting the intelligence of others while scratching their balls.

            “Mental Masturbation” was the best description I read on this thread thus far. But because I am open minded and not easily swayed, I still look past it and gave you the kudos your argument deserved.

            So leave it at that and take your compliment.
            Keep up the debate because it contributes to the “pursuit of truth”.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Where I, as a scientist, get frazzled is when people start getting into describing “the earth’s energy.” What does that even mean? If we are talking about electrical energy, that energy is no different if it comes from the earth, carpet, a wall outlet, a battery…electrons are identical.

            If for a second we assume there is some electric field causing an electric potential on the body due to our AC voltages around us, it certainly wouldn’t cause electrons to uptake into our body. It is an oscillating electric field. Thus the electrons would move slightly one way than the other. It wouldn’t magically cause electrons to flow only one way into our body.

            As far as Schwarz’s experiments, I cannot find his study actually being published anywhere. It was a small study (2 flowers each) and I cannot find where this has been duplicated anywhere. So I wouldn’t call it evidence without peer review or reproducability. Schwarz also believes he is a medium for the spirit world, which certainly reduces his credibility as a scientist. He misuses scientific terms such as quantum and evolution. So I again would need a higher degree of certainty from him because of these abuses of science.

            As far as refuting their claims – as skeptics we do operate that way to a certain degree. However, science truly works by forming a hypothesis and gathering evidence to determine whether the hypothesis is correct. Mercola and Ober have a hypothesis, but have no repeatable tests for which to determine if the hypothesis holds or not. Thus it truly is up to them to produce the evidence for their claims, not for me to falsify their claim. I think I have established that is is highly unlikely their hypotheses are not true – which only means their extraordinary claims require a much higher degree of evidence.

          • Good Morning to the ever -colorful Skeptoid team ~!
            I have been quietly reading the posts from various people to Skeptoid regarding the subject matter surrounding EARTHING, and the tenacious, adversarial posture Skeptoid continues to have on this topic… It’s hard to keep quiet because I’m reading information that is blantantly inaccurate (by mainly Skeptoid ) , from my humble point of view.
            I personally know several of the leading bio-physicists , M.D,’s , and Ph.D folks involved with Earthing research that have been at it for going on decades; and have forwarded some of this “back and forth” between readers and Eric Hall to a few of them ….. They ( and I) wince …. None of these people really want to engage in this forum because it just is sort of ……well…. embarrassing ? I don’t know .. But I guess what I’m asking here, is that in the very near future, since Mr.Dunning has agreed to appear in the next film that relates to Earthing, if you also, Mr.Eric Hall, would also agree to participate in the film ? When I say participate, it would be witness to an experiment, demonstration, quasi debate and such ..and offer your thoughts and observations and suggestions …. Are you IN ? ………Can you make it official by an answer here in front of your readers ? I want to THANK YOU, however, FOR the position you have taken on the subject with such unfettered confidence and brazenness, because without skeptics and those trying to disprove this whole amazing situation, the movie would be as dull as watching paint dry on a sunny day in the desert.
            Warmly, Mr. Kroschel ( the filmmaker dude from “Grounded” )

          • Steve – You’re going to continue to face such opposition so long as you passionately promote claims that have so far failed to convince any meaningful percentage of scientists in the relevant fields.

            You use Edgar Mitchell as if he represents NASA’s views or those of other astronauts, when in fact Mitchell is the ONLY astronaut whose views NASA was compelled to explicitly disown.

            You say “I have MDs, PhDs, etc.” when those people are, without exception, representative of a fringe minority considered cranks by the people who actually do the science in those fields.

            You keep saying I’ve agreed to appear in your next film, when we both know that’s not true. Maybe you hope that lends your films credibility among Skeptoid visitors.

            My encouragement to you is that you reexamine the integrity of the foundation upon which you base your passions. Having passions is a fine thing, but promoting them to the innocent using fallacious logic, half-truths or untruths, is not.

          • Dear Mr. Dunning,
            A few observations and suggestions :
            * Wouldn’t it be easier for readers to follow your comment thread if you kept the whole thing in a linear fashion from oldest to newest ? I had to hunt for your reply to a comment I made this morning in the middle of this mile long commentary epistle that started almost a year ago ! Many people just won’t know where to look. IT’S a MESS and most people will not take the time to figure this comment page dialogue out… Maybe take a tip from the MERCOLA.COM website, in which the comments are put forth chronologically :-) !! I’m just sayin….
            * My heart dropped to the ground and rolled down the hill when I’ve read in your reply that you had NOT agreed to appear in our new film about Earthing, yet, on October 26, 2013 in your comment section here you stated you’d be happy to do so.
            * Your observation that I depicted Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell to be a spokesman for NASA in the way you worded it is blantantly wrong. I know, because I wrote, shot , directed and edited the film .
            * That the scientists and other highly educated people with alphabet soup after their names that study Earthing are a “fringe minority , considered cranks by the people who actually do the science in those fields” is a hurtful comment that helps no one .
            I’ll reiterate again, that you “happily agreed” to participate in the next film about Earthing and you wrote that on October 26 in this comment section. Now you are denying that you’ve agreed.
            Is this a telling example of the tip of the Skeptoid iceberg ? Keep your STORY STRAIGHT :-)
            And what about Eric Hall ? Love to have him too !
            Warmly, Steve Kroschel / Director “Grounded”

          • Crystal says:

            This is forcing me to rely out of order.

            When I say none of us know everything about the earths energy I am referring to this very same statement that is common among scientists;

            “So, energy can change from one form into another into another into another, etc., but the
            question remains: what is energy? The answer to that is a little unsatisfying…

            (…) It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge of what energy ‘is’. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way. It is an abstract thing in that it does not tell us the mechanism or the reason for the various formulas.” -Dick Feynman

            There is kinetic energy a swell as electrical…there are photons from the sun which convert to energy….and so on. So when I say no one knows all there is about the earths energy, I mean all of the forms of energy, known & unknown, that “belongs to” or exists here on the vicinity of the earth…or all forms of energy that directly effect life here on earth.

            The experiments I referred to have been done by others. If the spirit medium guy spooks you, understandable…I think that’s creepy myself! But it has been done by others and your reply doesn’t rightly dismiss the findings, especially the blood samples.

            My point is, talking about electrons is just one aspect of earths energy. When discussing the impact that this mysterious energy has on humans, for sustaining life… there are too many variables that make it impossible to totally debunk. We’re not talking about the level of energy created from walking across carpet, or a door knob.

            You are justified in your argument regarding electrical energy tho. You seem to be justified in my research so far to insist Mercola & others change the way they describe the process.

            HOWEVER, when people say they benefit from walking around barefoot on grass, or they truly experience major health improvements from earthing mats, it is pompous to blatantly say they are experiencing placebo. No scientist will ever know enough about all forms of energy to be so obtuse.

          • Eric Hall says:

            While science might not completely understand the nature of energy, we understand a great deal about it. Energy in a certain place is not special from any other place. Saying the Earth has some special energy is much like saying the sun gives off photons of light that are unique from the photons given off by a light bulb. Energy in its different forms is indistinguishable as to its origins. Again – if I shine a light through a small hole in a box and measure the energy of that light in the box, I have no idea if it came from one light bulb or another, from the sun, from a star…you can’t differentiate between the source of the energy.

          • Crystal says:

            Who said “special energy”? Your not talking to a hippy here…

            I said mysterious, that it changes it’s forms. At least in your illustration you CAN say the light is coming out of a box, allowing you to measure it. You can’t use this “box” to measure what happens to people under all of the various conditions that surround us, when they come into contact with the different forms of energy around us.

            If it makes someone feel better, then IT MAKES SOMEONE FEEL BETTER. Even if it’s mysterious to you…It’s a FACT for them. These people don’t need your text books and scientific expertise. They have the only proof that matters. As most scientist agree, most aspects of energy cannot be explained fully, and this area of sustaining/ effecting life/health is one of them.

            This doesn’t justify the false description that Mercola and the others have used. We’ve established that.

            You still haven’t responded a third time about the blood samples. What do you think it means that the blood is changed after earthing?…these people walked across carpet and touched doorknobs before getting the samples taken, but they were sugnificantly changed after earthing.

          • Crystal says:

            Wow, please don’t be distracted with my improper use of “your”…I’m too tired today

          • I encourage a reply from Mr.Dunning as soon as possible ? Meantime , try to re-arrange your comment chronology so the newest comments are ALL IN A ROW at preferably the BOTTOM of this page, inside of being sprinkled throughout the last year’s comments like seasoning on a dinner casserole.
            Regarding the electrons flowing UP from the EARTH INTO the Body, and its ability to be proven and “earth energy” , I want to also introduce the provability of the existence of enzymes, and even a human thought … Have you “thought” about that ? :-)
            These are “thoughts” directed at the Skeptoid team ! You all have a fantastic forum to foster discussion ! Keep it going !! Warmly , Mr. Kroschel (the director of the film “Grounded”)

          • Crystal says:

            Respectfully Steve,

            In order to reply to someones particular comment, it will post under that conversation thread as it should. If we comment/reply at the bottom of the page then new readers would be forced to hunt through many threads to find the originating order of reasoning, to understand what in the heck we/re talking about. :)

          • Crystal says:

            Steve – At your request I am going to repost my conversation with Eric (Nov 6, 2013) including the question I posed at the bottom. . which still has not been answered. I will pose this question to Brian Dunning as well. Anyone?

            “So, energy can change from one form into another into another into another, etc., but the
            question remains: what is energy? The answer to that is a little unsatisfying…… It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge of what energy ‘is’. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way. It is an abstract thing in that it does not tell us the mechanism or the reason for the various formulas.” -Dick Feynman

            Sure you make a strong argument regarding electric energy, but there are many forms…

            There is kinetic energy a swell as electrical…there are photons from the sun which convert to energy….and so on. So when I say no one knows all there is about the earths energy, I mean all of the forms of energy, known & unknown, that “belongs to” or exists here on the vicinity of the earth…or all forms of energy that directly effect life here on earth.

            Your argument about the way electrons work are duly noted…. and this doesn’t justify the false description of electricity that Mercola and the others have used. We’ve established that. But after we settle the semantics…there still is clearly is something happening with grounding.

            If walking barefoot outside or using a mat makes someone feel better, then IT MAKES SOMEONE FEEL BETTER. Even if it’s mysterious to you. It’s a FACT for them. These people don’t need your text books and scientific expertise. They have the only proof that matters. As most scientist agree, most aspects of energy cannot be explained fully, and this area of sustaining/ effecting life/health is one of them.

            PS…The flower experiment has been re-done by others and it’s easy to find. Most importantly, you still haven’t responded a third time about the blood samples. What do you think it means that the blood experiences decoupling after earthing?…These people walked across carpet and touched doorknobs before getting the samples taken, but they were significantly changed after earthing. Why?….and why would you say this doesn’t contribute to feeling better, like relieving headache or inflammation?

            I would appreciate clear answers to these questions please….keeping in mind that you are not having an exchange with a strong proponent of earthing mats.

          • Eric Hall says:

            I will address your blood examples.

            The ONE blood study that Mercola and Sinatra cite is one of 10 “relatively” healthy adults. The study was not blinded or randomized. They pulled blood from all 10 participants 5 minutes before beginning the test. They then sat them in comfortable chairs, stuck electrodes to their feet which in turn was grounded. They got to relax in the chairs for 2 hours. They then drew blood again and compared the samples. Here are some of the issues:

            They never measured the blood chemistry. Cortisol, one of the most common stress hormones, is known to cause blood thickening. In fact, physiologically, it causes the body to retain sodium and water, increasing blood volume and thus blood pressure. It causes the body to produce digestive acids and the precursor ammonia. All of these things would indeed lead to a decreased zeta potential. So if a person relaxes for two hours, their cortisol levels will fall – thus allowing the kidneys to remove sodium ions and increase zeta potential.

            The study hasn’t been repeated with larger numbers or double blinding.

            The study has no quantitative way of comparing the before and after examples – just that it “improved.”

            The study reveals then that the participants were all experiencing pain before starting (so were they really healthy??). If one is in pain and relaxes, it will have an even more dramatic effect on cortisol levels.

            Now Mercola in another article on grounding makes a huge error in explaining zeta potential.

            Your red blood cells repel each other and function at the speed of light, traveling through your body at an astounding 186,000 miles per second. Grounding actually increases zeta potential by an average of 280 percent. According to Dr. Sinatra:

            “This is the most incredible discovery, because if you can increase the thinning of your blood naturally by grounding, you can fight off disease. Not only heart disease and stroke, but I’m thinking cancer, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, or any illness that requires good oxygenation to the tissues.”

            The cells do not work at the speed of light. If they did, they would be breaking a whole bunch of laws (and would probably have enough kinetic energy to punch through your skin). Electric fields do propagate at the speed of light, but he doesn’t say that. Sinatra then states this would help fight off cancer. Cancer loves blood – and in fact an area of research is cutting off the chemical pathway which cancer uses to cause blood vessels to grow into it. Would we want cancer to have improved blood flow? Not me.

            Now in another paper, Sinatra does address cortisol. I took a quick look at the data – and it appears he cherry-picked data to force a very small significance when there was none. Basically, I see that he included outliers in the non-grounded data, but pulled out outliers in the grounded data. Even at that, the differences between the cortisol levels was not significant. It also was small, hasn’t been repeated, and the data analysis is flawed.

            For your repeated plant studies – I am not able to find the others. But let’s also understand plant and animals handle water in a very different way. We intake water by drinking it. Plants actually do use the molecular attraction/polarity of water in order to pull water from the roots to the top. There are several more plausible explanations as to why the grounded plants would survive longer, but if the plants are left without water, I am going to imagine it has to do with the evaporation rates. I also cannot find any explanation/methodology of how the plants are actually wired to the plugs…which is very important in understanding what the effect might be. Looking at the pictures – I am concerned about the way the two groups are hooked up. It looks to me like one is in series while the others are in parallel – which dramatically changes the current which would go through each plant.

            We know what energy is and we know what forms it takes. In fact, all things are energy, including matter. We have particle physics to show us we have a pretty good handle on what energy is.

          • Dear Eric ~ I haven’t a clue where you found this material you’ve just posted ~! So, what is always good if one is citing a study is where , when and more.. Please give me the specifics, and , if I cannot find it or do , I will respond intelligently… Additionally, I will speak to Dr. Sinatra personally… What is highly dangerous in this forum is for only partial facts to be presented or half-truths. I am not suggesting that’s what you are doing , but I have no idea where you’ve found this and are citing it !
            Dr. Sinatra is pretty well known throughout the world for what he does ; and he’s NOT going to state something that is erroneous to the point of being comedic as you’ve suggested ! THANK YOU for the response. Also, PLEASE respond to whether you would appear in our upcoming film, and where is \Mr. Dunning with the commitment to appearing and then going back on that promise right here on your own comment section. This may not be significant to many of your readers as to whether he appears in a movie or not . But it is TELLING of how significant statements made by him are embarrassingly incorrect.
            Bottom line here : WHAT are you really trying to achieve here in the face of the scientific data that observers from all corners of the world proclaim as the “Greatest Health Discovery of All Time ” ! :-) Could it even Happen to YOU , Eric ? If you were in deep pain, or were suffering, would you try it ? Warmly, Your Fellow Earthlng , Steve Kroschel / Director “Grounded”

          • Eric Hall says:

            The blood study and the cortisol study can be found in Sinatra’s paper on pubmed –

            The other information is basic E&M. It makes no sense for example that a grounding pad would need to be in 60 Hz “mode.” If it is at ground, it is at ground.

            I am not keen on being in your film because it is obvious you are a proponent of grounding, and if I am not there to watch the editing, it isn’t worth my words being misused. Thanks for the offer, but I don’t see any benefit to me or to science.

          • I’ll look this up and get back to you on this forum… As for you not being willing to appear in the film, that is a shame, because it really needs people such as you that are so CERTAIN about what you know and that’s that ! So, where is Mr. Dunning with all this ? Is he going to bow out too after making the statement of participating ?

          • Eric Hall says:

            One other note – on the blood zeta potential thing – that is a huge push right now in the health world in general – at least in the pseudoscience world. Isagenix, the MLM nutrition company, uses the same tiny studies showing videos of blood flowing as their proof their really, really, expensive vitamin shakes work. A few other “natural” cure sites are also using this latest craze in supposed “breakthrough” research. Not that this is proof that it isn’t real, but when the only place this research comes up is when people are selling something, it raises suspicion.

          • Alan Henness says:

            I’m not sure it would matter how the comments were laid out or if they were hand-written in copperplate on velum by scribes working by candlelight: it looks like anything is used as an excuse to not answer the basic questions about science and evidence.

  10. SteveO says:

    I have to say that if I am forced to make a choice between believing the author of this article and believing people like Dr Stephen Sinatra – I will take Dr Sinatra’s advice every time. After all – he is the guy opening up people and physically looking at the condition of their heart, and when he says that grounding has many benefits, including reducing inflamation – then I think he would know what he is talking about.

    I always try and analyse why a person would promote something, and it could be said that Dr Sinatra benefits from the sale of goods from his website. However, on the other side of the coin he is a well respected cardiologist and I find it hard to believe that he would endorse an idea like grounding if he had not seen tremendous benefits.

    From what I have read – there seems to be a misconception that when ‘earthed’ electrons are flowing out of the body, whereas I think the opposite is try – negative electrons flow into the body and neutralize free radicals. But to the ‘flat earthers’ that is all pseudoscience.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Here are a few questions about Dr. Sinatra to also ask. How did he measure inflammation? Where is the data? Is it published in a peer-reviewed journal where other experts in the field can review the information and scrutinize it?

      As far as motivation – I would never judge based solely on that – but let me ask – those that sell homeopathy also might think it works – but there is no evidence or plausibility. Perhaps Dr. Sinatra’s bias has entered (and without publication cannot be scrutinized) and thus he thinks it is working, but there is no evidence.

      The entire earth is basically neutrally charged. The entire earth’s surface when totaled has a charge of a couple of Columbus or less. Thus it will wither draw out excess electrons or put electrons into our body only until neutral – but no more because it isn’t charged. Touching metal would do a better job of moving electrons to or from our body than walking on the grass. And again – you can uptake electrons very easily by shuffling across the carpet or putting on a sock that is statically charged from the dryer – but that discharges rather quickly. There is no plausible way to direct the excess electrons to do what is proposed.

      • SteveO says:

        How did he measure inflammation? I have no idea if he did… but I get back to my original thought – why would a well respected cardiologist take such a strong stance if he didn’t believe there were real benefits.

        As for being published in a peer reviewed journal – I would draw an analogy with farming… I have spoken to some farmers who have been on the land all their life, and they can grow crops as well, if not better, than a young farmer who has a uni degree and employs all the ‘modern methods’. There is no substitute for life experience and I think it is the same with Dr Sinatra.

        Just like that wise ole farmer who has studied the weather for 40 years, kept a diary of his past successes and failures, and generally been observant, Dr Sinatra obviously has spent many years studying the heart, and has been brave enough to ‘kick against the pricks’ and not followed the politically correct path that you are expecting he should take if he is to be believed.

        For me – real life experience will beat theory mostly. Granted there are probably some farmers with years of experience who are not great farmers, but I don’t believe you could refer to Dr Sinatra as an average cardiologist… he has the credentials which would indicate he has some real world experience that is very valuable.

        So I guess a person has to decide whether they are going to only believe what is written and discussed in a medical journal, or whether they are going to believe a well respected medical professional, along with a growing number of ‘average joes’ to at least try a technique that does not seem to have any ‘side effects’ and ‘shock (no pun intended) horror – just may work.

        I know that I am happy to at least look beyond the medical theorists (yeah those people who will only believe it if it is discussed and accepted in the medical journal) and at least be prepared to give things like ‘grounding’ a try. Good luck reviewing all those medical journals – I will get on with being practical…

        • Stephen Propatier says:

          SO you like Medical Theorists who give you information that is untested and unproven that use magical and physiologically impossible theories. You don’t like medical theorists who test and analyze their treatments first.

          You like doctors who open people up surgically and use their eyes to analyze inflammation response. Rather than a Rheumatologist who draws a small tube of blood to check inflammatory markers.
          You like people who know nothing about crop rotation, planting routines and selective breeding. You prefer farmers who guess and try to judge based on their past experience.

          You don’t like the scientific method. You don’t like carefully and logically investigating claims in a systematic and methodical way to find out if something works. You like being a Guinea pig for a doctor.
          Good luck with that.

          • Crystal says:

            Wow your full of over-exaggeration, putting words in peoples mouths & aggression. SteveO did not say he “liked” or “didn’t like” any of those things….he had some pretty intelligent points about researching as much as you can, realistically, but when the argument is strong on both sides…to use ones judgement.
            If he’s anything like me though, he “doesn’t like” pricks.

    • Alan Henness says:

      SteveO said:

      From what I have read – there seems to be a misconception that when ‘earthed’ electrons are flowing out of the body, whereas I think the opposite is try – negative electrons flow into the body and neutralize free radicals.

      Do you think this flow of electrons (aka current) could be measured? If so, how would you measure it, what current would you measure and how long would it last?

      • As the filmmaker of the movie “Grounded” , and in approaching this subject matter as an “outsider”, and remaining skeptical, I became educated very quickly whilst this movie was in production. The science and studies behind it cannot be dismissed easily. The earth has a negative charge due to the forces of nature : weather, solar flares, gravitational pull of the moon, and even sandstorms , avalanches and lightning contribute to the earth’s negative charge… When you “touch” the earth with your bare skin , and within a nano-second , these electrons flow into the body and IMMEDIATELY start to change the physiology of the body… Electrostatics, is a branch of physics, that says that when two conductive objects touch, they equalize. The human body in modern times is essentially “starved for electrons” because of rubber soled shoes- A POSITIVE charge due to free radical oxidative stress.. And when you take off the shoes and actually touch the earth , the measurements and science begins !One way this was easily seen was the red blood cell velocity tests that are done on a blood sample before and after connecting to the earth for a mere two hours… the flow of the red blood cells across the field were AT LEAST 60% faster in appearance , AFTER being grounded for 2 hours .. Also, studies with plants, skin conductivity, cortisol levels, heart rate variability and much more….
        Of course, the most fascinating of all , is to see what happens to everyday people, within minutes , when grounded. And after a month or more , it is astounding. An experiment on an entire Alaskan town , was nothing short of astounding …

  11. I am a filmmaker that actually used and even filmed the above internet article, and also FILMED Brian Dunning for the movie “Grounded” as well via Brian’s appearance on skype , in early 2013… We’ve invited Dr. Mercola to premiere this movie online via his website the week of October 19, 2013. He accepted. I invite all the readers/subscribers of Skeptoid and Brian’s to either watch for this debut of Mr. Dunning’s in this movie, on Mercola’s website, or have a sneak peek at the movie at : … The film will show , in depth , deep insights and the scientific research ( or not ?) into this “inflammatory ” subject in which both Mr.Dunning and Dr.Mercola both have helped popularize ……

  12. Anonymous says:

    Steve from what we have seen from big pharm and most doctors out there today it is all about the money and not health. The zions of the world have been feeding the world a load of crap for centuries to earn wealth and control. There are many simple things we can do to keep healthy if we are allowed, such as the food we consume. But they have contaminated almost everything we buy from the gmo veggies to the steroided out meats we eat to the fda stopping the sale of raw milk. Anything that is healthy for the people they will find a way to outlaw or make illegal so when people like Eric Hall chime in and put something down take him with a grain of salt. Peace to all who promote real health not synthetic big pharm and a lot of phony doctors out there.

    • I always say, start your medical argument with a racial comment against Jews, and you’re well on your way to being compelling.

      • Matt says:

        Zionism isn’t a race and never has been…start your undermining with a fallacy, and you’re well on your way to being called misinformed, or even worse, intentionally misleading.

  13. Zeferino Monteleone says:

    I have just learned of earthing today and am in the process of critically evaluating all information from both sides of the argument. I have no conclusion yet about grounding other than even if it is beneficial and something our ancestors have known and benefited from, our ancestors did not have these modern things such as money and wires, they only physically touched the earth. Therefore it is clear to me the intent is to overcharge in my opinion for simple electrical cords and devices. If they were truly interested in our health benefit they would charge a reasonable price for their thin copper wires and connectors. Due to this I begin to feel a sense of skepticism, and lack of truth and integrity of the makers of these products.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Thank you Eric for this post. I’ve found it an interesting read. Thanks for pointing me in the direction of Dr Mercola. It’s quite a good site. I can read and make my own judgement on many issues. His site seems to be at the cutting edge of ideas. I saw reference to animal fats being good for you which flies against the advice given to me by my GP. It’s great that I was already of this and to see that he’d flagged it up a couple of years ago was heart warming. It’s now hitting mainstream media BUT the reality of this science is up against the advertising power of companies. I however, choose to respect my GP has his view on this, knowing that I’ve read more recent information than he has. We can’t expect everyone to know everything.
    As in anything in life we have to make a judgement and this is where Mercola and you come in. You both have experience and knowledge.

    However, the venom which you show in your choice of words and the way you reply to people who do not have your extensive knowledge does not endear me to you.
    For example you wrote ‘Aside from the gross misrepresentation of the role of electrons in your body’,

    I am more tuned to my body now in my 50’s than I was as a teenager. We do not know what the interaction of electrons, chemicals, micronutrients and other stimuli we are exposed to relate to each other.
    I’m led to believe that the movement of electrons and electric charges are essential to our existence. I would lean towards the thought that these could also interact with other nutrients and also affect cells in ways which we don’t know about.

    To see a voltmeter change under different conditions is a visual indication to me that something is happening. Is it something I should be aware of? Yes, If it leads me to walk barefoot on soil and wet grass and the effect is that I feel better for reasons unknown to me let it be. Other people may find comfort from it.

    If you are able to converse with the maker of the film mentioned in this thread you might think there is something else happening, something outside of your current knowledge.

    I would have more respect if you had at least engaged with Mercola on any of the subjects you think he is feeding with disinformation and then put it here objectively.

    There’s a TV programme coming up in the UK here, an interesting meeting over many months between a Muslim guy born in the UK who invited the leader of the English Defence League into his life. It was a humbling thing to see Mo Ansar make this offer to Tommy Robinson.
    A lesson to be learned by us all.

    • Eric Hall says:

      I will address just a couple of things –

      First is your assertion we don’t know about the role of electrons in our bodies. Actually, we do know how charges move through our body pretty well. Yes we might not know about some of the more complex interactions, but basic charge movement is well known. Again, electromagnetism is one area of physics we know really well. The volt meter is a trick – to make you think the readings mean something.

      Also, I have tried to engage Mercola. I tried e-mailing him asking for additional information as to why he reached his conclusion on vaccines. I got a response from an assistant who told me he would not address it. I respectfully disagreed with him in the comment section, including links to published papers showing evidence supporting my position, and I was banned from commenting. I respectfully e-mailed and asked why, and I was told my comments needed more editorial scrutiny, and if I wanted to comment I could e-mail them and they would do their best to post them. No comments since have been published.

      You will notice here we allow comments that do not agree with the positions listed here. That is because I am not afraid of my conclusions. I reached them via my best effort to understand the research. I am not saying I can’t ever be wrong. But it is those that do not allow for disagreement or discussion that are much more likely to be wrong.

      Finally, again, if it were the electrons that made a person feel better, and our body needed to pull them in, simply putting your hand on a piece of metal would be better. Or shuffling your feet across the carpet.

      • Anonymous says:

        :-) Mine wasn’t an assertion. That’s your choice of word which is toooooo strong for the point I was putting over. I think it’s great that you’ve tried to engage in conversation with Mercola and also allowing other comments on here.

        If you’ve been banned then I agree it’s a bad show. Something to draw a line under. Not worth worrying about.
        However, if he’s not willing to talk on this subject, he’s not the only one that’s deep into it.

        Have you spoken with or engaged in conversation with Steve Kroschel, he seems to be more approachable than Mercola who perhaps has more pressing things on his mind?
        (Mercola may be so fixed in his mind that he is correct in the same way that you have a very off handed way in writing to people who do want to engage with you)

        I am surprised that Steve has not made an offer to share his knowledge with you. You can do it here publicly with him and we can see the response. It certainly would be interesting to see a scientific slant on some of the research in the film. Could all the people in the film be part of some collusion or mass hysteria which gives these results? T
        Then if its a placebo effect, don’t knock it, GPs give placebos to patients.
        So, how about accepting that it is working, placebo or woo woo but also calmly stating the science without the nastiness?

        ‘Finally again’ (I use your words) perhaps the action of electrons in our complicated bodies MAY still be barely understood beyond the text book physics and electromagnetic principles we are aware of.

        • Anonymous says:

          Hello ~! I am reading and would like to contribute to this dialogue here at Skeptoid ! I am the producer / director of the film “Grounded” , and sincerely appreciate Mr.Dunning’s participation in the film. I am become an avid fan of SKEPTOID and really feel that this website “puts it all to the test ” for critical thinking people…. Therefore, I would like to pitch in with my two cents on Earthing and if you could pose the most vital questions about Earthing to me, I will do my level best to answer the questions in the understandable way possible.
          Currently, I am in pre-production on another movie called “Without a Doubt” , and want to feature Mr. Dunning in a far more in-depth role this time around !

          • Here’s one question for you. Half the earthing sales material describes what appears to be electrical grounding — electrons flowing from the body to the ground; while the other half describes gaining “energy” from the earth — presumably electrons flowing from the ground to the body. Which half of the sales material is wrong?

          • Anonymous says:

            Neither ~! There are two ways of looking at this . One is that electrons are moving in both directions, to and from the Earth. This is how Earthing keeps the body from becoming charged from atmospheric electricity, i.e. it prevents 60 Hz ( or 50 Hz in Europe) electricity from inducing a voltage on the body. This is demonstrated in the Applewhite paper.
            On the other hand, the flow of electrons from the Earth to the body appears to be important ; and even vital, in neutralizing inflammatory conditions.
            Both of these electrical aspects of grounding or Earthing are extremely important. Earthing neutralizes any fields that might induce currents in the body, while at the SAME TIME, allowing electrons from the Earth to neutralize charges associated with inflammation. It is a real challenge to give a complete understanding of exactly what is going on and has stumped some very sophisticated electrical engineers !
            I will say that what happens to humans, also happens to plants as well, and I did illustrate this in the movie, and think that this is an excellent way for school children to test earthing in the science classroom !

          • Eric Hall says:

            You do understand that this is grossly incorrect. If you are talking about AC current in wires inducing a current in the body, the current will oscillate in one direction than the other. So the idea that the earth will “pull extra electrons out” of the body is BS. The drift velocity in a low resistance wire is measured in centimeters per hour. Thus the electrons in an AC current will move back and forth in fractions of a millimeter. So in a much higher resistance body, they will move even less so. So no luck there.

            It would seem you have, in a sense, admitted that these grounding devices or grounding itself does exactly nothing. If electrons are leaving the body, and coming into the body, then the net charge change is zero. Thus the electrons in your body are adequate to take care of both tasks.

          • Anonymous says:

            Hi, Eric ! Thank you for your quick reply ~! Your conclusion that I have “admitted that these grounding devices or grounding itself does exactly nothing ” is misleading and slightly premature to jump to that conclusion ! And OUCH for that ! I’m a sensitive sort, and urge you to sustain a dialogue here that moves this a little further into the beauty of Earthing !
            The early research showed that Earthing reduces the voltage induced on the body by power line frequencies ( 60 Hz in the U.S, and 50 Hz in Europe. This is important , because people are exposed to significant voltages in their homes and especially in their bedrooms what with electric alarm clocks and bed lamps. These wires radiate electric fields, even when the appliances are turned off. Research by others had already indicated that exposure to alternating electric fields can have health effects, including impairment of sleep.
            It was natural to think of grounding humans in terms of the familiar grounding of appliances and home wiring that protects you if there is a “short circuit” in an appliance that makes the metal surfaces electrically “hot”. If this happens, the ground wire( the third prong on the plug), conducts the electricity from the metal surfaces of appliances to the Earth. This produces a large current flow ( electrons flow to the earth) , that immediately blows a fuse or trips a circuit breaker so you will not receive an electrical shock……
            The situation when you sleep on a grounded sheet or some such is different from this. The study done by Roger Applewhite showed that Earthing greatly reduces the voltages induced on the body. This happens because grounding stabilizes the electric field on the body at the same electrical potential as that of the earth’s surface ! This stabilizing effect happens because any external field that attempts to push and pull the electrons in your body must OVERCOME the vast stabilizing influences of the earth . Applewhite showed that there is a minute BACK and FORTH current that STABILIZES and maintains the low voltage on the body. This stability is extremely important for normal physiology to take place. Many processes in our bodies are electrical in nature, and Earthing or Grounding provides a STABLE environment for these processes ! WITHOUT Earthng, the body’s electrons are more or less TRAPPED by the environmental fields, and this creates physiological stress and detriment. .. Now, more than any other time in human history, do we need to GROUND, because of modern life that is so contrary to earth friendliness and true health.
            Also, later research demonstrated that a flow of electrons from the Earth to the body is extremely vital, in neutralizing inflammatory conditions. Considering the modern research showing the significance of inflammation in laying the foundation for chronic disease, THIS aspect of what Earthing does to one is PROFOUND. Both of these electrical aspects of Earthing are vital for health and they can operate simultaneously. Earthing neutralizes ANY FIELDS that might induce currents in the body, while at the SAME TIME allowing electrons from the Earth to neutralize charges associated with inflammation .
            As Mr. Dunning has stated , electrons from the earth are energetic electrons, excited by sunlight and can contribute to one’s overall energy state. One important way they can do this is by saturating what is known as electron transport chain in the mitochondria that produces adenosine triphosphate (ATP) that is regarded as the main metabolic source for all living processes.
            IN view of the various factors involved , one cannot make a firm statement of WHICH WAY electrons are moving toward and away from the earth AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT . It will depend on OTHER FACTORS , such as how well a person is grounded to start with ( i.e. barefoot on a sandy beach or BURIED in the sandy beach, or only walking barefoot in the wet snow or such ) . and how LONG it has been since one has been adequately grounded , and the STRENGTH of the fields in their environment , and the AMOUNT of inflammation they have in their bodies… This is complicated and complex, and sorry for the long reply ! PLEASE consider appearing in the next film I ‘m producing called “Without a Doubt ” .. You’d make a wonderful protagonist !

          • Eric Hall says:

            I want to ask you a basic physics question regarding this –

            What is direction of the electric field when the wire is carrying current?

            Start with answering that question, and then maybe I can better understand your position.

          • Anonymous says:

            Hi, Guys ~! Steve Kroschel, director of “Grounded” here again ~! You are providing a nice forum for the “debate” on Earthing, and I THANK YOU for this opportunity to post, get your response, post , get your response, etc. .. But, I’m curious why NO ONE ELSE is responding besides you and Alan Henness.. PLEASE , if there are more people out there , whether M.D,s, physicists, electrical engineers, Ph.Ds , bio-engineers, etc.. JOIN IN on this debate ; including Mr.Dunning! The problem here is that you are going to lose many people that either don’t have the time or want to read all this science stuff that gets in a little over their heads. Therefore, before I answer your posts, I’d like to ask you to explain to a portion of our audience :
            *How do you explain what happened to the people of Haines, Alaska that were crippled and pain-ridden, and their transformations ?
            * How do you explain the effects that grounding plants that were in vases or trays or jars that were 50% sham grounded, and 50% really grounded , and those ONE HUNDRED PERCENT RESULTS to the affirmative of what Earthing is claimed to be able to do ?
            * How do you explain a paraplegic man that was barely able to twitch his toes for decades, and within a year was able to get up and walk ?
            * How do you explain the moose calf that instinctively bedded down where there was a grounding pad in the ungrounded horse trailer ?
            * How do you explain the red cell blood velocity research and results pioneered by cardiologist Dr.Stephen Sinatra ?
            * And almost last , but certainly not least, are you open to trying to Earthing yourself ?
            * How much research into Earthing have you done over the past months since you posted that first blog that was filmed in the movie “Grounded” ?
            * How many weeks or days or hours did you do spend on research before you wrote that first blog for the Skeptoid Article ?
            * Have you STUDIED all the published research reports at : ?
            Now , answering the above questions might prove to be interesting to many casual observers that are on galloping horses that have seen the movie “Grounded”, and have a sustained curiousity to read your answers to the above but will tune out the rest of my response that gets more scientific.
            To answer your question above :
            * If the electrons are leaving the body and coming into the body, then the net charge change is ZERO.
            * There is a drift velocity of electrons in wires ; and there is always confusion on exactly what is going on and nobody really understands the whole picture. The subtle nature of the power of Earthing is so interesting and profound that your question is in itself a bit misleading when specifically applied to this “phenomenon”.
            * Earthing keeps the body electrically neutral when in the presence of an oscillating field; and at the same time there can still be a small net INFLOW to neutralize inflammation. These anti-inflammatory and physiological effects have been well documented and go way beyond the entertainment value of a movie’s cast of characters. The drift velocity of electrons in electric circuits is very low.. This is described in great detail in this published scientific paper :
            A number of people are CONFUSED about PRECISELY what is GOING ON, and have published articles and statements that contain inaccurate information and half-truths. Part of the confusion arises because there is confusion about the DIFFERENCE between ELECTRON FLOW, and ELECTRICAL FIELDS!
            Earthing , in my opinion , Is unequivocally, the “Greatest Health Re-Discovery of all Time”, and that can be deduced by just looking what happened to the people of Haines, Alaska, ( population 1,700), and , for the vast majority, that is all the “evidence” they will need … Thank you , Skeptoid, for your allowing this discourse to flourish ! And ONE LAST QUESTION for YOU :
            * Will you and your colleagues agree to appear on camera for a sequence discussing all the merits and questions surrounding Earthng for our new film “Without a Doubt ” ?

          • Eric Hall says:

            So you are avoiding the question.

            One – what would force electrons to both enter and leave the body?

            I will ask again – before you go on your sales pitch again on the “miracle cure” – what is the direction of the electric field for a current carrying wire? You say it is misunderstood what an electric field is. Please, clarify what direction the electric field for a current carrying wire is.

            I will point out a couple of errors. The largest is that you say electrons are flowing in and out keeping the body neutral, but then in the same sentence claiming electrons are flowing into the body. It can’t be both. It also cannot be, because the extra electrons would cause a net negative charge in the body, meaning the volt meter would read a negative voltage when measured with respect to ground. It would also mean the electrons would flow back to ground – and not into the body to fight inflammation. The other is you then admit the drift velocity is very slow. If that s the case, passively connecting your self to the earth would result in a very small amount of electrons entering the body (if we assume your assertion is true). It would be such a small number in comparison to the number of molecules in the body, it would be negligible.

            I will write more about the errors – but I would like you to address my questions first before I can properly discuss further.

          • Alan henness says:

            Damn! You beat me to it, Eric!

          • SteveO says:

            Eric – what are your qualifications?
            You seem to be presenting as an expert on electricity so I would be interested in your qualifications.

            I assume your qualifications would be suitable to enable you to refute claims made by doctors, or are you just presenting facts ‘as you understand them’.

          • Eric Hall says:

            I have a Masters degree in physics. I do not need a medical degree to show even the basic info presented by the film maker as well as Mercola (read the blog post) is incorrect in the physics.

          • Alan Henness says:

            Instead of spending time arguing over someone’s qualifications, how about trying to answer the questions being asked?

      • william says:

        Let me first state that I am neither a proponent or opponent of earthing. I am neutral. I haven’t tried it but I do go barefoot because I like the feel of the earth under my feet. However, I am not about to throw the baby out with the bath water as Eric seems to do here. I am not sure that free electron migration is the correct explanation for the observations that have been made regarding the pain reduction and other salutary benefits achieved after earthing.You are attempting to discredit the observations made by the people who are using the earthing devices based on their explanation of the effect. Even if their explanation is wrong, it doesn’t mean the effect isn’t present. Keep in mind, so-called scientists for a long time believed the sun rotated around the earth as the reason for the observation that the sun rises and sets on a regular basis. The reasoning was wrong but the phenomena was predictable. So I think it’s clear that people can be right about the phenomena but wrong in their understanding of the phenomena. You are attempting to dismiss the phenomena entirely just because you have a quarrel with the claim that the observed benefits are due to electron migration.

        I see this quite a lot where people are trying hard to debunk alternate health practices that take place outside of the religious control of the ordained priests of the scientific and medical religions. Your basic position here is one of a witch hunter or inquisitor from my viewpoint.

        What is it that “we know” so much about regarding charge motion in our bodies Eric? Do “we” even understand the nature of the water dipole or is it not just something “we” have observed? Knowing and observing are substantially different. Why can’t we create water without a dipole, isn’t it after all just H2O? You seem to be operating on the premise that says if I observe something and I can then later predict the same behavior under the same set of circumstances, I must know something more than what I observed. I can predict the sun will come up at some point after it sets but still, I may not know much about why that is. I will always be right about my prediction regarding the behavior of the sun irrespective of my explanation for it. If the proper functioning of my system depends on the regularity of the sun rising and setting, I probably don’t much care if I am wrong about the reason for that regularity. Unfortunately, the success of a system based on the behavior of the sun will cause many people to conclude that there must be some deeper understanding of the behavior of the sun than just what was observed.

        When you say “we know”, who do you mean? The people that are proponents of earthing apparently don’t understand (according to you) this so they can’t be included in the “we know”. So is it you that is part of the “we know” in your statement? If so, on what basis do you make the claim that “we know”. This discussion is taking place in the context of the limited understanding of those involved, including yourself. So your basic physics which never touches upon real world components in this discussion, is sorely lacking in the tools needed to explain the nature of charge movements in the body. Most electrical interactions in the body don’t involve free charge motion but instead involve rotations and translations of complex molecules that have dipoles. This is the basis of cell to cell communication through receptors and effectors found in the cell membranes and which are acted upon by neuroproteins.

        The so-called current isn’t a flow of electrons, instead it is a ripple of molecular dipole orientations which result in a change of the total position of charges in the regions. Each of these dipoles has a local effect that results in a gradient or a neutral charge distribution in it’s immediate vicinity. The simple attribution of free electron flow in this discussion is not exactly what is going on with the ionic currents that are typically measured at the cellular level. Thus, for you to attempt to relate the body to simple circuit elements that you understand from your physics courses is not relevant to this discussion. Any real discussion of some kind of circuit must concern itself with the nature of the conductors and the passive and active elements involved in the circuit if in fact there is one. The body is more of a semiconductor than an actual conductor. The currents are not currents as much as they are changes in potentials as a result of dipole reorientation.

        You take objection to the fact that in the video, Dr. Mercola places his hand on the grounding pad and the voltage drops to near zero. You claim this is a sham and that it is effectively measuring the same thing as having both clips connected to the pad. Now where is your vaunted MS in physics taking you? Why was the voltage on the meter reading 1.2 Volts while Mercola kept his arm resting on the desk?

        I think you haven’t properly considered the model for the human body as that of a capacitor. If the human body is acting as a capacitor of about 100pF connected in series with a 1.5kohm resistor (this is the ESDA model), this makes perfect sense. When Dr. Mercola places his other hand on the mat, the voltage drops to near zero which is consistent with a capacitive discharge. That would involve a transfer of negative charge to the human body since the measured body voltage had been positive indicating a net deficit of negative charge in the body. Hence, the flow of negative charge would be from the earth to the body and current would be shown flowing out of the body to the ground. It would only be the case that the voltage remained net positive between the meter and the grounding pad after placing the other hand on the pad if Dr. Mercola were a battery. The demonstration supports a negative charge flow from the earth to the body.

        You claim with certainty that this earthing stuff has nothing to do with electron flow and yet you have no proof for your claim. I think you are on weaker ground than those with whom you disagree because you have no measurements or data with which to refute the hypothesis. Instead, you have built strawman arguments based on “bad physics” claims to refute their hypothesis but in fact, you seem to misunderstand what was being demonstrated in the video. So in my view, it’s your physics that is bad. It seems to me that you haven’t given this any real in-depth thought. Instead, you have just rushed out a blog article to refute something you haven’t given much thought to.

        Now if you want to argue that Dr. Mercola and Clint didn’t really prove there was an electron flow into the body of Dr. Mercola, I might have to agree with that. Capacitors are composed of conducting terminals and dielectrics. Most capacitors store charge by a rearrangement of the electrons in the dielectric material. This would make sense as far as the body goes with regard to the arrangement of the complex dipoles of the many different types molecules in the human body.

        I don’t think we have enough information to conclude that in fact free electrons are flowing in either direction. However, I think there is enough evidence to show that in the presence of EM fields, the body will remain positively charged with respect to earth until it’s grounded. This of course implies that there is some net positively biased arrangement of the overall dipole that is the human body when it is exposed to EM fields. The grounding process eliminates this orientation and the body may better function in it’s restorative process since that is most likely the natural state of the body. That is to say, EM fields from electricity and electronics were not always present in the living environment of humanity.

        • Whoever wrote the beautiful piece above, I would like them to go to the Kroschel Films website and connect with me privately… and I appreciate the time and patience to write the above ! Warmly, Steve Kroschel / director “Grounded”

        • Eric Hall says:

          First let me state that you are not neutral. You reveal much both in that claim and in your blog post here in response to mine. You do believe in it and try to manipulate my words in order to “prove” Mercola right. I won’t address every single point, but let me grab a few of the main ones.

          First you are creating a false dichotomy when you talk about “scientists” thinking the sun went around the earth. While this was the general belief, we also didn’t use the scientific method until the last couple of centuries. We also didn’t have the tools to measure many phenomenon. Finally, many of those beliefs came from religion. Modern science is far different than what was considered science 2000 years ago.

          I am not sure what you mean by “can’t create water without a dipole.” This doesn’t make sense. Yes, water is a dipole. It gives it some unique properties, such as becoming less dense when it becomes a solid. You don’t ever explain how that in any way affects what I stated in my blog.

          When I refer to we, I am referring to physicists and other scientists who use these ideas of Electricity and Magnetism. Maxwell’s equations have been thoroughly tested over the last 150 years. In fact, as I have stated, it is one of the most well understood areas of physics.

          Yes, a current isn’t exactly a flow of electrons, but a drift of electrons and instead a transmission of energy via the electric field. You go on to talk about cellular currents – but funny how you then accept Mercola’s proof at a macroscopic level. And no, currents aren’t all about dipole reorientation.

          If we accept your premise that the body is a capacitor – how would it get charged? If I have a capacitor just sitting without being attached to a voltage source, will it magically charge itself? Sounds a little like free energy to me.

          Now you claim it is electron flow after stating electrons don’t flow. Let me quote from Mercola’s article:

          Your immune system functions optimally when your body has an adequate supply of electrons, which are easily and naturally obtained by barefoot contact with the Earth.

          Research indicates that electrons from the Earth have antioxidant effects that can protect your body from inflammation and its many well-documented health consequences. For most of our evolutionary history, humans have had continuous contact with the Earth.

          It is only recently that substances such as asphalt, wood, rugs, and plastics have separated us from this contact.

          The claim they are making is the body needs electrons, and carpet prevents us from getting them. In fact, I can easily get electrons from the carpet by shuffling across the carpet – far more electrons than I would get from walking on the grass. Electrons are identical – there is no way to differentiate where an electron came from. So to claim electrons from the earth are somehow better or different is plain wrong.

          You then go on to talk about the body being positively charged. So if the body is a capacitor, the net charge on a capacitor would still be zero. Draw a Gaussian surface around a capacitor, and the net electric field is zero. So perhaps the capacitor analogy doesn’t hold, eh?

          The other thing they spend alot of time talking about is the lack of “ground” in electric devices. In an AC circuit, the neutral wire is actually held at a ground potential. They conveniently leave out that fact. The ground wire isn’t involved in the circuit and only becomes a conductive path if one of the other wires contacts the metal in a device, so that most of the current will go through it instead of you.

          You are stating this as if people should do this because “we just don’t know.” However, it doesn’t fit with physics theory, they contradict their own statements, and it doesn’t have any real plausibility.

          • william says:

            I am neutral with respect to earthing since I haven’t tried it. I can see that my response wasn’t clear enough. Let me start by expanding my comments on water. The fact is, science doesn’t understand the structure of water, one of the most common substances on earth. There certainly isn’t any lack of water to study nor has there been any lack of interest in studying it. Scientists have observed many anomalous things about water that make it very unique with respect to similar molecules. It is many of these very anomalies that make water so important in biological systems, particularly our bodies. However, scientists don’t understand how the water on earth was formed nor can science produce water in any significant quantity. The existence of as much water as there is on earth implies a tremendous release of energy. The explanations given for the formation of all this water are dubious speculations at best, particularly given the paucity or complete lack of water on the rest of the planets in the solar system.

            Scientists are not able to isolate and study a single water molecule so the model of water as a dipole is not even a certainty as it is arrived at by an average measurement. Science has had many speculations about the structure of liquid water over the years, but none have been scientifically verified. Of course this doesn’t stop water from being used in all kinds of human machines and systems of power conversion. Scientific ignorance of the nature of water hasn’t kept us from using the observable properties of water to our benefit. Again, this is what I am suggesting you are overlooking with respect to the effects of earthing/grounding.

            Now regarding the comments about the multimeter and the body as a capacitor. The video shows multimeter is connected in series with Dr. Mercola, measuring the 60hz rms voltage on his hand as compared to the grounding pad. They also connect his hand to a low frequency spectrum analyzer which demonstrates essentially the same thing. I think the frequency analyzer moots the issue of the circuit model of the body. It very clearly shows that grounding the body attenuates the magnitude of the measured electric field strength on the surface of Dr. Mercola’s body by two orders of magnitude. In essence, the body cannot act as a circuit element to the 60hz field because it is grounded.

            Again, after viewing the video, I don’t find any bad physics in it. What I do find is you nitpicking the video looking for things with which you can discredit the idea of grounding. I suspect the answer to why grounding may have produced the observed health benefits that were documented in the Nat Geo film may not be as speculated. That doesn’t negate the observed benefits.

            The fact that Maxwell assumed the existence of an aether in formulating his field theory didn’t keep it from being a very effective model for developing a tremendous range of useful and beneficial technology. In fact you have lauded the benefits of Maxwell’s theory even though it was based on a false premise. Let me finish my post with a quote from Maxwell himself in his first paper on the Dynamic Theory of the Electromagnetic Field.

            “The theory I propose may therefore be called a theory of the Electromagnetic Field, because it has to do with the space in the neighbourhood of the electric or magnetic bodies, and it may be called a Dynamical Theory, because it assumes that in that space there is matter in motion, by which the observed electromagnetic phenomena are produced.

            (4) The electromagnetic field is that part of space which contains and surrounds bodies in electric or magnetic conditions. It may be filled with any kind of matter, or we may endeavor to render it empty of all gross matter, as in the case of GEISSLER’S tubes and other so-called vacua.

            There is always, however, enough of matter left to receive and transmit the undulations of light and heat, and it is because the transmission of these radiations is not greatly altered when transparent bodies of measurable density are substituted for the so-called vacume, that we are obliged to admit that the undulations are those of an aethereal substance, and not of the gross matter, the presence of which merely modifies in some way the motion of the aether.”

          • Eric Hall says:

            All of that stuff on water? It is homeopathic, non-scientific nonsense. We produce water in science all the time – combustion produces plenty of water. We separate and recombine hydrogen and oxygen thereby destroying and creating water. Hydrogen and Oxygen are certainly abundant in the universe, as protons formed as the energy of the universe cooled, and oxygen is one of the products of fusion in stars.

            Scientists have isolated a single water molecule – but nice try on the nonsense

            If Mercola is in series – what is the circuit path? And what field is Mercola a circuit element to? This is an important question.

            One simple example of bad science – Ober doesn’t even know what Hertz is. He says it is the time to make one path around the Earth. He repeats his error by then stating 60 Hz means it goes around the earth 60 times in the same time as 1 Hz. It is gibberish nonsense.

            In physics, we do sometimes make assumptions as a thought experiment in order to set up a test to verify a hypothesis. Newton’s laws, for example, assume time is unchanging. It worked for observed phenomenon, and is a good estimation for low relative velocities. However, Einstein came up with a more exact theory when relative velocities are much higher. This doesn’t make these theories wrong, just incomplete. We can verify over literally millions of observations that Maxwell’s equations hold. As Steven Novella says, science is a process of closer and closer estimations of the truth. If one were to believe all of the pseudoscience in that video, we would have to throw out the scientific method.

          • william says:

            Well as usual with people like you, any misstatement is some sort of indictment of incompetence. The things I said about water are scientific fact. I also said scientists cant create water in significant quantities. You implied I said otherwise. Significant quantities is a subjective judgment and that was a test to see how you would react. You are predictable, you have been programmed and I will leave you to your religious views that will never change because your mind is closed.

          • Eric Hall says:

            I am very willing to change my mind. I have continued to ask you for evidence of your position. I am always willing to change my mind based on evidence. You are not providing any.

            I reacted to your water argument because it is important to note your inaccuracy – even more so in a subjective statement. If I didn’t respond to that, others reading the blog would repeat your subjective conjecture as fact. When I respond to comments, I do so not for the person commenting, but for all the readers of the blog.

            You say we can’t isolate a single molecule – I showed that is wrong. It is pretty easy using even basic sources that we know alot about water

            You say you are skeptical – yet you will not read my evidence, nor will you provide any of your own. I again start with a basic question – what direction is the ELECTRIC FIELD in a wire carrying current? I am not sure why you won’t answer that question.

          • Alan Henness says:

            So, William, what about this earthing thing?

        • Eric Hall says:

          I also asked others who have commented here this question – the claim here is ELECTRIC FIELDS are causing this effect due to CURRENT flowing through various devices. My simple question back is – what is the direction of the ELECTRIC FIELD in a wire carrying a current?

  15. Steve – the answer to all your questions is no. Earthing does not present a cogent hypothesis that can be tested, which is why I’ve never seen or heard of any high quality research being done (yes, I’m well aware that websites selling miracle gadgets post a dizzying amount of what they describe as research, but all you need is a basic understanding of research methodology to recognize them as worthless). Moreover, its claims are couched in flagrant factual misstatements about the nature of electricity. Neither are personal anecdotes like your town in Alaska of any scientific value. You don’t see earthing in use in hospitals, which alone should give you cause to reconsider your belief that it is the “Greatest Health Re-Discovery of all Time”.

    Until it presents a testable hypothesis and begins gaining traction in medical literature, neither I nor most other science writers will give it any attention. There are things out there that actually exist that are a better use of our time and energy.

    I would, however, be happy to appear on camera helping to design a proper blinded, randomized test. In such a test, we would expect to see any claimed benefits disappear. My condition would be to have my own camera crew on hand to document the true results of such a test.

    • Anonymous says:

      Hello , Mr. Dunning ~ The above response is a HUGE disappointment on a number of levels. None of my specific questions posed were answered . The observation written above that “Earthing does not present a cogent hypothesis that can be tested ” Is astonishing to me.. Isn’t science about TESTING ? There is no possible way that you or your associates could have looked up the research and answers that were posted previously.
      According to the time posted of my reply to your associate Eric, and the time he responded with “I see you are avoiding the question ” was eight minutes after my lengthy response. That is an impossible time frame to read or consider the evidence I offered him, or even you for that matter .
      In summary, therefore, Mr. Dunning, I think we both are extremely busy people, and I will leave this discussion alone for now, and allow the rest of our viewpoints rest upon a SCIENTIFICALLY DOCUMENTED “filmic event” in the near future, which I am very happy that you have officially accepted !
      Look for more details in the near future!

      • Eric Hall says:

        It is enough time to consider your evidence – because your evidence presented is anecdote – not scientific evidence. While anecdote can serve as a basis for forming a hypothesis, anecdote or anecdotes are not evidence.

        However, your remaining claims on how earthing works is not correct. It doesn’t fit with the model of the E&M theory – one of the best understood area of physics. I asked a question I would ask my intro physics class – what is the direction of the electric field in a current carrying wire. You won’t answer that question – which is based on your claim of the body experiencing an oscillating electric field. I ask not to be a jerk, but to gauge your current understanding of E&M – because it would help me then formulate my answer as well as additional questions for you.


      • But testing WHAT? A test attempts to answer a specific question. It is the lack of a specific claim that makes earthing unscientific. A specific claim would be “Patients suffering from X experience Y by being in contact with the earth.” Even if X and Y are vague, a blinded randomized test can conclusively demonstrate any effect.

        Once an effect is proven, that constitutes an observation, and then we can move on to developing a theory to explain the observation. You’re trying to put the cart before the horse by making a bunch of incoherent (and wrong) claims about electrical “fields” when there is still not yet even a proven effect in need of an explanation.

        • Anonymous says:

          Holy Doodles you Guys ~! You’re a LOT fun ! Just like electricity to work, there needs to be a positive ( in this case, yours truly), and a negative ( people at Skeptoid) in which to make a small portion of the sequel to the movie “Grounded” much more colorful .. I’m looking forward to working with you all in filming the sequence(s) !
          Meantime, please come up with some interesting “litmus tests” that will satisfy your skepticism of Earthing and I’ll see what can be done within the context of a movie !

    • Alan Henness says:


      You claim there is lots of research to back up your claims.

      Can you say why the evidence your UK distributor, BEP Technology Ltd t/a Original Earthing, provided to the Advertising Standards Authority in support of their claims they made after I challenged an advert in the magazine What Doctors Don’t Tell You, fell well below the standards required?

      Your distributor lost the adjudication, with the ASA finding it breached the CAP Code on five counts, including two counts of misleading advertising and one of substantiation. The ASA told BEP:

      “not to make efficacy claims for earthing products and to seek guidance from CAP’s Copy Advice team before preparing marketing communications in future.”

      For full details see:


  16. Ra:ah says:

    While you’ve all be arguing ~ many many people ( with long term illnesses ) have felt the health benefits of this technique, proof is in the pudding ~ all your doing here is mental masturbation ! I laugh in your general direction !

    • Then why not demand that it be properly tested so it can be accepted by medical science?

    • Eric Hall says:

      What if, while walking on the grass, it just so happens it was the exposure to UV radiation from the sun causing the benefit? Wouldn’t you feel bad if thousands of dollars were wasted on grounding pads when they should instead be spent on UV lamps? Or what if a nutrient was being absorbed through the skin from the grass which isn’t absorbed using a grounding pad? These examples – though entirely conjecture, have much more plausibility than the idea of electrons moving in ways not found anywhere in nature or according to physics.

  17. What an interesting discussion. Backing away from who agreed to appear in someone’s movie or how comments are laid out or all of the spectacular effects of earthing, let me ask this: can one of the earthing supporters in this thread explain to me how it works and why it works? And what do electrons have to do with the human immune system? Answer me those simple questions with researched science (as opposed to quantum word salad) and I’ll be willing to do a little more digging on the subject.

    • Go to and also and type in Grounded documentary ( October 19th issue ) . You will find enormous resources that will answer your questions ! If no one ( including the Skeptoid people themselves) don’t wish to do any homework, or even watch a film about it, or do some elementary classroom experiments, or do some testing with thermography, blood sampling, or visit some universities about this that specialize in this study, then we’ll never get anywhere in this forum with this subject. It’ll be just a place to banter back and forth with sophomoric replies and amateurish tit for tats… Of which I’m also starting to get sucked into by continuing to be active in this area with this … I am NOT a physicist, I am a filmmaker, and a regular guy with some intelligence. ……Certain aspects of Earthing are so fundamentally wonderful that a small child will smile……..or even a crying BABY if cradled in a mother’s arms and she takes off her shoes and walks barefoot on the grass. ….with a resultant content infant…Go figure and go to work you guys !!! Warmly, Mr. Kroschel

  18. So Steve, I asked for a simple description of how and why earthing works – and you expect me to pour through two different websites, watch a film and conduct my own experiments, including sampling blood? How on earth(ing) do you expect anyone to see your point of view when you demand those seeking more information jump through dozens of hoops?

    If you’re at a cocktail party, you say to someone that you made a film about earthing, and they ask how it works, what do you tell them? Because if I asked you that, and your answer was “go to” I can guarantee you I won’t do that.

    • Dear Mike ~ How Earthing works :
      1. All living things are essentially “connected” to the earth and the energy of the earth, except for much of humanity now, thanks to the rubber soled shoe !
      We are now disconnected.The” energy” of the earth takes on many different meanings to many different people. But when we are discussing grounding , in the sense of Earthing, , we are looking at the tangible biological effects this has on living things, and especially In humans, when the bare skin or living tissue connects directly with the Earth.
      ELECTRONS from the earth flow into the body in a nano-second, and balance the body with the earth’s negative charge. It is the most powerful antioxidant known. Antioxidants in food are different , yet similar.
      Electrostatics, is a branch of physics that says that when two objects come in contact with each other , they equalize, almost instantaneously. This is what the earth does to us. We are equal with the earth ~ It’s beautiful and it’s powerful and it begins to change your physiology in multiple ways to the point it rejuvenates, heals and renews to a visually almost miraculous degree to many organisms such as plants and humans.
      These results and experiences and experiments and science is and has been ongoing to back this up for going on two decades.
      Clinton Ober, is someone who was MORE than an executive in the cable industry pushing a pencil in an office , contrary to what has been written on this comment page. That is incorrect as are many other statements by Skeptoid.. Clint Ober got his hands dirty in the field as well and is one of the most intelligent and compassionate and humble people you’ll ever meet. The hundreds of thousands of people that are affected by Earthing is so powerful , it is undeniable no matter whether you look at it under a microscope or with your own two eyes…. To the point that I felt compelled to make a film about it to the best of my abilities.
      I like what Skeptoid is doing ; but only to a point. What happens , and what is happening now with Skeptoid and this subject is serious business. It’s one thing for Skeptoid to poke fun at UFO’s and Bigfoot, but when it comes to life altering topics such as Earthing, we need to be careful.
      To discuss the physics and provability of Earthing the way some on this site are trying to do is very difficult and complicated ; and it is NOT black and white. And THAT is why I ask you to do a little research and take some time before sending instant replies on this public site which in essence, belittles us both , more or less.
      At the outset of making this film, (January 2012) , I knew absolutely NOTHING about Earthing .. And spent the next almost two years doing research and witnessing what I call miracles … Which in the end influenced the lives of a huge population of my hometown of Haines, Alaska and people around the world.
      I humbly and respectfully ask, that if we continue this dialogue, that we do so in a respectful and thought provoking manner …. We are all one on this planet. And we have reached a point in our civilization where we need to seriously address environmental concerns, healthcare, and public attitudes that make for a better and sustainable future. …. Warmly, Steve Kroschel / Director “‘Grounded”

      • Eric Hall says:

        Steve – again…the electrons cannot flow into the body that fast. That basic misunderstanding by you and Ober show that either you don’t understand E&M or are intentionally falsifying it. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say you don’t know. You keep talking about electrons flowing into the body, then saying that is what balances the potential on the body. Electrons cannot move through a resistance at that speed. Not even close.

        Secondly, the 60 Hz power cycle is cycled with respect to ground. That means that IF we assume it is true that the electric field interaction is what is causing the potential on the body, then grounding the body would cause our potential to go UP, not down.

        Finally, I still have not had any proponents answer this – what is the direction of the electric field in a wire carrying current?

    • Crystal says:

      Mike- I don’t know what kind of cocktail parties you go to but If someone tried talking my ear off at a party…. in reply to an overly simple question like that, I guarantee I would walk away.

      Look at the length of this entire discussion group…do you honestly think anyone could answer you in one reply? I’ve been at it for a couple days now and it’s tiring me out.

      This is a research subject, research it…but don’t just use this site.

      • If one is advocating for something, ought not one have a simple, direct description that explains the basics of what they’re advocating for?

        • Crystal says:

          Quick Answer: “No” ….

          There is our short cocktail party conversation for you. Just kidding :)

          Absolutely not Mike. Not for something this controversial. Clearly this thread is a perfect example in answer to your question. I am on the fence about earthing mats, but when it comes to outdoor “earthing” I am never going to be convinced by any physicist that they know with a certainty, 100%, that there or absolutely no benefits or a healthy amount of reaction with the human body.

          I don’t like the debating style of democrats vs republicans, or religious zealots vs atheists, or scientists who think they always have the mathematical answer before the “common” people. I’m also not a sucker to all these cheesy product marketers.

          There are common people who have nothing to gain by saying they have experienced great improvement. But I do think there are a lot of variables that may not make it good for all. These guys are arguing about semantics (and some legitimate other points) but when many people are reporting that SOMETHING is working for them, whatever it is…. I HATE hearing “oh that’s just placebo effect”. Throughout history that has been said to the “common people” as if they’re not intelligent enough to recognize B.S. sales pitches and placebo.

          This thread is full of it, a lot of the time…. Neither side answering all questions directly and answering every question with cherry picked data… and insulting the intelligence of others.

          I’m using this for research and to study the behaviors of people. I’ll go so far as get blood testing done myself with a grounding mat. It’s not that expensive. I’m not willing to sit and be TOLD what it may or may not be, when the data is not clear enough.

          Good luck in your research :)

          • Eric Hall says:

            Did you read my reply regarding the blood tests. I’m not saying there isn’t an effect or an explanation. It’s just not the one Mercola and Ober are trying to sell you.

            Imagine you cut your finger. Are you going to trust the doctor who says use stitches and antibacterial ointment, or the one that says buy this expensive contraption X to stop the bleeding and fight infection? If you want to heat water, if I said your water will be more beneficial if you heat it in my special $300 tea kettle versus a $20 stainless steel one, would you believe me?

            My point is there are explanations for these effects. Known effects. Ones that can be measured and repeated. If someone relaxes by walking outside, there are many physiological effects which can be measured. It isn’t because of electrons or special energy transfers. It is due to how we as humans have evolved to handle stress.

          • Crystal says:

            I did read you’re reply thank you. Busy schedule …

            Honesty you stated things I already know about blood and cortisol… after getting through that part, the bottom line of your reply is “Can’t say for sure”. That’s fine. I don’t expect you to know all of it, as you are not a doctor.

            Your comments are always sprinkled generously with the admittance that you just flat out think these guys are salesmen first and cannot be trusted on any level. I don’t trust anyone 100% but when you’re dealing with Doctors, scientist, anyone, you MUST leave room for error in what they say and do. No one is fallible.

            These Doctors are surrounded by other doctors. They work along side each other in many cases. Don’t you think that if these blood tests were a farce or contrived, that fellow Doctors would call these high profile doctors out? In our society, the answer to this is a flat out Yes.

            And also, it’s not a slimy thing to SELL something you are passionate about. Albeit, I don’t like the sleazy style of some of these salesman. I have an interior design store and sell earth friendly products because I’m trying to do my best with the environment. People would be pretty pissed if I talked about these recycled products at length but told them to get them elsewhere. My customers cannot weave their own wool carpet, it must be purchased.

            These experiments were redone by the way. One was at the Longevity conference (don’t get me started on how annoying that thing is, I’m not a follower) However, it was done on random people who were not sitting in comfy lounge chairs and the results were all the same after 40min. The spokesperson said that it is undetermined how long this decoupling continues. That blood test can be redone by average people at a blood lab….I’m considering doing the experiment myself.
            The flower experiment was redone as well and was pioneered by Dr. George Starr White in the 1940’s.


            Regardless of whether these guys use the word, electricity, aura, forces, flow…or whatever, even if not grammatically correct, the results cannot be fully dismissed. Something is happening to the body on a larger level than shuffling across carpet or touching a doorknob.

            Now, you do make a good point with decoupling blood and cancer. This I am well aware of and agree with. A person with no know cancer would be able to benefit . So isn’t it better said then, that there SEEMS to be validity to these blood results (instead of a “probably not” attitude) even though earthing mats are not safe for everyone? There is enough of a considerable reaction that people on blood thinners are already advised against using the mat.

            So far in my research I have yet to find find anyone who has suffered considerable damage using a mat, although some have decided it was not good for them…

            When you combine this individual feedback with the current blood results, you have to admit that something is happening and that it’s becoming evident that there are too many variables so this product should not be used by all. How to predetermine who it’s good for is not possible.

            In the meantime, the world turns and bigger issues are out there.

          • Eric Hall says:

            No good scientist will say anything is 100% certainty. Science is a closer and closer estimation of the truth. The more we can reproduce results, the higher the likelihood the hypothesis is correct. Can I say with 100% certainty there isn’t some bizarre effect due to a grounding pad? No. But I can say with 99.9% certainty it has nothing to do with a grounding pad.

            The repeat of the test you state – is it published anywhere? The problem I see is I cannot find the results in a peer-reviewed journal. It also took place in a setting ripe for confirmation bias. And again it would appear there is no control group. Without those things, the data is highly suspect, and is not valid. Wouldn’t the very thought of some “miracle” that is going to make you feel better help lower your stress?

            Would other doctors point out if it were a farce? They do. All the time. The blood study appeared in the Journal of Complementary and Alternative medicine. Most Science-Based/Evidence-Based doctors will tell you the whole CAM movement is a sham, and is only being supported by politics and marketing, not science. I would recommend looking at the Science-Based Medicine blog for general topics on CAM and why it can actually be harmful.


            Finally your eyewitness testimony – again that isn’t science. Humans are terrible at reporting “feelings.” We have plenty of brain science to back this up. Here’s another example. Several studies have been done where kids are given a drink sweetened with sugar or an artificial sweetener. Some of the parents from each group are told their kids got a sugary drink, while other parents were told their kid got no sugar. Overwhelmingly, parents who thought their kid got sugar stated their kid was more hyperactive, regardless of whether or not they actually consumed sugar. Parents who were told their kids didn’t get sugar overwhelmingly reported no change in their child’s behavior. The conclusion is the parent’s perception that sugar causes hyperactivity dominated the reporting, not necessarily the child’s actual behavior. My point is relying on people to report subjective symptoms is very unreliable. The only way to help to eliminate some of the reporting bias is to perform controlled, double-blind studies. It still can be difficult to determine, but it eliminates some of the noise of subject confirmation bias. So no, people reporting they got better doesn’t mean anything other than they believed it.

          • Crystal says:

            What is the “CAM” movement?

            I’m fully aware that there are science based articles against earthing… show me specifically where doctors have said the blood tests results are false or slanted.

            As far studies like the sugar/kids…. You are dealing with THREE groups that come out of that study. 1) the group that “imagines” the sugar made their kid hyper. 2) the group that “imagined” their kid was unaffected. 3) The parents who were CORRECT in their examinations.

            It is this THIRD group that you are ignoring. Society as a whole cannot be held up to ONE reputation.

            This, and other studies don’t conclude that all people are unreliable. In addition, did the study you read include data on how many kids had naps that day? Did it include a description of what environment the children were studied? In these cases, the parents of tired/wired children would be correct in reporting to a certain degree.

            When it comes to the blood samples…whatever the cortisol levels or health of these people……. the tests results ALL came out the same. You’re have the right to feel it’s “highly suspect” but not “invalid”.

            I for one am willing to find out. I don’t just throw my arms up and say “it could be wrong, so it doesn’t count for ANY further investigation”

            So without getting into anymore side points, show me those doctors quotes specifically regarding those blood samples…saying the test results are clearly false.

          • Eric Hall says:

            That’s where we are going to fundamentally disagree.

            If I set up an experiment where I flip a coin. My hypothesis is if people drink tea with honey, they will be able to predict the outcome of a coin flip. I take half the people and give them tea with sugar, half have tea with honey. 52% of the sugar people predict a coin flip correctly. 53% of the honey people predict the coin flip correctly. Of course, if I take a small group of people who didn’t drink tea at all, they will get a coin flip correct around 50% of the time +/- a few percent. So yes, there is a third group that got it right – but statistics says it is no better than chance. So in the case of the parents, the third group might have “guessed” correctly – but it isn’t a number that is above background noise.

            Also, again, I will state that as a good scientist, I would never dismiss a correlation completely. Science uses statistical analysis and controls to help eliminate other variables to increase the likelihood that the data collected is due to what is being studied, not some other effect. In the blog, I did link to Dr. David Gorski who wrote about Earthing and why it is a sham. A study of 10 people in a CAM journal is not going to get much attention from the medical community – because the data has very little meaning, and isn’t plausible. Also, Dr. Stephen Barrett puts the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine on his non-recommended list, meaning that really anything in this journal should not be accepted as science as a general rule.

            An interesting side note is after thinking more about this, I had to further review my memory of my biology from long ago. Turns out, one of the ways cancer metastasizes is by increasing the zeta potential of the blood so that it can itself than repel away from cells that would otherwise interfere with its function. So the very fact Sinatra is claiming earthing as a cancer cure is not only false, but potentially dangerous if his zeta potential research were true.

            Another red flag in this study – “This research has been supported by Earth FX Inc., in Palm Springs, CA.” and “G. Chevalier, S.T. Sinatra, and J.L. Oschman are independent contractors for Earth FX, Inc., the company sponsoring earthing research, and own a small percentage of shares in the company.” I smell conflict of interest here.

            I didn’t say it could be wrong. I said it is highly likely it is wrong. Science doesn’t say something is wrong. It says if the data doesn’t support the hypothesis, then the null hypothesis is still valid. The data here is bad data, and cannot be used to support the hypothesis – for many reasons. Just because something correlates doesn’t mean it is cause an effect. If I said cocaine use prevents cancer, I bet I could find cocaine users who never get cancer. If I said organic food causes autism, I can find a correlation there too. It doesn’t make it true.

            I know you are trying to say skeptics and scientists are too dismissive. And on occasion that may be true. But in most cases being dismissive is valid and necessary, especially when resources are not unlimited. We don’t spend resources researching cures that might cause a 2% improvement when there are other possibilities that might cause 90% improvement. We apply science to make those decisions.

            In this case, the physics is wrong. The medical science is wrong. The research methods are wrong. The claims are overblown and upon further research could be harmful. I cannot in any way support further research nor use of these earthing products.

          • Crystal says:

            Correction Eric. Some main cancers have decreased but other cancers have increased. Including leukemia which Neil listed above. The increases include:

            “melanoma of the skin, cancer of the kidney, and renal pelvis, thyroid, pancreas, and liver and intrahepatic bile duct cancers are rising with annual percent changes of greater than 1 percent. Incidence rates of some other cancers are also rising; however, they are rising at a rate of less than 1 percent per year. These cancer sites include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, childhood cancer, leukemia, myeloma, testicular cancer, and esophageal cancer.”


            You shouldn’t correct people with misleading statements like that. Unless you consider these other cancers, like tragic CHILDHOOD cancers as “background noise” that is insignificant compared to brain cancer.

            One area you are Correct… Is where you and I fundamentally disagree.

            What is science?

            “The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.”

            Simply put… Do the study yourselves. No, you won’t do that because you don’t want to touch something that CAM had it’s hands on.

            The link you used regarding organic food and autism is a good example of fuzzy statistics, but it supports my point too. To look for the THIRD factor or shared correlations before totally ruling something out. One example commented on that thread is, “the correlation could be due to consumers reacting to studies that show a possible link in pesticides and autism. That would explain why organic food sales is now on the rise at the same time as autism”.

            Now, you and I both have to agree that SOMETHING IS effecting the blood when these mats are used (regardless of proper semantics used by the study hosts, how long the effect lasts, ones health or environmental factors, or even if it is exaggerated) otherwise you wouldn’t have bothered to argue the fear of feeding cancer.

            The blood decoupling is an actual occurrence that should be researched more.

            Decoupling the blood does not cause cancer, it just is not good for when cancer is already present.

            Whether it is beneficial for healthy persons, or not, is not the point yet. We don’t know for sure. But it could certainly explain why some people report feeling better, or why a headache went away. It most certainly CAN be a correlation, since legitimate research shows that thinned blood eases headache and certain pains.

            Studying this occurrence further for yourself could also help your cause in setting these Doctors straight in regards to electrons and properly explaining the REAL cause for the subjects relief.

            If you’re going to tell me that the evidence of blood decoupling doesn’t justify further research on these earthing mats (even though that doesn’t equate to acquiescing on electrons) then, I’m not talking to a true “scientist.”

          • Eric Hall says:

            The “semantics” to which you refer are research methods. What they did was poor research. If I am doing DNA testing, and I don’t use sterile equipment, it is likely my results will be wrong. Same here – without controls or blinding, the data is invalid. From the observation perspective, other explanations are much more likely. The explanation given doesn’t fit with our well established theories in physics. It is wrong, and I feel confident in dismissing it.

            If we addressed every quack observation and/or test by throwing more resources at it, real science would never get done.

          • Crystal says:

            Correction Eric. Some main cancers have decreased but other cancers have increased. Including leukemia which Neil listed above. The increases include:

            “melanoma of the skin, cancer of the kidney, and renal pelvis, thyroid, pancreas, and liver and intrahepatic bile duct cancers are rising with annual percent changes of greater than 1 percent. Incidence rates of some other cancers are also rising; however, they are rising at a rate of less than 1 percent per year. These cancer sites include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, childhood cancer, leukemia, myeloma, testicular cancer, and esophageal cancer.”


            You shouldn’t correct people with misleading statements like that. Unless you consider these other cancers, like tragic CHILDHOOD cancers, as “background noise” that’s insignificant to brain cancer.

            Also, you confidently state rise in Autism is “due to an increase in awareness reporting” but then attach a link to “hypothesis”. This subject is still in debate and labeled “unclear”.

            Don’t resort to the very “Quackfactory tactics” you hate, just to make your argument seem stronger than it is really is.

          • Crystal says:

            ….Never mind, I looked at your links. I don’t support “CAM” myself. I’m also not a Big Pharm sucker either. I do my research and in the case that I do use some natural forms of relief doesn’t make it a “religion” for me.

            Your links led to lengthy rantings about Scientific Medicine vs CAM. I already told you I don’t need to be convinced of that kind of stuff. I’m already a sensible person and I don’t believe in voodoo.

            Focus on medical journals that give rebuttal to those blood tests specifically please.

  19. Neil says:

    Holy Cow ,you guys – there sure are a lot of brainiacs here bantering back and forth about science and physics, how it works and how you are all 100% sure you are right; enough to boggle even my little pea brain.
    Please let me say I would love to have any of you on my debate team,if I had one.
    However – I know nothing about science,physics or biology – and am more of a Show Me! type guy.
    Eric, I can see you are highly educated but you remind me of a person that always has an answer for everything – liken that of having a conversation with a very religious person.Not that there is anything wrong with that!
    My problem is that although I could never be in the same league as most of the posters here,I have grown up and prided myself on one attribute – Common Sense.
    I’m someone who – when somebody says – it can’t be done! – I’ll find a way to do it.
    My theory is simple:
    When I see what the world is evolving into nowadays is scary.
    An uncomfortable rise in the cases of leukemia,diabetes,brain tumors,all forms of cancers,autism.
    Teenage depression and suicides, not mention mental instability in normally stable people – i.e.
    mass killings in schools and turmoil in the Middle East.
    Teen age kids on the computer day in,day out – on their cell phones talking to God knows who – This Can’t Be Good for them!
    People working in a computerized environment – in front of a computer screen all day when the warning in the manual for my plasma television says to be at least 8 feet from the screen! This Can’t Be Good For Them!
    People walking around with those dumb blue tooth devices stuck in their ear – That Definitely Cannot Be Good For You.
    No, there is something going on here that science or physics can’t grasp – and that is common sense. If these things don’t seem right to you,it’s time to go with your gut instincts,regardless of what science predicts or tries to push on you – what is or what is not right.
    My gut tells me there is something to this earthing thing and it’s time to try it out – because it makes sense!
    Emf’s and Rf radiation has increased with technology,with every marketing scheme jumping on the bandwagon,jostling for #1 position.Little thought going into how it will effect every day lives and the consequences.
    I’m going out to buy a grounding mat tomorrow for my wife’s sake – because she works in a computerized eviron and I worry for her.
    I’ll get back yo you.

    • Eric Hall says:

      The rise in cancer rates? You mean the rate that has been falling for almost 2 decades now?

      The rise in autism? You mean because of the increase in awareness and reporting?

      I would like to know what your concern is with EM radiation? Most people don’t realize, but light is a form of EM radiation, just like radio waves, microwaves, etc. Because the energy of a photon is inversely related to its wavelength, light has much more energy than radio wiaves and microwaves. So if your concern is EM radiation causing damage – your world will be awfully dark.

      Common sense is not how we do science. Blood letting used to be “common sense.” Drugging young kids to sleep used to be “common sense.” Let’s not let “common sense” get in the way of science and evidence.

    • Crystal says:

      This thread is not designed well….Why does my reply to Eric & Neil’s conversation get posted to mine & Erics convo above!?

      Sorry for multiple postings buy I meant to stick this here to keep this discussion in order:

      Correction Eric. Some main cancers have decreased but other cancers have increased. Including leukemia which Neil listed above. The increases include:

      “melanoma of the skin, cancer of the kidney, and renal pelvis, thyroid, pancreas, and liver and intrahepatic bile duct cancers are rising with annual percent changes of greater than 1 percent. Incidence rates of some other cancers are also rising; however, they are rising at a rate of less than 1 percent per year. These cancer sites include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, childhood cancer, leukemia, myeloma, testicular cancer, and esophageal cancer.”

      You shouldn’t correct people with misleading statements like that. Unless you consider these other cancers, like tragic CHILDHOOD cancers, as “background noise” that’s insignificant to brain cancer.

      Also, you confidently state rise in Autism is “due to an increase in awareness reporting” but then attach a link to “hypothesis”. This subject is still in debate and labeled “unclear”.

      Don’t resort to the very “Quackfactory tactics” you hate, just to make your argument seem stronger than it is really is.

      • Eric Hall says:

        His claim is cancer is increasing. There are over 200 types of cancer. If taken in total, as a percent of population, the incidence is going down. So is detection and survival rates. It was Neil who is trying to use fear, not me.

        Several studies on autism support that hypothesis on autism. It gets muddy a bit because the definition of autism and the diagnosis methods both have changed. Again, like all science, it is never 100%, but the hypotheses to which I linked are the most likely when considering the data.

        • The last couple days I’ve been away from this commentary line and am encouraged that at least you are posting the replies in a chronological order.. However, In scrolling up this line of back and forth, I see nowhere in this line where Mr.Dunning has addressed the fact that he agreed to work with us in TESTING EARTHING on camera, with his people, and then later claimed he did not agree to do so ; and yet, I’ve pointed out publicly here to the what appears like the three people that run this Skeptoid Website that Dunning agreed to do so if you read his October 26th answer above …This is another great example of how these people that run Skeptoid like to poke at serious subject matter and a long, LONG list of “mysterious” topics and have all the answers and are here to re-assure us that they have it all figured out.. Well, Dunning for one and his people only studied up on Earthing for a SINGLE AFTERNOON on the INTERNET before writing this piece on Earthing announcing that Dr. Mercola and Ober are wrong. Dunning has never tried Earthing himself, refuses to test it , knows of no one who has benefited from it, and was so confident that he appeared on Skype to tell our town of healed people that it is all New Age nonsense. This is amazing. And so, why will he, ( and you , Mr. Eric Hall, ) not engage oncamera to put what you think you know to the test ? This would involve not hiding behind your computer and writing half-truths about how Grounding works . . I’m going to hit a few bullet points on this commentary one more time, and this is more for the benefit of the fine people that try to add their two cents that are left somewhat embarrassed by what and how the answers come back from this panel of Skeptoidians :
          * If you’ve ever had a shock from an a dry carpet and a brass doorknob, you know that quite a bit of electricity can flow through your skin rapidly. Such a discharge is more than enough to completely fry a sensitive piece of electronic equipment , as any electronic technician knows. That’s a fair amount of electricity passing through your skin in milliseconds. An electric chair is a good example of how long it takes to fry the brain and cook the eyeballs.
          * The entire human body is an electrical system ; and EACH red blood cell carries a surface charge of about 15 million electrons, so blood flow itself is an electric current. It takes about 20 seconds for a red blood cell to complete a circulatory loop.
          * Nerve impulses are electric currents. Brain and heart run on electrical impulses. To assume that electricity does not travel fast enough as you’ve stated Mr. Hall, it would , for example mean that it would take about an hour or so to know that if you stubbed your toe after it happened.
          * The human body runs on electrical signals FAR WEAKER than 60 cycle, 110 volt electricity. Obviously if you hooked yourself up to the house current , you’re a dead man.
          * EKGs, EEGs and so forth are recordings of very weak signals , but one’s nerves carry these electrical signals very quickly.
          * If you don’t ground one half of a weak electrical signal ( like the shield on a coaxial cable like Clint Ober used to work with for television ) or a twisted pair of wires, the signal will become distorted by the time it reaches its intended destination . That is why ALL delicate electrical equipment is grounded ! Remember rabbit ear t.v. ? ( maybe not , I’m getting old ) , but , if you’ve ever experienced an ungrounded t.v. signal you’re going to get snow, poor vertical hold , horizontal distortion , etc.
          * NOW, ONE of the problems involved in human health, for example, HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE, is the acidity of the blood. If the blood stream goes acidic, some of the 15 million electrons on EACH red blood cell (RBC) bleed off. The cell becomes LESS negatively charged, and the repulsive force ( zeta potential) that keeps RBCs circulating independently is reduced. The result is that RBCs will clump together which is known as rouleaux, and not pass as easily through the circulatory system. The blood gets THICKER, giving one more of a predilection to heart disease , strokes, embolism, etc… EARTHING helps to RESTORE the negative surface of RBCs, quickly lowering the blood pressure.
          *** When ELECTRICITY was first discovered, the FLOW was assumed to go from ANODE to CATHODE, plus to minus. That was an arbitrary flip of the coin. ELECTRONS were discovered MUCH LATER ! And it turned out THEY were the carriers of the current . UNFORTUNATELY , they were the things flowing from the cathode (minus) to the anode (plus).So, in reality, electricity , carried by electrons, actually FLOWS from minus to plus, not that it matters :-) . The ELECTRONS jump from “hole” to “hole” , and , depending upon what you are measuring , you are either measuring the “holes” or the electrons.
          *** Okay, this is long and boring to most regular folks, but Eric, we need to cut open the disinformation that you are disseminating with such fanfare and feeding to people about Earthing. You may be afraid to appear on camera, which is fine, ( actually this action I’m doing right now with you will suffice and the fact that you refuse to participate is already participating… I respectfully find your position on Earthing and dozens of other mysteries that are “debunked” by you and the Dunning team, as incredibly Einsteinish ; and , you are either one of most learned human beings on the planet that exceeds all the famous and smart people that ever lived, or just pretending to be . Which is it ? How can people spend decades researching earthing in the laboratory and the universities around the world, with tens of millions spent on these activities and be wrong, yet you and Dunning , that have no Ph.D or Doctorate recognition be right every time ? C’mon . C’mon, if this was professional wrestling , okay. But you spend all this time typing this stuff up with straight face here. It’s dangerous and scary from my point of view; and even insulting to many of us …. If people believe you that are in pain right now, and do NOT GROUND, now that , to me , is a sin . And pitifully wrong..
          Computers run on “electricity” and it takes nano seconds to travel around the world, and our bodies are missing electrons when we have inflammation, and these are positively charged ions.. Flood the body with electrons, FROM THE EARTH, and these little buggers will FIND and FILL the lack therein in free radicals. Once the gap is FILLED , the ion is neutralized, and causes no more inflammation.
          THEREFORE, I am still hoping that Mr. Dunning, and you are able to recognize these facts, and discuss this further on camera. If not, then I will have to use what I’ve already got from you as substance to back up your “rebuttal” , which thus far, is ZERO. Respectfully, Steve Kroschel / Director “Grounded”

          • Eric Hall says:

            I will address your bullet points first – some with questions.

            – What do you mean by “quite a bit of electricity” in a static shock? Because while static discharges are due to a high voltage, it has a very low overall energy due to the small number of charges.

            – Yes, our body has many electrical systems. That doesn’t in any way prove grounding works.

            – Tell me then Steve, how do those nerve signals travel so fast? What travels from my stubbed toe to my brain? I can tell you with certainty that electrons from my foot are not making it to my brain in that amount of time. So what is moving that fast? In fact, your previous bullet point says it takes 20 seconds for this electric flow to make a trip around my body, so shouldn’t it take 10 seconds for it to make 1/2 the trip (toe to brain)? Sorry, I know I have a patronizing tone, but I can’t find another way to get you to answer my questions on this…

            – You again have two more bullet points about electrical systems in the body – which doesn’t prove Earthing works.

            – Now suddenly, you say with certainty that Earthing cures this zeta potential problem, without addressing the possibility that it is another cause. You do not even consider my hypothesis as I proposed to Crystal. But let’s go by your premise that hypertension is due to acidic blood. Let’s look at a simple experiment. If I take a container full of an acid, say vinegar, and hook it up to a grounding pad, would it be completely neutralized in an hour? On this bullet point, I also want to ask a basic electricity question. If something is carrying a negative charge, even a reduced one, what is required in order to put additional negative charge on that object? Is it your premise that electrons will just go there just because?

            – Yes, it is the electrons that “flow” in electricity – but at what speed? Even Ober acknowledges this. It is called the drift velocity. It is on the order of a few cm per hour in a DC circuit. In an alternating current, the electrons will oscillate back and forth within no more than a couple hundredths of millimeters. If cancelling out a 60 Hz field as claimed, then there would be no net electron flow into the body. None. When I flip on a light switch in my house and the lamp comes on, those electrons in the light bulb never leave the light bulb. So the very claim that electrons are flowing into the body from the earth due to the “cancelling” of the oscillating electric field is ridiculous.

            – Your long soliloquies at the beginning and end here still do not address my question (I’ve asked a dozen times or so) —–> What is the direction of the electric field in a wire carrying current? This is a very important question, as it is the very premise of your (and Ober’s) hypothesis. If the ELECTRIC FIELDS from all of these devices are what is causing these problems, my question is the first thing I would ask.

            These are not half-truths or based on a few hours of research. The premise being sold here as grounding, more specifically how it works and what it does for the body, doesn’t make sense from a physics perspective. The testing is not blinded nor randomized, and uses subjective measures of pain (which can be part of the discussion, but should be in conjunction with things that can be measured objectively), and other measures such as zeta potential changing over time with an assumption of cause an effect with what is being tested. Let’s say I leave several chunks of a peanut butter sandwich on an earthing pad outside my house overnight. In the morning, half of the chunks have disappeared. Should I assume a cause and effect, that the earthing pad caused the sandwich pieces to disappear? Or are there other possibilities I didn’t test?

            Again, why would I appear on camera, when I would have no control over the editing or the conditions of the test? The problem with your documentary is you use a passive-aggressive technique that you are just searching for the truth, but the reality is you are already sold on the idea, now you are hunting for the evidence after. I am a scientist, and I prefer my testing to be scientific.

          • Eric ~ your answers to my lengthy discourse are filled with so many holes that I don’t know where to begin. So briefly, I want you to contact Mr.Dunning, who has become strangely silent about participating in the film after stating he more than happy to , and then states “we both know I did not agree to” in this same mile long epistle of comments here.
            What you are doing , is simply providing a DISINFORMATION VENUE for yourselves, and coming across using PBS type requests for people to “donate” to Skeptoid to keep this a going.
            Your reasoning for NOT appearing in the film, because you “would not have control of the editing” is a lame excuse for non-participation and insulting. Ironically, the film “Grounded” has and will generate a great deal of advertising to your site, and the fact that I want to CONTINUE dealing with you should be viewed as a “GIFT” to you ! Passive / Aggressive ? If that is what you think I am , perhaps I’m getting under your skin at this point , or closer to exposing your innate talent to sell a list of unproven lies and accusations to the public without any true evidence. You have nothing to operate on to disprove Earthing, except a phoney baloney replies that come within usually an hour of these posts… How exactly, do you want me to deal with people like you ? Meantime, please confirm for me , that Mr. Dunning , like you , does NOT want to appear on camera to demonstrate various scientific ways and means how Earthing works. The title of the film is “Grounded 2″.
            The reason I am making it , is JUST FOR PEOPLE like yourself …. Have you seen the film “Grounded” already ? Have you watched the entire movie ? Answers, Eric ! The only reason why I am even investing any additional time with this Junior HIgh discourse with you, is because I want to put your “science” to the test . On camera. There is no other reason . I want the public to see your theories in living color .

          • Eric Hall says:

            This is why I won’t appear in your film. You are asking me to disprove an untruth. I can tell you there is a teapot orbiting the moon – prove me wrong. Can you do it? Of course you can’t disprove it.

            Please, I welcome your discussion of the holes in my science. Feel free to point them out. Every time I have invited you to do so, you reply with your rhetoric from the film without actually addressing any of my questions or concerns.

            I ask you again, what is the direction of the ELECTRIC FIELD in a wire carrying a current? I’ll ask a couple others while I am at it. How does a voltmeter function? What causes an electron to go towards a cell that is already negatively charged?

            I am not spending my money on a piece of propaganda for which there is limited plausibility. I don’t make a single cent from writing here, so go ahead and drive traffic here. Yes, Brian asks for donations in order to run his servers, and to pay for his time he spends recording each week. I notice you don’t give away your movie for free wither. Hopefully this site, which is available for free, helps to undo the bad science done by Ober, Sinatra, and Mercola. I have to undo this type of bad science all the time in my physics classes. Students believing in magic energy fields, believing their blood is blue until exposed to oxygen, believing wifi can damage the body, etc.

            Yes, you are acting passive aggressive in the way you discuss under the guise of being open-minded and willing to discuss the topic, but you don’t discuss it. I have addressed your “proof” by showing how the evidence is poor and doesn’t fit with 200 years of physics knowledge. Don’t give me the information I have shown is bad – I’d like to see how you or those from which you get your information respond to my questions above (which still have not been addressed. Feel free to ask me questions on my information or show me where the holes are and I will try to address them. Again, I can’t provide an entire class worth of material on E&M – at that point I would just write my own textbook and actually get paid for my time.

            One other thing on watching the film – I will watch if available for free. However, please understand a documentary film is not evidence. If the results are not published in a trustworthy journal with extensive peer review, it is not evidence. I am happy to respond to any of your questions or any of your “evidence” as I have continued to do.

            Let’s have a conversation. Ask me questions, I will answer. Will you answer mine?

        • Crystal says:

          Neil is just a guy. He’s not using “fear tactics”…I don’t see any tactic at all.

          Not every conversation needs tactics unless you’re dealing with Steve “director of the film Grounded 2″, as he keeps generously advertising.

          Anyway, it’s a FACT that “specific” cancers are on the rise and they cannot be lumped in with “averages”. My friend lost her 14 year old son to an aggressive brain tumor…another friend lost her husband to an aggressive brain tumor while she herself battles leukemia.

          When these people cry and want to find out WHY…no one in their right mind will come back with “well statistically most other cancers rates are falling, so….”

          What I do not agree with when it comes to “text book science” is, how people are all lumped into one after experiments are done. Then casually in conversation you’re allowed to say blanket statements like “cancer is on the decline.”

          If 12.7 learn they have cancer per year, then 7.6 mill per year die from cancer…how does that kind of death rate equate to success?

          Don’t get me wrong…science is good. However science doesn’t fuss with the “smaller” percentage of people which still is in the millions. For example, that report from the National Cancer Institute listed “child cancers” as on the rise…that effects all children and includes several types of cancers. Children make up a large population on their own, regardless of what it looks like in compared “percentages”.

          Also, the list of cancers on the rise is LARGER than the list of cancers that are on the decline.

          These are facts and not fear tactics.

          In regards to this Earthing argument… I could care less about the correct description of electrons. I’ll leave that to you guys to hash out. What caught my eye is the decoupling of the blood. Any good researcher should be focusing on finding out what’s going on. THIS IS THE POSSIBLE SHARED CORRELATION.

          The blood is decoupling. WHY?!

          • Eric Hall says:

            It is likely due to the relaxation brought on by both the situation and the placebo effect. You probably don’t have time to read all the comments, but basically Steve’s claim is the flow of electrons is making the blood less acidic. As I responded, if I have a jar of vinegar and I put a metal probe in it and then ground it, I can tell you it will still have the same acidity in an hour or two. There is a chemical change (I would guess cortisol) that is being reduced which allows the blood chemistry to “recharge” the blood cells (via chemical reaction, not a current). If they did a blinded and controlled experiment, I would say it is highly likely they would see the same decoupling in both the grounded and control group.

            In fact, we have pretty good science on this. An sort of relaxation and self-meditation reduces stress hormone levels, reduces heart rate and blood pressure, and all sorts of other measurable things improve. As I have stated, other products make this same decoupling claim – most commonly nutrition products. Some even have videos of the blood before and after ingesting their product. Stress hormones are pretty powerful – and reducing them is known to be good for your health. We have good, blinded, controlled studies showing this.

            And yes, we should do everything we can to fight cancer. The truth is, infant mortality is so much lower, and kids with conditions where they would not have survived now are surviving, but perhaps at the detriment to their later health. But with survival rates increasing and overall cancer rates going down, I call that progress. We also have people in general surviving so many other conditions, it means more people will get cancer we might not have otherwise encounter often because the people who get them would have already died from something else. Doesn’t mean we stop – just means we should acknowledge it is getting better, not worse.

          • Crystal says:

            Ok now we’re finally talking… DECOUPLING BLOOD.

            Do you have any articles to reference regarding;

            1) Other products offering decoupling results (Not doubting, just curious. I can’t find any claims)
            2) That relaxation causes decoupling.

            When it comes to decoupling of blood, to the degree shown in the grounding “trials”, everything I have read states that it involves increasing blood oxygen concentration. This would indicate exercise, not relaxing right? Meditation lowers your body’s oxygen consumption but I cannot find an article that claims it contributes to decoupling.

            I’ve been read-eyed looking into any such research regarding decoupling and it sounds like Chinese to someone who is not in the medical field. From the little I could gather, it appeared that the doctors attached used some form of “stimulant”, like a probe(?) to cause decoupling.

            We are still left with the same issue though. These subjects were sitting in a conference for some time before they were given blood tests. There was plenty of time for them to experience any such relaxation they would have experienced sitting in a similar seat, attached to a mat. If this mat can create decoupling on demand when a person is NOT in a deep state of meditation, wearing fuzzy slipper in a lounge chair… WHY?

          • Eric Hall says:

            Isegenix is one example off the top of my head.

            Cortisol has the effect of causing a retention of sodium. This means it is harder for the blood zeta potential to increase. Cortisol in general also reduces all waste output, so the body can’t balance itself as well. I am on my phone and don’t have links readily available on that.

            When I say blinded and controlled,part of the reason is to avoid confirmation bias and placebo effects. If a guy with a lab coat and a nametag that says MD on it says you’ll feel better if you do X, doing X will make you feel better. So you relax. The burden is lifted. So that stress reduction is the key.

            I would guess the same results could be obtained if you tested before and after an hour message.

          • Crystal says:

            Interesting and worth more review. One problem is that I’m not sure the subjects at the conference were told exactly why blood samples were being taken. I think they just asked for anyone who might be in any pain. Not sure they were exactly preparing their minds for upcoming “relief”. I’ll review it again…even though I can’t stand the sound of the guys sales pitch.

            I strongly believe this should be studied further. I cannot for the life of me find an easy-read study regarding blood decoupling. I would like to find a study showing blood results (specifically decoupling) before and after rest, exercise, and with use of these mats.

            Not to prove the “healing” theory they are currently boasting…but to figure out exactly whats going on. Why it is so consistent. The theory that “telling someone they will feel better can cause the level of relaxation”only goes so far.

            The fact is, even though that kind of “mind/body relaxation” CAN happen, this cannot be the guaranteed outcome for every random person you tried that technique on. Some of those blood tests would have come back different than the others. There is no way every subject would have the exact same results in my opinion.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Without a formal study and formal data, it is hard to know what the results really are. I don’t taje scientific data from a sales pitch at a conference. At that point we might as well get Vince the Shamwow guy up there taking the blood samples while he makes innuendo about poking people with needles.

            Seriously though…that’s not data. When the sellers of a product claim their product works, that’s a red flag. Zicam claims their product works too, but when the data is analyzed, turns out it improves the symptoms by 40 minutes in duration – which in the size of the study is background noise.

            How many researchers do you see doing their work collecting data at conferences? It is a sales pitch.

          • Crystal says:

            I am going to post this twice in this thread and below to keep this organized.

            I am finding more studies. They look legitimate enough to me so far. But seem to confirm my opinion that these mats do cause blood decoupling BUT should not be used by just anyone without proper education.

            Here is a study that shows that some people MAY benefit from these mats. The study was done by Dr. William Amalu. A pioneer in thermography.


            HOWEVER….as I have stated before, even though there seems to be legitimate reaction in the blood decoupling, it appears that mats should not be used casually. For example, as Eric and I discussed, a person with existing cancer…BAD IDEA.

            Here is a very nice article I finally found to show that people should not use mats “just because” or with out proper education. Eric, you will really like this one.
            (I like the easy to understand illustrations) It points out how using these mats when sleeping could actually make the situation worse by increasing the field of exposure.


            My conclusion, so far, is:
            1) With a bit more study, it is possible for these mats to benefit certain people with ongoing inflammation.

            2) Earthing should be limited to the outdoors, naturally…(Whether it is legit or not is not my worry) But as for using mats, avoid them unless one has a true understanding the field exposure set up in their personal indoor spaces (which varies greatly from building to building).

            For now I will not be using my sleeping mat since I do not suffer from chronic inflammation…but instead get an expert to evaluate my homes/bedrooms EMF potential for adjustment.

            I think people should use good old fashioned ethernet cable if their afraid of wifi…or assign a specific “wifi” zone in the home and using it in time controlled sessions.

            Thanks everyone here for all the input! It got weird, maybe that’s still the case, but I definitely got what I needed to move forward for now.

            Although it gets ugly sometimes, thank you for offering this website and your time Eric.

  20. Steve R says:

    Have you tried walking barefoot? I did. I suffered from severe arthritic knee pain. Just one day of working barefoot in the yard and the pain was gone!

    Don’t poo poo natural things unless you want to look like an idiot to people that are open minded enough to try new things.

  21. Neil says:

    Hi Eric – sorry, I don’t mean to belittle science or any theories that physics has proven or disproven over the years, and I’m definitely not going to get in a match of wits with yourself – you would win every time.
    My stance is simply this – I read the pros and cons , and then I make a decision. The way I see it I’ve got a 50/50 chance of making the right decision. If I make a wrong decision – so be it. I’ll chalk it up to experience and move on. A lesson I learned from my last boss, when he left me in charge of something when he wasn’t there. It’s called a “Flash Executive Decision.” If you don’t know what to do – at least make a decision. You’ve got a 50% chance of being right – if your wrong, deal with it later.
    But I’m off the topic here – sorry about that.
    My question to you Eric is – where do you see the world at in the next 10 years?
    What with technology and EMF and RF levels ever increasing, where is the danger point in the physics scheme of things. Can you assure me 100% that these things aren’t hurting me or my kids or ever will? Or is theories, hypotheses and deductive reasoning enough to make your decisions?
    I’m sitting here right now with bare feet on an earthing mat as I type this. I bought it today for $39.00,
    My volt meter reading for my body has gone from 6.12 off the mat to .132 on the mat. Somehow, I think this is good and I’m quite happy knowing this.
    If this is a scam then it’s a pretty good one – it sure sucked me in.
    I’ll get back to you.

    • Eric Hall says:

      I can assure you with a very very high degree of certainty that radio frequencies are not harming you. Our bodies are evolved in a bath of radio, infrared, and even visible light portions of the EM spectrum from space.

      Yes, experience can teach us alot. But there are times when we let other people’s experiences, observations, and evidence decide for us. We don’t jump off bridges or stand outside in a lightning storm because we know from others’ experiences that those things are harmful.

      One thing about your reading – and one thing I haven’t asked Steve yet because he hasn’t answered my other question – do you know how a voltmeter works? I would ask that you study a little on how it works – which might better explain why you are getting the readings you are getting. Along with that, please look into what voltage and current both really mean. These are important to understand. I’ll start you with this nugget – if you rub a balloon on your hair to give it a little charge to stick it to the wall, you are putting several thousand volts of potential on the balloon – much, much higher than the 6 volts you measured with your volt meter. Is that 2000+ volts on the balloon harmful?

      • Alan Henness says:

        Yes, it really would be helpful if your straightforward questions could be answered by those making claims about earthing.

        • Eric Hall says:

          I don’t understand how my basic question is Junior High behavior – but it does seem strange I can’t get an answer to a few basic questions on electricity, eh?

          • Dear Skeptoidians ~ I am STILL noticing that you IGNORE my questions regarding Mr. Dunning appearing in the movie “Grounded 2″ ….Does he fear that he might be wrong ? Obviously, you are revealing that YOU may be wrong ! And I am STUNNED , just STUNNED , that you continue to spread disinformation to the public ( well , thank goodness it is less than 200,000 subscribers, and let’s hope it stays that way) ~ and disparage EARTHING, and haven’t even taken the time to watch the film “Grounded” which shows , depicts, illustrates, verifies, and gives reference to, etc.. the SCIENCE and PROOF POSITIVE behind Earthing.
            Now you are saying you would watch the movie if it were “free”. It WAS FREE , and I’ve given those Youtube Links to your ring leader Mr. Dunning MONTHS ago. And , as a humanitarian gesture, Dr. Mercola very generously offered the film for FREE via Youtube that accompanied his article on on October 19, 2013. The response and number of views went viral ; and we extended the views for an extra week… At this point, Mr. Hall, I’d be happy to send you and your followers at your “headquarters”, a dvd complementary copy of the film to look over for FREE ! Give me a good physical address and we’ll Fed Ex one out later this week. How’s that ? Will you and you watch it then ?
            I would suggest that you SCIENTIFICALLY analyze the DATA , and NOT bury your heads In the sand of what physics is all about . You are “educated” to the point of being brainwashed and brittle to the point I fear you might “shatter” if you have to possibly, just a little, consider that your Skeptoid Organization could be WRONG about Earthing. And yes, you spent a single afternoon reading up on Earthing before the above article attacking Dr. Mercola was published. How do I know ? I have a personal email from Mr. Dunning himself, (and a few other emails ) that state that fact.. Those emails from Mr. Dunning were promptly printed and filed , thank you very much.
            At this point, I’m not going to be quite as soft with you on this website commentary page , that, has a LOT OF GOOD, but it is also adulterated with a LOT OF BAD. And from my perspective, you are a WOLF in Sheep’s clothing. And very , very dangerous. I feel that you are HURTING THE public and leading people astray about Earthing. I feel so strongly about this that it almost makes tears come to my eyes. Because, MOST people that visit this MISINFORMATION SITE , with you masquerading as an expert in physics, will unquestionably believe YOU , instead of the truth. And then , if they are physically SUFFERING, they will not even TRY it, in which they almost certainly would recover from inflammation and pain, or have SOME BENEFIT. Instead, you are ROBBING readers of this privilege with your answers that are forever and always laced with such a smug self-assuredness that it reminds me of a sixth grade bully on the playground.
            Now , hopefully most people that have read this long comment, will , at this point, tune out and move on with their day, with the hint at least, that operates purely and solely as (from my point of view) a place that benefits by “scamming the alleged scammers”…
            For mostly the two or three left to read the rest of this , here it goes with RATIONAL THOUGHT:
            * Do you have to understand which way electricity is going to know a light bulb works ? Of course not, kids and grandma and Uncle Fred don’t care, they just want some damn light ! For the rest of you, electricity is going BOTH WAYS, as it’s alternating current.
            Do you have to know how a voltmeter works to use it ? A current is generated by the voltage , and the current causes a magnetic field in a coil that drives a spring-loaded needle to move in a direction and angular magnitude proportional to the applied voltage.The electrons do not travel towards a cell, the negative charge of a RBC ( red blood cell) is primarily caused by its sialic acid. When the RBCs are immersed in an acid medium (incorrectly balanced serum), the negative charge is reduced or eliminated. They travel towards and neutralize the free radicals, which are positively charged.
            * Do you have to understand the electronic and chemical and mechanical function of an automobile engine to drive one ? Of course not !
            And the MILLIONS fo people that benefit from earthing , and MILLIONS of plants and animals that benefit from Earthing don’t have to understand how it works to know they are getting the benefit . Again , WATCH THE FREAKIN MOVIE “Grounded” , before posting ANYMORE of these sophomoric responses ! Just take a deep breath and go outside barefoot and THINK before you utter some more poo-poo !
            I send you warm greetings from my frozen Alaska cabin to you ! Steve Kroschel / director “Grounded”
            P.S. If you change your mind about participating In “Grounded 2″ , please post here and we’ll do a blood viscosity study RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EYES… It’ll take about 40 minutes to demonstrate, and we can also do a study with germinating SEEDS, PLANTS, etc. IN A NEUTRAL UNIVERSITY setting ! Just need you to show your face and that of Mr. Dunning at the outset, of all these demonstrations. And of course , we need you to show your face at the conclusion of the studies, and we want you to DISCUSS the findings ! What do you say ? THAT is REAL science. Period.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Ahhh – so you do admit that the voltmeter is measuring the current through a resistor, and by measuring the small current going across a large resistance, you get a voltage (or in the old fashioned way, a magnetic field which would deflect a needle).

            So in Mercola and Ober’s demo, they have an electrode on Mercola’s hand, and the other electrode on the grounding pad which is hooked to ground. So when Mercola’s heart beats, it discharges and creates a small voltage difference across his body. If we assume his skin isn’t sweaty, that means the resistance of his body is about 100,000 ohms. We know the voltage difference between the left hand and the discharged heart will be anywhere from 2 to 10 mV. So that makes the body a current source of about 0.02 mA. Let’s be conservative and say the body is only producing a current of 0.002 mA. If we assume a resistance in the voltmeter of about 1 Megaohm, then the voltage that will read on the voltmeter is (wouldn’t you know it) 2 volts (or I guess 1.4 since it is reading RMS). Now, if I touch my other hand to the grounding pad, my body offers a less resistant path to ground than does the voltmeter. So most of the current will discharge directly to ground, less through the voltmeter. Less current through the resistor, the voltmeter reads less voltage. So guess what – their demo is a sham – based on something learned in sophomore physics.

            You do need to know which way the electricity is flowing. Your very claim is that the oscillating electric fields are to blame for all of the various ills of people. However, the ELECTRIC FIELD points along the length of a wire, which is why the charges move. The electric field oscillates back and forth – thus even if it were directed out of the wire and not along it, the electrons would not continue to flow into the body – but instead a few would flow in, then back out.

            I am not doubting the RESULTS of the test. I am doubting the correlation and the conclusion. I offered a hypothesis which makes much more sense than does earthing. You are not going to get a chemical change that dramatic by touching the ground. The chemical change is because of the reduction in stress. Cortisol levels can easily explain the zeta potential issue. Walk around barefoot is relaxing. Cortisol goes down when stress is reduced. This is pretty basic. No need to spend money on useless gadgets. So again – do the blood viscosity tests all you want – unless there are controls and blinding – the results are not valid.

            Send the DVD to Mr Dunning. He and I can talk about it.

            And let me just say – for you to come here and accuse me of wanting to make people suffer – that is just plain wrong and very insulting. I am talking about science and reason, and in no way am I trying to be evil. Perhaps you should try to get to know me before throwing out such accusations.

            I look forward to your response on the science.

          • Alan Henness says:


            It seems to me you really know little about science and what constitutes good evidence.

            However, to dispel my impression, please answer Eric’s questions about how a voltmeter works, the 2,000 volts on the balloon question and the direction of the electric field in a wire carrying a current.

            If you want another simple question, can you tell us what the impedance of your voltmeter is?

          • Mr. Henness ! Are you a clone of Mr. Hall ? ….Did you even bother to read my latest reply ? Because if you HAVE NOT (which is posted above this comment you’ve just issued) you’re forgiven. … If you have and replied in less than ten minutes flat , I very politely asked you all to go outside and go barefoot for a bit and take a deep breath and THINK before you write some more POO-POO ! You guys like to play , don’t you ! You like to “tease” and “coax” and , well, like a damn 6th grade bully !

          • Alan Henness says:

            Ooooh! You described one of those old-fashioned moving coil meters. Do you still use one of those? Last one of those I saw was in a museum. Never mind though, they still work. What’s its impedance?

            Maybe you could also see your way to answering my previous question to you that you don’t seem to have answered. Unless I missed it in the middle of some other shouty rant of yours?

            Anyway, your last response still demonstrates that you have little clue about science and evidence or you would not suggest such silly and so obviously flawed experiments.

          • Mr. Henness ~ What an insulting reply ! I’m very busy chopping wood outside to keep warm and only come in to read be further entertained by your large-as-a-bull-moose ego … Since the days are short and it’s cold outside, I’m willing to play along just a bit more with you and your team .. I’ve already answered but apparently you’ve added some more or they are not what you wanted to hear , and so, here is what I think a scientist who tries to stay organized might do next if he had pupils that are disruptive in a classroom :
            Write down the TOP TEN QUESTIONS that you are just DYING to KNOW about how Earthing works and I will do my best to answer them for your edification . ( But primarily for the poor unfortunate unsuspecting souls that find and this article.
            Meantime, here are only FIVE questions I want YOU to answer :
            1. Why doesn’t Brian Dunning respond to the question of RE-verifying that he has agreed to appear in “Grounded 2″?
            2. Will YOU (Mr. Henness) and Eric Hall actually watch the movie “Grounded” if I send you a free dvd of the film and critique it ?
            3. You feel suggestions of plant studies or blood viscosity studies are “silly”, what other are three top experiments that would satiate your Skeptoidian-sized skepticism that are visually interesting and readily understood by the general public ?
            4. WHAT do you hope to achieve by this back and forth pissing contest with a film director of a movie about Earthing ?
            5. Will YOU, Mr. Henness , appear on camera for “Grounded 2″ with your expertise ?
            Looking forward to your reply ! ~ Kindly, Steve Kroschel

          • Alan Henness says:



            Your lack of answers to these very simple questions is noted – and very illuminating. It looks as if it will have to be left to readers here to decide for themselves whether they think you are capable of answering them.

            Oh. Here’s a little something to help you get started in your understanding of evidence and experimentation.

          • Mr. Henness ~ Are you entertained ? Yep ! Good ! Now answer the questions and pose the questions that I”ve put in numerical order.. Meantime, I’m back to splitting wood and feeding animals.. I’ll look at your Wikipedia link very closely and STUDY IT ! THANK You ! I’m your FRIEND , if you give me a chance ! But you just , and MUST know that I want your questions and answers laid out in a LINEAR FASHION so readers can easily understand what makes you so , well, YOU :-) …..I’m also grateful you decided to organize your comment page like so we can follow this thread of fun more easily…. Now , PLEASE use your BRAIN, take some time, avoid further knee-jerk comments , and ANSWER the rudimentary questions above. Thank you very much for playing along ! It’s getting to the point that I”ve put more time in trying to help you understand Earthing, than my shooting outline for the next movie ! Warmly, Mr.Kroschel

          • Alan Henness says:

            That gets you another LOL, I’m afraid.

            If you ever decide to answer those basic questions to demonstrate that you understand some of basics, please let us know.

          • Crystal says:

            Wow you finally got to it. That’s great…I was barely hanging in there to see if this would get to a real point. Although, my point in being here is the decoupling of the blood issue. The real bummer is, after all that effort, this website is SO disorganized so that will not get posted in as the last word.

          • Eric, the “you disagree with me, therefore you hate people and want them to suffer” argument seems like it’s getting more common. As you know, I’ve seen it quite a bit with my Fukushima posts. Might we be seeing a new logical fallacy in its infancy?

          • Eric Hall says:

            I don’t know if it is “new” per se as it might require its own separate category as a common mix between a couple of categories. It is amazing to watch how sticking to the science and evidence leads to people attacking all aspects of mine (and your) personal life. I don’t have a problem if someone wants to question my education, my training, my mind state the day I write something — but to see on here and Twitter where it has become an attack on my family – especially my kids, is both angering and disheartening. I had that instance here where I wrote a blog about an experience with my child, and I was attacked as being a bad parent and stupid because I applied logic instead of emotion to the situation.

            I don’t have any other way to live my life except by science and logic. It doesn’t mean I don’t feel emotion, don’t have empathy, or even that I don’t sometimes stray away from what’s logical. But I choose to let logic be my center. I don’t see a problem with that…other than it can be difficult to deal with other people’s obvious hatred of that approach.

      • Telecom Engineer says:

        My personal experience is that you are vastly underestimating the damage to human health caused by EMF fields. I used to work in medical device and telecommunications companies. When I was around a lot of wireless telecom gear and unshielded in development networking equipment for 10 hours per days, I got multiple blood clots in my legs and head. These continued even when taking the frequently prescribe rat poison called Warfarin or Coumadin. I also experienced bizarre nose bleeds that would start from just standing in an area with a lot of such equipment. I also experienced horrible headaches that the doctors could not explain.

        • Eric Hall says:

          I am sorry that you are having health problems. However, you are mixing in a couple of logical fallacies – first one of authority by your title and two one of confusing anecdote as evidence. If radio waves indeed are causing health problems, wouldn’t we see a consistent appearance of these symptoms in people who do your kind of work? Also, you fail to mention the large amount of naturally occurring radio (EMF) waves that bathe the earth all the time. We have radio astronomy that tells us alot about the universe. We see bursts of radio waves coming from all over the universe.

          Now granted, if one stands right next to a powerful emitter of EMF (a radar for example), it could cause a burn, but that is because the large amount of photons being emitted at the source. Because the intensity falls off as a 1/r^2 relationship, it very quickly becomes harmless. Our Wifi and similar signals in our homes are at most a couple of Watts at the source – so the intensity is very low very quickly. The blackbody radiation from a room temperature object about the size of a modem would give off about a Watt of energy.

          • Telecom Engineer says:

            Have you read Robert O. Becker’s book The Body Electric? Many functions of animals depend upon quantum physics features with tiny power levels.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Anytime you hear the word quantum physics other than from those who only research quantum physics – run away. It is a buzz word badly misused.

          • Telecom Engineer says:

            If you haven’t read of Becker’s research, you get zero credibility to be making the claims you are making. He was nominated for a Nobel prize for his work.

          • Eric Hall says:

            We don’t do science based on winning awards – or on those nominated.

            The Nobel committee gets plenty of bad nominations every year for all the prizes. In their attempt to make sure to get random representation outside of the Scandinavian countries, they do yield a few bizarre nominees each year. Hell – Putin is up for a peace prize this year. Um…OK.

            Even winners are occasionally without controversy. Fermi won a prize for what they thought were making elements heavier than uranium. Turned out to be fission. Still interesting, but not correct science as published. Several medicine prizes have some controversy behind them. Many more peace prizes. So – again – let’s not base our science on prizes or a prize nomination.

          • Alan Henness says:

            Can you provide a link for that?

  22. Neil says:

    Well, after reading the last 10 posts that’s clogging up my inbox and seeing this is getting a little ugly – and no disputes are even getting close to a happy medium – I’ve made a decision on what to do.
    I’d like to thank all posters for their input – pros and cons – but I see this debate is far from over and personally, I think it’s getting a little boring.
    My decision sides with giving Earthing a try – just to satisfy my own curiosity.
    Also unsubscribing to my email so I can get on with my life.
    Good luck with your new movie, Steve – I’ll look forward to seeing it.
    Regards – Neil

  23. Eric Hall says:

    FYI – for Steve and anyone else who is wondering if any other doctors have looked at this evidence and agree – Dr. Novella did indeed look at the research as well.

    • I am reading the “aftermath” of my responses to trying to contribute some sense to this misleading discourse has created to disparage Earthing. Very, very, sad how more misinformation continues to be served up here; including the “opinions” of Dr.Novella. Surely, his observations contribute nothing to the facts about Earthing, and he himself admitted he was wrong in how he wrote the article ; and many of his readers were far from agreeing with his rudimentary viewpoints.
      Meantime, I am trying to figure out a way to respond to and address the same half dozen people here who seem to have enormous time on their hands to just continuing to attack the concept of Earthing . I’ve made suggestions above as to listing ten questions, and listed five questions myself, and instead was laughed at …. Furthermore, condemned for suggesting that your disparaging of the topic of Earthing is hurting people. I reiterate , this article and these comments , if believed by suffering people, and who therefore will NOT even try it , have LOST A CHANCE to HEAL and be PAIN FREE . .Somehow ,the Skeptoidian people have even twisted my statements above to mean I am leveling a “personal ” attack on them for these observations. Wow !
      Very challenging to work within this forum with the assemblage therein. .. I will try to
      study all this more carefully, do some consulting outside , and write a final comment and move on.. There are much bigger things to be concerned and/or worried about …..Concerns over Fukishima might be your next topic to discuss in what is could do to this ;planet at any given moment ?

      • Alan Henness says:

        If only you could provide good, independent, robust evidence for what you claim…

        • Geez-us ! This response was quick ! I haven’t even got my coat on and BAM, there is a reply already….Mr.Henness… Like I said, I’ll get back to you ! Meantime, the good , robust evidence is all around you on the internet; in the libraries, in Universities, at clinics all over the world.. and in the movie “Grounded”, which you refuse to watch ! Corresponding on this forum is getting old very fast, because nothing happens that is constructive at all. Now , goodbye .. go feed your cat or go for a walk …

          • Alan Henness says:

            You seem to misunderstand what ‘good, independent, robust evidence’ means. A promotional video doesn’t quite cut it, I’m afraid. And a lot of hand waving ‘look it up on the Internet’ isn’t any better, is it? Anyway, I’m sure I could find all sorts of contrary information on the Internet as well…

          • Okay, I just SAT HERE, just KNOWING that you would reply. I KNOW you now.. This is all you have to do apparently is make assumptions (lazy accusations actually), about a subject that you know very little about. Just enough to BE DANGEROUS. “A promotional video” you say?
            How can you know what it depicts and discusses since you haven’t seen it !You haven’t a CLUE what’s in that 74 minute motion picture. What you are demonstrating yet again, is brutally ABUSING the shield and term of “SCIENCE” to have the excuse to have “open season” on any social concern that you don’t agree with . This is the premise of Skeptoid , in fact ; and it is misleading and damaging ; and it will tarnish the understanding of many serious scenerios in society if the unschooled ( no one can be an expert on everything , right ) are gullible enough to swallow the whole set-up of Skeptoid to begin with.
            I wonder what your background is ………are you a Ph.D or M.D. or …..maybe I’ll google your name to find out when I have nothing better to do…When I googled Mr.Dunning’s name, there is quite a colorful story about that fellow. Certainly not a scientist.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Steve – how about you? Do you have a PhD? MD? No. But you are proclaiming to be an expert on this subject as well.

            You misunderstand my motivation. I am not using science as a shield. I am trying to balance out people who misuse or misunderstand science and use the public’s misunderstanding of science to their advantage. I am more than happy to review a copy of your film, but you have pretty much described it here. You use terms like “try it” and suggest I take part in a non-scientific test as “proof.” Steve, I will ask you nice – please take some time to research the scientific process and the scientific method. In fact, you can start with Mr. Dunning’s episode on the subject, and also I might suggest some of the reading on science on the Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe website. You have to understand I am not dismissing your claims because I am trying to be mean or evil. I am simply pointing out that the science is bad, and I want to educate the public on the scientific method and specific science topics. They get the science wrong on electricity. They give evidence which is not gathered scientifically. Again, I might suggest that Grounded 2 should be them going through the process of properly testing their hypothesis, and report the results, whatever they might be. Go ahead and interview a few physicists and/or electrical engineers about Ober’s tests. Get PhDs if you want since my MS in physics is not enough education for you. Go ahead and talk to several cardiologists (pick them at random) and see if they find any plausibility in this hypothesis. Ask them what test they would design for the hypothesis. I think you will find a much different result than what you got for Grounded 1.

            We can continue to discuss this ad nauseam, and I am more than happy to oblige. But I will not have you insult my intelligence or my passion for science. If you have evidence which will show I am wrong, I am happy to admit I am wrong. I have not insulted your intelligence in any way – I have only insulted your information. I would appreciate if you did the same. I also haven’t questioned your motivation. I understand that you are trying to inform people and help them – good motivation doesn’t mean you can’t be wrong. I would appreciate you refraining from insinuating I am somehow evil and that I abuse science or people. I gain nothing from writing on this subject. I make no money, no fame, no nothing. I simply want to help people understand the difference between good and bad science. And if I did somewhere insult you personally, I apologize. It is never my intent to do so.

            When I am in the electronics lab this week, I will do a couple of my own tests to further show my voltmeter hypothesis to be correct. Would you like me to bring the results back here to the blog?

          • Eric Hall says:

            Again – the only publications are in a CAM journal – and most of it is opinion pieces. There is very little actual data. A documentary which is selling grounding is not an independent or evidence. I can make a film on anything I want – that doesn’t mean I get to fly in a warp ship….

          • Stephen Propatier says:

            Watched you feel good promo, feel better now? One question. the population on earth that predominantly wear absolutely no footwear in the all natural brazilian rainforest. That are lifelong “earthing”. One in every two children born in the rainforest dies before their second birthday, and if they make it to forty years of age they are considered tribal elders. Most dwellers who make it through childhood tend to die from a disease trivial to western medicine. The key to good health my eye.

          • The tone of this new Skeptoidian is odd… And trying to connect the dots with people in third world countries that are barefoot to disparage Earthing is preposterous . Is that all you can deduce from , if you truly watched the whole film ? Because if you watched the whole film , you ignored an enormous amount of science…
            Thanks for your two cents worth ! :-)

      • Eric Hall says:

        Already have that covered too –

        You did attack me. You said I don’t have compassion for people in pain. I do. I choose not to have them waste money or time on things that don’t work. If they are in pain, the cost of a grounding pad could pay for a message, a physical therapy treatment, a pain medication, a book on meditation, or anything else that would have evidence of helping those in pain.

        Dr. Novella fixed the physics errors in his piece. His medical knowledge along with my physics knowledge shows together that the claims made by earthing proponents are not scientific. If you truly think your (and Ober’s and Sinatra’s and Mercola’s) hypothesis is correct – then take the money made from these grounding pads and do legitimate, controlled, blinded studies. Maybe higher an independent source to do the studies. Let them publish it in a legitimate journal where it can be peer-reviewed. Doing a small 10 person non-controlled study isn’t evidence. It is, at most, cause to do more legitimate research, though the plausibility is limited which is why no one has jumped on doing more extensive research on it.

        I have addressed your questions – you continue to side-step most of mine. Have you looked at my explanation of the demo with the voltmeter? I’d like that to be addressed as well – why Ober, an “expert” in communications, would make such an obvious error.

        • Crystal says:

          I am going to post this twice in this thread and below to keep this organized.

          I am finding more studies. They look legitimate enough to me so far. But seem to confirm my opinion that these mats do cause blood decoupling BUT should not be used by just anyone without proper education.

          Here is a study that shows that some people MAY benefit from these mats. The study was done by Dr. William Amalu. A pioneer in thermography.

          HOWEVER….as I have stated before, even though there seems to be legitimate reaction in the blood decoupling, it appears that mats should not be used casually. For example, as Eric and I discussed, a person with existing cancer…BAD IDEA.

          Here is a very nice article I finally found to show that people should not use mats “just because” or with out proper education. Eric, you will really like this one.
          (I like the easy to understand illustrations) It points out how using these mats when sleeping could actually make the situation worse by increasing the field of exposure.

          My conclusion, so far, is:
          1) With a bit more study, it is possible for these mats to benefit certain people with ongoing inflammation.

          2) Earthing should be limited to the outdoors, naturally…(Whether it is legit or not is not my worry) But as for using mats, avoid them unless one has a true understanding the field exposure set up in their personal indoor spaces (which varies greatly from building to building).

          For now I will not be using my sleeping mat since I do not suffer from chronic inflammation…but instead get an expert to evaluate my homes/bedrooms EMF potential for adjustment.

          I think people should use good old fashioned ethernet cable if their afraid of wifi…or assign a specific “wifi” zone in the home and using it in time controlled sessions.

          Thanks everyone here for all the input! It got weird, maybe that’s still the case, but I definitely got what I needed to move forward for now.

          Although it gets ugly sometimes, thank you for offering this website and your time Eric.

      • julie says:

        Steve-you are wasting your time arguing with these closed-minded arrogant know-it-all left brainers.

  24. Telecom Engineer says:

    My personal experience is that you are vastly underestimating the damage to human health caused by EMF fields. I used to work in medical device and telecommunications companies. When I was around a lot of wireless telecom gear and unshielded in development networking equipment for 10 hours per days, I got multiple blood clots in my legs and head. These continued even when taking the frequently prescribe rat poison called Warfarin or Coumadin. I also experienced bizarre nose bleeds that would start from just standing in an area with a lot of such equipment. I also experienced horrible headaches that the doctors could not explain.

  25. Dear Skeptoidians ~ I had to leave on an emergency film shoot after participating in this very dangerous “tit for tat” with you people. The way this was left the last I checked is that you felt “insulted” that I would insinuate that you are hurting people with your spewing forth of MISINFORMATION…. Obviously, I guess, you purposely do not want to hurt anyone, but , after being gone a while from this amazingly lengthy comment section , I get this email “alert” of a new entry from someone who is sensitive to EMF’s that you pretty much brush off as trivial.
    THIS is where I draw the line. You are unequivocally HURTING PEOPLE and LEADING THEM ASTRAY with this continued idiotic diatribe of how you think Earthing works and how physics and electricity work , and your now dismissing the dangers of EMFs…You have crossed the line ; and if you truly and SINCERELY believe that you’d not want to hurt anyone, then prove it by REMOVING THIS ENTIRE attack on Dr. Mercola IMMEDIATELY.
    Dr. Mercola is held in high esteem by some of the world’s biggest and best in science and medicine. He has raised an awareness of some of the biggest threats to the environment and human health like few others. He has pointed out how to improve your health and life without the aid of substances and policies that will harm or kill you . Yet you have the audacity to spend a single afternoon on the internet and come up with this damaging and completely false blog about not only Earthing, but a personal attack on Mercola.
    I’ve played along with this “” in utilizing and allowing Mr. Dunning to appear in a film, about Earthing, which invariably is contributing to more “traffic” to this highly dangerous website. So please, REMOVE this entire blog if you truly care about human beings in pain and their suffering.
    I just returned from a film shoot about a man that was almost KILLED by exposure to EMF’s ; and was given a less than 5% chance of survival by doctors … Earthing SAVED HIS LIFE. Earthing, in most cases, TRUMPS environmental “dirty electricity” and EMF’s and people need to know this vital information ; and you are RUINING and CONFUSING PEOPLE with your responses here.
    You have NOT answered all my questions posed , nor have we ever heard a peep from Brian Dunning that runs this website after he was EXPOSED to be contradicting himself in this long epistle of comments. NONE of you want to participate in the next film because you probably are well aware that you may be risking being wrong.
    Even your questions about Earthing of “what is the direction of the electric field in a wire carrying current ” is telltale of misunderstanding the concept of “Grounding” or Earthing… It’s a trivial question at best and is UNRELATED to the effectiveness of Earthing or the mechanism of the beneficial effects of Earthing. With DC electricity , such as with a battery, the positive and negative terminals are always, respectively , positive and negative. Current always flows in the same direction between those two terminals.There really isn’t any confusion about this and WHY do you keep asking it ? Is this a trick question ? I’m a filmmaker, but I’ll tell you , I spent more than an afternoon on the internet , like you did studying up on Earthing, with apparently enough audacity to actually write this disparaging and damaging blog ! I spent almost TWO YEARS on this subject. Consulting with experts including physicists and bio-physicists, including a person that studied directly under NOBEL LAUREAT Albert Szent Gyorgi, who verified and supported the concept of Earthing at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, MA….I did receive my FCC license a long time ago and study and dedicate myself wholly into any subject matter that a film is made about. .. And, oddly enough, I was a skeptic of Earthing on the outset, and that journey IS THE FILM ……Really, you should watch it , you might learn something new !
    Additionally, the Skeptoidians that respond to this entries continue to be confused about how fast electrons flow, and how quickly the electric field is able to balance the potential of the body. The equillaibration between the electric field of the earth, and the electric field of the body is virtually instantaneous ; and as I”ve said before, in a “nano-second”… Why does this seem so hard for you to grasp ? If you are a physicist, haven’t you heard of “electrostatics ” ? Which teaches that when two conductive objects with different electrical potential TOUCH EACH OTHER , there is a transfer of charge so that the two objects equilibrate to the SAME ELECTRICAL potential. Haven’t I covered this before with you people ? Or are you only reading and seeing what you want to see ?
    Does that help ? …….BTW, the people I’ve approached to assist with this commentary were pretty appalled as well with this forum and how unbelievably damaging your misinformation has been to people that try to say something here. Finally, I’d love for you to come to Haines, Alaska in person, (not on Skype , like Dunning) and proclaim how absurd Earthing is to the hundreds of people whose lives were changed by this experiment which made the film what it is.
    With Sincere Good Wishes and a Prayer for you to throttle back and remove this BLOG before more people are mislead by your comments.

    • Eric Hall says:

      The electric field is not instantaneous – it moves at the speed of light. If it was instantaneous, it wouldn’t take minutes to communicate with our rovers on Mars.

      My question, which you brush off as not important, is a key question. Your claim is electric fields from alternating current is causing all of these health problems. The problem is the electric field which induces the current (AC or DC) is directed along the wire. I may be misunderstanding your claim, but this is what I think you are trying to say – that electric fields from wires are causing all of our health problems. So if that is the case, how are we exposed to these electric fields? Because the video in question is saying the electric fields are coming from being near current carrying wires, which is not the case.

      Secondly, I specifically described how the demonstration in the video is a sham. It is very basic science on the electrical currents in the body and how ECGs work. It concerns me that a doctor wouldn’t recognize this – but it is possible he doesn’t understand how a voltmeter works.

      Have you submitted your film for peer review? If you picked ten random physicists at various universities and asked them to evaluate the plausibility of your film, I can tell you they will tell you the science as described for earthing is total nonsense.

      You now are adding EMFs to your descriptions. So are we talking electric fields, or are we talking electric and magnetic fields? Or are we talking about electromagnetic radiation? Because these, while related, are each different in their explanation of how they affect the body.

      The information provided here is not intended to be medical advice. It is instead meant to serve as a warning to be wary of “miracle” cures. The body is a very complex machine of chemicals. There are over 200 types of cancer, and they respond differently to various treatments. The claim made in some of the earthing propaganda is that earthing can cure/prevent cancer. I can say with a very high degree of certainty that no treatment will cure all cancers (other than the host dying). That very claim tells me it is a sham.

      The plural of anecdote is not evidence. You can ask people all you want if something cured them. They very well might claim it did.

      I’ll make a recommendation for your second film. If you set this up, I might just agree to be in your film. Take an equal amount of people as you use to “test” earthing. Sit them in the same chairs in the same room you set up your earthing experiments. Keep as many of the conditions as possible the same. Give all of these people a sugar pill and tell them it is a new cure for all of the same conditions as earthing. I am pretty confident you will get the same results.

      I am willing to discuss this further Steve – but please stop making outrageous claims of this info being dangerous. I am simply trying to prevent people from falling for a sham. I don’t want someone to forego seeing their doctor because of information in a non-scientific docu-drama.

      • I have just read your latest entry ; and I have to stay ON TOP OF YOUR B.S., because you continue to spew forth EXTREMELY DANGEROUS MISINFORMATION. Now you are stating that Earthing is touted as a cancer cure ? NONSENSE ! Where on Earth (no pun intended) did you pick that up from ? Certainly no one involved with Earthing officially has stated that …Perhaps from an exuberant person who is a layman? Although, in the final analysis, after much more significant ongoing research, it may be shown to assist in warding off such things… I’m involved with trying to keep the pipes from freezing at the moment in the arctic cold… More later… You have to be WATCHED like a hawk because you’re just not getting it… more later…

        • Eric Hall says:

          From Mercola’s website – quoting Dr. Sinatra [emphasis mine]:

          “This is the most incredible discovery, because if you can increase the thinning of your blood naturally by grounding, you can fight off disease. Not only heart disease and stroke, but I’m thinking cancer, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, or any illness that requires good oxygenation to the tissues.”

          Isn’t Mercola one of your sources? And Dr. Sinatra? I believe they are involved “officially” in earthing.

          • Once again, you have the amazing capacity to TWIST the facts to see what you want to see. Is Dr.Sinatra declaring Earthing as a cancer cure by this statement ? NO ! ……..Keep going , Mr.Hall, the more you write, the faster the crap floats to the top readily for all to see….Meantime, where’s the leader , Mr. Dunning ? WHY is he not participating in this discourse ?……..More later……

          • Eric Hall says:

            Would you care to elaborate what “fight off disease” means then?

          • Crystal says:

            Woah, Eric.

            I left this thread but forgot to discontinue comment updates. I feel compelled respond to your false claim.

            Doctor Mercola does NOT claim grounding is cancer “cure”…nor, do any of the earthing proponents I have researched.

            I believe in both the Medical Sciences and integrating Alternative care and have researched many controversial subjects extensively. Although I personally decided that earthing mats are not good for just anyone….In my research you and your “colleagues” have called this Doctor a “quack” and GROSSLY over exaggerate what he says.


            Here is a link where Dr. Mercola is interviewing a world renowned cancer specialist Nick Gonzales. Whether you like MR. Gonzales or not, he DISCOURAGES grounding…and Dr. Mercola freely makes it available to the public. They are mostly discussing cancer treatment but toward the end they discuss earthing mats.

            “We discuss the benefits of juicing and chiropractic adjustments, and the importance of regular exercise for cancer patients. We also review the dangers of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure, in terms of how it may aggravate cancer growth and hinder cancer recovery, and the benefits, along WITH SOME SURPRISING PRECAUTIONS, OF EARTHING OR GROUNDING.”

            Dr. Gonzales refers to his associate, world renowned EMF’s specialist David Stetzer. You really need to look David Stetzer up and listen to the last bit of this interview…starting at 3min 10sec.


            I am not attempting to protect Dr. Mercolas, as I am not an avid follower. As I said, I use him in my wide-range research.

            A reasonable person would conclude that Dr. Mercola may turn out wrong in some of his conclusions, but he IS ALSO correct in many of his findings. JUST LIKE SCIENTISTS AND MEDICAL DOCTORS EVERYWHERE ARE. Studies are never truly unbiased and the filth of big Pharm and Government agenda is uglier than Mr. Mercola could ever be.

            I find Dr. Mercola to be willing to concede and grow in his learning by his constant interviews of highly respected and educated doctors. When he is corrected or given adjustment he releases it on these un-edited interviews.

            You must stop over exaggerating his ideas, like the health benefits of the sun. He says only 20min maximum is healthy. That is not extreme or incorrect. Now you are saying he claims earthing is a cancer cure when he states that it can help stave off certain cancers.

            It is comments like this that vilify a very knowledgable and experienced Doctor. Most of all they take away from your credibility…for intelligent, truly unbiased researchers like myself. I have found both you and Mr. Dunning as clearly biased. You will not give credit where it is due to these Doctors, as if having any common ground with CAM is wrong.

            For example, On Aug 27, 2013 Mr. Dunning posted a “student questions” forum regarding Manuka Honey/Hangovers/Probiotics. He incorrectly replied to a student regarding probiotics using just his total opinion and he was incorrect. I gave him links to solid medical findings, including Berkley University studies… and he never replied. He actually hasn’t replied to anyone since. It’s hypocritical to go after a certified Doctor, insisting he change the way he describes earthing/electrons, to explain himself…then Mr. Dunning does the very same thing.

            As for you…just to humor my interest in the “social studies” aspect of all this….Is there anything that Dr. Mercola publishes that you AGREE with? Anything thing at all? Do you think he should be stripped of his degrees? Do you feel compelled to apologize for the “cancer cure” comment?

            I’m not being sassy. I’m truly intrigued to know.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Do I feel compelled to apologize? No. Because I put the slash in there for a reason. Dr. Sinatra said “fight off.” So he means either prevent, cure, or both. The slash is meant to represent “and/or.” If he means either or both, it doesn’t make sense. Steve – the filmmaker – said NO cancer claims were made. There is a cancer claim clearly in the article.

            Your interview quote – several claims in there have been tested and shown NOT to work. Juicing? No benefit. Chiropractic? Adjustments shown to cause harm with no benefit.

            Your claim that Dunning is wrong about probiotics – you can look up several articles on Science Based Medicine blog on the topic. Oral probiotics have been studied. Just because there are studies showing positive results doesn’t mean that is the scientific consensus. One must look at the entire body of work. Even those who study gut bacteria agree that oral probiotics do little or nothing to change the makeup of our gut bacteria. However, fecal transplants and other work on gut bacteria are interesting – but still not conclusive. The causes of hangovers are pretty complex, but also pretty well studied. Brian did do a follow-up in a correction episode mentioning he over-simplified the hangover answer – but did get his correction right according to current science.

            Do I think Dr. Mercola is dangerous? In some ways, yes. His strong advocacy for the NVIC is scary. He continually uses anecdotes of vaccine harm as proof that vaccines are dangerous. I have written about what these risks really are and what they mean. Losing herd immunity puts all of us at risk. He promotes serving raw milk to kids, known to cause deaths with the benefits yet to be proven. He continues to promote large amounts of supplementation (which he sells) even though the science has not shown a benefit, and recent studies even showing it can be harmful.

            Thinking outside the box or making reasonable hypotheses are wonderful things in science. But it is up to the scientist to then do the proper science to determine the validity of the science. When Einstein came up with the general theory of relativity, he begged astronomers to do the observations to show gravitational lensing. He was nervous it might not work and he would have to reject his own work. He is quoted as saying:

            The chief attraction of the theory lies in its logical completeness. If a single one of the conclusions drawn from it proves wrong, it must be given up; to modify it without destroying the whole structure seems to be impossible

            Mercola, Sinatra, Ober, and Kroschel are all making hypothesis, without proposing a proper, independent, scientific test to prove such claims. My point in writing this article was two-fold: 1) To discuss where the science is wrong. This type of stuff shows up all over the internet. My students ask about it all the time. It takes alot of time to show them the correct science and where it is wrong (the direction of the electric field for example). 2) To show the lack of plausibility in their hypothesis, which again is based on the physics and my knowledge of medical science (which I do consult experts both in the skeptical community and personal acquaintances of mine). It is up to those proposing the hypotheses to prove their hypotheses. Anecdotes, improper science, and documentary films are not proof.

            It could very well end up Mercola, Sinatra, Ober, and Kroschel are all correct. It is not likely based on the plausibility and the proposed explanation for their hypothesis. But, if they can provide proper scientific data (such as a double-blinded study) which is peer reviewed and independently verified (repeated), it can then be considered valid – and I will be happy to write an article stating such. Until then, it is just a hypothesis, and not a good one. This is the heart of why I write here and teach – so people think like a scientist.

          • Crystal says:

            No Eric… It was wrong for you to put “cure” in there at all… using the “slash” button did not make it right. It also misrepresents Dr. Mercola’s rational thinking.

            When you find one sentence using that word or that word at all in any of his comments… then feel free to link it here.

            I’m not going to sit and invest too much time protecting someone I do not invest a lot of money or time in…but regardless who’s side I’m on, I don’t sit back apathetically either.

            The discussion I linked with Dr. Gonzales is not about juicing or chiropractic…not sure why you mention on those subjects. The point is, that Dr. Gonzales DID NOT agree with grounding/earthing and Dr. Mercola was glad to let everyone hear why, in depth. The article was titled that “it is discouraged”…. So 1) He is not promoting that it is a cancer CURE nor a good source of treatment for cancer. 2) He is candidly being corrected in front of his audience/viewers.

            You had my attention with the biology/electrons discussion…but you lose it with exaggerations like this, showing clear bias.

            As fo Mr Dunning. I’m not concerned with the hang-over part of his forum. I mentioned probiotics specifically. He was incorrect in dismissing probiotics completely. I don’t know which scientific studies you are referring to but I have read MANY in support of good quality probiotic food and supplements. For Mr. Dunning to talk about yogurt, the weakest of them all, is amateurish.




          • Eric Hall says:

            I’ll address the probiotics first – I read the first two links – which are actually the same article – which is just a press release for a hypothesis. It is preliminary data, and no where did it mention taking probiotics as a cure for anything – including hangovers. It simply said microbes in our intestines are hypothesized to play a significant role in our health – something mouse studies have started to show interesting data and small case studies in humans with fecal transfer. That is not the same as probitoics being a cure for a hangover. I hope you can see this important distinction and that this is the process of science.

            Dr. Gonzales appears to be associated with a group of these “alternative” cancer doctors who never move on from their case studies and claim those as proof. Case studies serve as a way to form a better hypothesis, but do not constitute science. In fact, a few of the things Dr. Gonzales promoted (when he could practice) are being studied in more detail now – and being done in the proper scientific way. But again, Dr. Mercola is promoting “miracles” and not anything with evidence, just anecdotes. This is not science. Gonzales, as an example, says coffee enemas are good as part of a cancer treatment plan. These are harmful –

            See what happens when doctors try “natural” cures and don’t follow proper science:


            There are many more articles on Burzynski – a guy Mercola touted as a hero –

            I don’t like giving Mercola too many links, but let’s just say if you search his website for cancer cures – he touts either “dramatically improves your chances of recovery,” “the FDA is suppressing these cures,” “Why Medicine Won’t Allow Cancer to Be Cured” and other choice words. Again – whether promoting it as preventative or as a cure – both are bogus and both are dangerous. If one person puts off going to the doctor because they think they won’t get cancer because of this advice – it is one too many.

          • Crystal says:

            That is a play on words Eric.

            Fighting off disease can mean “preemptive”…and does not equate to “cure”.

            You said “cancer cure”… Can you show me where you found THIS word arrangement please?

          • Eric Hall says:

            What Mike said. Saying “fight off” would seem to me to be cure. If I “fight off” a cold, my body’s immune system is killing the virus causing the cold. Whether Dr. Sinatra is saying it will cure cancer or prevent cancer in his words “fight off,” it doesn’t make sense when the number of cancers and causes couldn’t all be due to electric fields. That is why I put the slash (cure/prevent) because whichever meaning was implied, neither make sense.

  26. Preemptive? How do you “fight off” something you don’t have yet?

    Come on. He’s saying cancer can be treated through earthing. Spilt hairs all you want, but that’s what he’s saying.

    Now Steve will write 1,000 words telling me how I’m wrong.

    • Crystal says:

      Really Mike… People say foods are “cancer fighters” all the time. It’s so commonly said which is why it is absurd to insinuate that he is claiming it as cure. Totally absurd.

      Are you saying that Dr. Mercola claims that grounding is a cancer cure?

    • Crystal says:

      ….case in point… There is a website called about getting the flu vaccine. We know the flu vaccine doesn’t work if you already have it. They are implying that the “fight” is PREEMPTIVE.

      Argument over.

      • Eric Hall says:

        Yes – but there is scientific evidence for the flu vaccine working. Scientific, peer-reviewed, evidence. We know also it is not 100% effective, but we have good scientific measures of its effectiveness. There is no such study or data done in the same scientific way for grounding. We also know indeed the vaccine does help you “fight off” the flu if exposed – because your body then has antibodies to attack the virus to either reduce the symptoms or prevent the symptoms entirely. It doesn’t put up an invisible shield that keeps out the virus – it just prepares your body to neutralize the virus. For grounding – based on the Mercola-Ober video – its effectiveness goes away the instant you disconnect from the pad. How would that “fight off” cancer?

        That’s my entire point here with all of those trying to “prove me wrong” or claiming I “am dangerous” or that I’m “not skeptical.” Bring me a study that uses proper methods. Then bring me a peer review. Then bring me an independent repetition of the study. Then I will be happy to reevaluate my conclusion. Until then, it isn’t valid.

        As far as “cancer-fighting foods” – here ya go

        • Crystal says:

          Are you confusing me with someone else? Why are you sending comments my way that have nothing to do with what I brought to the table?

          1) Cancer fighting foods? I never mentioned that, and why do you think I need that link?
          2) My mention of Dr. Gonzales has absolutely nothing to do with grounding or his cancer research. I knew you would distract yourself with getting off the point so I clearly stated “Whether you like him or not, he DISAGREES with Dr. Mercola on grounding/earthing. HE DOESN’T THINK IT SHOULD BE PRACTICED and explained why very well.

          Why do you feel it necessary to bring up coffee enemas and his cancer treatments when I merely direct attention to the fact that HE AGREES WITH YOU…and that Dr. Mercola was candid enough to allow his viewers to hear that.

          3) Probiotics for hang-over? Did you even read Dunning’s forum? Probiotics had NOTHING to do with hangovers at all. A student stated that he was going to take antibiotics and his doctor also prescribed probiotics. He asked if it would really benefit him to take them. Mr. Dunning dismissed the benefits of probiotics, brought up yogurt, then said it probably wouldn’t be necessary. Probiotics have much stronger studies showing their benefit than not. Can you show me one that says they are not beneficial at all?

          4) You say I linked to a “hypothesis”… Well, you have done that several times on this forum, which I called you out on. You used your hypothesis link as if it was fact and argued that using hypothesis is correct in scientific debate. Are you now changing your mind? I use mine to show that SCIENCE is studying probiotics and showing BENEFITS…not “cures”. It is a fact that probiotics are helpful especially after a round of antibiotics. The real debate is “which forms” and under “which circumstances”…not, “if they are beneficial or not”.

          5) Flu vaccines…ESPECIALLY after one has the flu. You can pull a respected study up supporting your argument…. I can equally pull up a reputable study that says otherwise. The problem is there are way too many variables, age, the year, the strand… I’m not going to list them all out. Talk about needing real validation, studies are so varied and conflicting. The “so called” benefits do NOT outweigh the risk. We’re not a one-size-fits-all “herd” when if comes to the flu and there are big bucks to be made here.

          The problem here is that you assume I am a CAM supporter just because I agree with a few of the techniques. You’re not listening. I am not here to prove you wrong, I agreed that earthing mats are not for everyone. My research shows that they do effect the blood, but that doesn’t equate to safe casual use. I agreed with your electrons argument.

          However, I call you out on exaggerating. That’s why I’m here right now.

          • Crystal says:

            Eric…oh, I see you saw my reply to Mike and grabbed onto the “cancer fighter” comment. I didn’t say that to argue that foods are cancer fighters. It was merely an EXAMPLE of common verbiage. We’re all intelligent people here who know that Dr. Mercola’s words cannot be misconstrued as CURE.

            It’s absurd to use that word at all.

            I’m not going to argue this point any longer as it insults my intelligence to engage in word-play.

          • Eric Hall says:

            I used a hypothesis as a counter to another hypothesis to show what a good hypothesis is – meaning plausibility based on existing knowledge and possibly observation. It doesn’t mean I accept it as fact, simply as a proper direction for study. That’s appropriate in science. One shouldn’t simply state there is a flying spaghetti monster orbiting the moon and expect it to be a good hypothesis.

            To use Dr Gonzales in the way you did is an argument from authority. His conclusion is partly correct, but the way he got there is still illogical and not scientific. I also wouldn’t use him for proof due to his bad scientific reputation.

            Probiotics, taken orally, have not withstood the rigors of science. If a study shows positive results, it hasn’t been able to be repeated under the same conditions. Again – process of science.

            Flu vaccines have rigorous science for them and still provide a net benefit. The way they work still fits the “fight” meme – meaning to kill the entities which cause the illness. Thus, to argue “fight off” surely does not mean “cure” is a bit silly. It also is silly to say a single thing can “fight off” cancer when the disease is much more complex than the flu.

          • Crystal says:

            Again, the part I inserted about Dr. Gonzales is not an argument to support his theories, or to discuss him at all. He just happens to be a person who set Dr. Mercola straight on the subject of grounding…in front of an audience. If your bottom line is, that you don’t agree with his “non-scietific” practices so he is is not allowed to agree with you…then that is what makes this a silly discussion.

            Again, I did not bring up “cancer-fighting” foods because I believe the hype. It was to show that it has become a casual saying in everyday life to represent ways to “stave off” certain cancers.
            I do not believe that eating purple foods, drinking juices or consuming probiotics guarantees anything…but I do know it couldn’t hurt and hopefully, as a side effect, it will at least cause people to just become more healthy about their food choices/health, exercise…as THIS is the real way to help avoid certain cancers.

            The flu vaccine is not a strong argument when it is clearly not effective almost half the time. It is “scientific thinking” to use the current findings to decide NOT to have one. You’re not going to win me over on this one.

            There are doctors and respect researchers that could run circles around you on the subject of probiotics. There is indecision going on in the product arena to insure that the term “probiotic” isn’t used loosely or fraudulently. Again though, the question is not whether probiotics are effective in ailing patients…but it’s “what type, the strength, how and when to administer”.

            Sometimes a fecal transplant is in order, sometimes oral doses are fine. I’m not talking about buying some off-label brand. I’m talking about doctor prescribed. Doctors have treated Crohns, H-pylori, Candida and very ill infants with probiotics. Right now scientists are talking about this subject with promising study results. The articles I linked to you were basically to show the positive, current consensus.


            I agree with helping people think scientifically, but let’s face it, we cannot sit around and wait for clinical studies for every. single. thing. There is a lot of expense, red tape & too many subjects to cover, so many things just sit on the back shelf. When the studies are clear enough that reputable doctors are using them and Science based journals are reporting the success and safety, then that’s when individual people have the right to put themselves out there to try it. They become “scientists” in their own right. When they find positive results, there is no media hype, no journal of medicine report. It just becomes personal and they are smart enough to know it’s not placebo. In fact placebo is not even possible when it comes to treating Crohns, losing weight, infant recovery, fungus or reflux. These things are either obviously present or not.

            Finally, on this “cure” thing… I understand what you are saying about Dr. Mercola, his unscientific approach, his product promotion, the dangers, etc. You’ll notice that in our past discussions I have been agreeable. Those arguments you presented stand on their own and do not require additional exaggeration.

            I’m a pretty intelligent person, we all are here…So when the word “Cure” get’s thrown out there and an argument get’s distracted with word-play, then you lose your footing. If you’re going to go through all this effort to build a website to make these discussions possible, don’t taint it with these kind of tactics.

            Other than that, I have liked about 80% of what you have said and have appreciated this forum. I don’t find you dangerous…I find you a bit overly retentive, clearly bias and overly cautious. But an open minded person wouldn’t dismiss every. single. scientific thing you have to say just because of these flaws.

  27. “Now Steve will write 1,000 words telling me how I’m wrong”………writes Mike Rothschild.
    …………Actually no. Not tonite……This is a very low priority status at this point….More later… possibly… I’m just watching Eric Hall ramble now ; grasping at whatever he can sew together to make his story seem legitimate under an oddly twisted banner of the REAL SCIENCE that he sees himself hoisting to the world… Weird and getting weirder….or more aptly put : dumb and getting dumber… Whether it’s raw milk , vaccines, cancer, Earthing… Apparently he has taken the place of one Mr. Dunning.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Steve – I believe your continued insults towards me – the personal attacks – show a real weakness in your position. I have not called you any names or questioned your intelligence. I would never claim to be a perfect scientist or incapable of making mistakes, but what I am talking about here is basic science – the scientific method, the basics of E&M, basic medical knowledge – your continued proof is your film of anecdotes. Science and skepticism has addressed this topic ad nauseam. Anecdotes are not proof – no matter how many you have. 25% (or more) of people believe in astrology – all based on anecdote and confirmation bias. The scientific method (double-blinding, random samples, etc) are designed to eliminate these issues. Anecdote only strengthens those biases.

      So again – If you want to discuss the science and the issues surrounding that, I will be happy to both approve your comments and respond to them. If your comments continue to simply be insults directed at me without any substantial addition to the conversation, they will be dismissed.

  28. Eric Hall says:

    Crystal –

    I thought about it on my drive this morning, and I am more than willing to admit my mistakes. So let me start with this: I am sorry Dr. Mercola for inferring you said cure cancer when you said “fight off” cancer. He is careful to always choose “fight off” and “ward off” and not say cure when referring to his specific recommendations.

    Now, since I pointed out on one of Mercola’s articles a few years ago that Wakefield’s research was redacted by the journal which published it, I am no longer allowed to comment on his site. So, if he happens to come here and read these comments, I would like to know what the measure is of “fight off.” Is there a medical definition for that? What is the threshold above normal variation which would be considered for a treatment to be one which “fights off” cancer? This is important as it is a basic tenant of the process of science.

    The people Dr. Mercola chooses to associate with are all on the fringe. This doesn’t mean they are wrong, but the methods used and the data is not scientific. If it truly worked, it should be able to go through the rigors of the scientific method. In some cases, it is even dangerous (Burzynski for example). Scientists can make mistakes. Bias cannot be completely eliminated. But when one continues down the bad path over and over, it hurts their credibility. Wakefield continues to push the idea that the MMR causes autism, even though dozens of studies since have not shown the link. It means his reputation as a scientist goes down and he is not a trustworthy source. Even if he did get something scientifically correct, it is going to take a higher level of evidence because reputation is one piece of the puzzle in evaluating data.

    You notice, that as long as a person stays on topic (the science) – we generally let all people comment. Dr. Mercola does not (point out that the science was redacted and get banned). That is another red flag as to the validity of what he says.

    This blog post is just one of many showing a consistent pattern of Mercola’s bad science. He is not a trustworthy source, and people should know that.

  29. Am I allowed to contribute additional SCIENCE to support EARTHING , or am I going to be “dismissed” or “edited” off the page as you’ve been doing the past three days ? If this post is allowed to STAY on your site ; it needs to be allowed in full .
    People need to know the facts…..Kind Wishes, Steve Kroschel

  30. Followup : WHAT will unequivocally CONVINCE SKEPTOIDIANS that EARTHING is unequivocally legitimate ? Be Specific !!!!! Thank you. Sincerely, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

    • Eric Hall says:

      The basis of what I would want can be found in a previous reply

      In summary, I would want an independent test, one we can design together in consultation with our respective experts. Let’s design an unbiased, random, double-blind study with specific measures to compare. Let’s then publish those findings in a RESPECTED peer-reviewed journal and let other scientists look for errors in methodology and/or statistical analysis. If there is a result that shows significance and the paper does get approved for publishing, then let’s get an independent group to repeat our test. If they get results that are similar to ours, now our hypothesis has support and can be considered science. Hopefully more testing will take place and refine both the data and the process, but at least these steps would verify whatever hypothesis we agree to.

      If we get that – then we are talking science!

    • Crystal says:

      Is this an actual merger? Seriously guys, how can this idea actually be turned down? I hope the rest of the conversation from here on out doesn’t get side-tracked again. You two can actually become a more serious version of “myth busters” if you could bring your resources together. Even if you fight like cat’s and dogs, it’s worth it.

  31. Questions and Answers :
    1. Has reviewed the movie yet ? The fact is that I allowed the public to watch it for free for two weeks and it still can be watched for free if a member of Youtube and the invite is accepted. Another way that Skeptoid can watch it for free is to go the site and view the October 19th article and click on the “Grounded” trailer Youtube Icon. That will open up the page and if one looks off to the right of the page, you will see a four small thermography pictures with the title “The Benefits of Earthing” .. This is a PIRATED copy, and you can still watch it for free right then and there.
    But , I have to understand, have you ALREADY seen the documentary or not ?
    2. Additional answers to questions posed by Skeptoidians :
    * Consider the propagation of the electric field. Yes, as Mr. Hall points out, the electric field propagation is NOT INSTANTANEOUS ; but rather , it is at the speed of light, or a little less depending on the type of insulation of the wires. Yes, if the power station that supplies a Skeptoidian’s home is on Mars, there will be a transmission delay . However, if the power station is somewhere on planet Earth, say on the other side of the Earth, and the wires connecting the home circumnavigated our planet, there would be a delay of about 1/10th of a second. Since the power station is probably much closer to home, for all practical purposes, the transmission is instantaneous. But the obvious question I have to a Skeptoidian is “So what ?”
    * Electric Fields are NOT the source of all of our health problems ; and I never made such an absurd statement. There IS evidence correlating electric fields with a variety of health issues , but certainly not all health issues. The report by Ghaly and Teplitz ( Teplitz cortisolstudy 2004.pdf) has a summary of a sampling of this literature. Many other reviews are available on the web… i.e. I”The government of Sweden funded an official , massive study of the effects of electric fields from overhead powerlines on 500,000 people over a period of 25 years and found overwhelming evidence that electric fields generated cancer in children at 4 times the normal rate ; and tripled the rate in adults”. Sweden now lists electromagnetic fields (EMF) as Class 2 Carcinogens, right along with tobacco. However, other studies have shown no effects, and the issue needs closer and further research.
    * Electric Fields are radiated from wires in the walls of homes and the cords that go to the bed lamps and clock radios, for example…. The wire to a lamp radiates electric fields even if the lamp is turned off. If you doubt this, you can buy a voltage tester at Home Depot and have some fun with it…Why at Home Depot and some such places ? Because carpenters need to know how to locate wires hidden in the walls so they won’t accidentally cut into them. You can hold the tester next to a power cord for a lamp that is turned off. The light will light and the sensor will beep, indicating the presence of an electric field.
    3. The reason I keep inquiring whether you’ve seen the movie, is because there are now almost 20 peer reviewed and published studies on Earthing from all over the world, and they continue to be documented and ongoing . And yes, from INDEPENDENT studies , from medical doctors in Poland ( Pawel Sokal ) to published stuidies from the University of Arizona to the University of Oregon to all points in between . If you cannot find them , please contact the Earthing Institute and they can be readily provided as an easy starting point…This research is done by experienced scientists ; including a Nobel Prize winner , Albert Szent Goyogi .. It is is not accurate for Skeptoidians to say that “it is not science”.. The Marine Biological Laboratory In Woods Hole , MA. would not like to hear it is unscientific, I assure you .
    I question how the statement by a Skeptoidian can be made in which , I quote : “My students ask about it all the time . It takes a lot of time to show them the correct science and where it is wrong ( the direction of the electric field for example)”
    4. SPECIFICALLY : PLEASE DEFINE AN EXACT TEST that will unequivocally convince Skeptoidians that Earthing is legitimate ! PLEASE answer this question . Make it black and white and simple. …….And then I will respond accordingly and see what can be done.
    Thank you ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

    • Eric Hall says:

      I see my comment didn’t post (work internet can be difficult on occasion). I will summarize –

      I will watch the movie perhaps over break. I again don’t see it as evidence, which is why I’d rather read science papers on the matter – but I will to prove the point.

      The Swedish study is full of weaknesses. In fact, several British studies, and really good Danish and Finnish studies have all been done with better methodology since the Swedish one, all of which show no correlation. The other thing to note is the proposed physiology here was interaction with the magnetic field from the wires carrying current.

      Your electric tester is an interesting note. Yes, in the presence of another conductor such as the body, a very small electric field can be induced radially from the wire. Notice that these testers require contact with the wire in order to work – because they need that proximity in order to detect the change in capacitance in the tester. You can also induce this capacitance change by moving the tester quickly – something Ober does in the video and then claims he is detecting an electric field – when really he just misused the tester. The energy stored in this wire to body capacitor is something on the order of tenths of a microjoule (using the 6 inch distance Ober talks about in the video). If I shuffle across the carpet and touch a doorknob, I get over 1000 times that energy.

      As a side note – I want to reiterate that the current in household wires is AC. So the proposed physiology of electrons flowing into the body doesn’t hold. If the electric field is established in the body was significant to cause charges to flow significantly, they would then flow in and out of the body, not just in.

      How would the film help me in reading these studies? I want to evaluate the studies, not your evaluation of studies. If these studies are there – why are they not in journals with good review processes (they appear in the Journal of alternative and complementary medicine)? I’ll give you a quick example of why these studies are questionable. In one study, they took two groups of people and divided them in half and had half sleep grounded and the other half not. There was no blinding. They measured 5 different biochemical levels. Funny how the number of participants changed for each level they tested. If they had 84 participants for the first experiment and drew blood to test them, why then did some other tests only have 32? 12? Was there some data manipulation there? I didn’t see any clear explanation as to why that number changed. I also do not think their significance levels make sense – meaning the differences are not really differences because of grounding, but rather random variations as we would expect in human population.

      Their other study I looked at is slightly more interesting – but their conclusion is baffling. They measured people’s potential (on their skin) inside a Faraday cage. Those that were grounded developed a slight negative potential, but those not grounded had no potential. However, they didn’t measure for any amount of time. If electrons are indeed flowing into the body and the body is a capacitor, then the slight negative potential should start to reduce as these charges flow…oh…wait…negative with respect to ground…meaning there are too many electrons on the body? Do you see where I start to see inconsistencies?

      I defined my test Steve. Take it or leave it.

  32. Wow, I have just discovered this rather amusing thread! I became interested in this concept a few months ago via Dr Sinatra’s youtubes. I was immediately quite fascinated, as I know all too well how important earthing is with radios (I am a practising radio ham). Additionally I am a yachtsman, and believe me we try damn hard to manage earthing etc to stop our boats rusting. Small differences in electrostatic potential can cause mayhem with metallic boats especially. We also use sacrificial anodes to divert electron flows caused by dissimilar metals and also the capacitative properties of insulated bodies. Think also that automobiles use a negative earth system to stop them rusting. This is OLD Science! Now the human body can also rust! That’s what oxidative stress is all about, and why a supply of electrons is needed. Its like simple? I can see why they call it Vitamin G – its an anti-oxidant. The challenge from a communications perspective is deciding whether to explain this from a physics perspective, or in language that non-techy people can understand. Guess who is the majority by far. So the explanations do not include measures of capacitance etc etc, with the possible example of the Zeta effect on colloids, blood thinning in this case. To me the science was reasonably clear, and I bought an earthing blanket. I have to say I had no specific pains before I started so can’t say much about that – but I really can vouch for sleeping far more heavily than I can ever remember, with deep and vivid dreams. To my mind the effect is real and has a rational explanation, the question is how does one quantify the health benefits besides the anecdotes? And is that necessarily a problem? But I do think it may help if the language was tidied up a bit to not include terms like energy fields….

    • Eric Hall says:

      Is our body made of pure metal parts with no enzymes that fix oxidation? If our bodies were like boat hulls – medicine would be a 9 month tech certificate instead of 9+ years of school and training.

      Is it possible your earthing blanket simply keeps you at a better temperature for sleeping and thus you sleep better? Or perhaps you are at the point in life where you can afford an expensive blanket and thus you have less stress because of your comfortable position and thus you sleep better? When one explains with anecdotes, I can find other anecdotes equally plausible. This is why anecdotes are not science – no matter how many you have.

      • Question :
        *** If a Skeptoidian was climbing down from Everest, and was about to DIE, if it was not injected with a substance that would give it strength to endure the rigors to descend to Base Camp ; BUT, the substance was considered to be only anecdotal in benefit to the Skeptoidian, WOULD the Skeptoidian then INJECT ITSELF to get to Base Camp ANYWAY ?
        This is a sincere question.
        Thank You. Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

        • Eric Hall says:

          If you were climbing down from Everest Steve, and your grounding pad was strapped to your leg, and I said the only way to prevent your death was to take it off and never ground again – would you give it up?

          • ((( I have posed a question to the Skeptoid commentary)))) , I would like a straightforward answer . It was posted on November 23rd, at 10: 34 a.m..
            PLEASE answer the simple question. This dialogue is in itself , a method of science of proper protocol and method of rational thought and investigation in a chronological order.
            PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION that was initiated by Yours Truly.
            Instead of answering the question, you have asked ME a QUESTION. And , the answer is that I would take the Earthing device OFF and never wear it again . I would do so reluctantly however, because in the long term, I would never be as truly “alive” without it… And would spend the rest of my days, helping others to live and find a better way to live. And to live sustainably on this planet. And to discover for themselves what is entirely the most important reason for living and how to relate to others what really matters while we’re here .
            Now, please answer the question . Thank you.
            Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            I found my side-step perfectly legitimate becauae you have side-stepped several of my responses.

            Whether my life is in danger, or I am feeling a little under the weather, or I am doing something preventative, I always weigh the evidence. If someone said “take this or die” would depend on how dire the situation is. If I am on Everest, I will likely have a medical professional with me whom I trust to use science and reason to treat me for any issues. I also chose my family doctor the same way. If I were unconscious or unable to decide,I hope others with me who share my passion for proper science would use the same logic and reason. I also support scientific skepticism in order to keep the pseudoscience quacks away from medicine.

            So would I take the injection? Likely. Because it would be from a trustworthy source.

          • Dear Skeptoidians ~
            I believe I have answered all your questions posed and have not sidestepped ANY of them.
            If I have SIDESTEPPED any of your questions , please write them in numerical order immediately as it appears that you have them fresh in your mind and I will answer them more plainly or clearly.
            Regarding the question I posed to you on Everest, I appreciate your trying to answer it .
            Standing by with your feedback ; as I want to make sure I am not seen as to sidestep ANY of the questions posed by any Skeptoidians !
            Thank You . Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

      • No our bodies are not made of metal parts, besides the odd dental filling really. But they are conductive and capacitative (how do touch screens work, elevator buttons?) And yes enzymes and vitamins (anti-oxidants) do much the same job! Isn’t that exactly the point? That’s why they called it Vitamin G! Agree that anecdotes are not double-blind RCT tests etc etc etc – who said they were. I don’t propose my experience of this blanket, real or not, means anything at all. My point is that the science is commonplace, the effects may be debatable and hard to quantify. For now they are limited to anecdotes and blood thinning (a bit better than anecdotal but easily demonstrable in all kinds of colloids). That’s where the (open minded) debate should be! (By the way did you know that sunshine on your skin is really good for you, it connects you with nature! – and something about Vitamin D)

        • Eric Hall says:

          If you see my replies to Steve – I don’t necessarily doubt the blood potential data – just the cause. And if the blood thinning is happening to a significant level, then we should look for the cause because that is medically useful. If we just guess at what it is, then we might not get the full benefit or none at all for some. Let’s do the science – and get the maximum benefit.

          • Ok I agree in principle – but not sure where the doubt lies. Zeta potential is defined in terms of the electrostatic potential of the colloid (blood), the effect is on viscosity. Is this the piece in question? Either way, for me the blood thinning is a side issue, its the contribution of electrons to the body that really counts – the whole redox chain is improved. This has compound benefits to many metabolic processes – much like Vitamin C has. Comes back to the point of how to quantify the degree of benefit. Theoretically, intuitively and anecdotally this is good stuff. It’s not going to make much money for anyone though, so the large double blind RCTs ain’t happening anytime soon, they are just too expensive now….. Now I am aware that n=1 samples don’t count here, but I can say my wife (previously hypertensive) had to have her BP Meds reduced and then stopped (Valsartan), this was just a few days ago – after it continued to reduce for about two weeks of exposure to the earthing sheet. Ended up at about 100/50. Interesting stuff!

          • Eric Hall says:

            HBP is easily triggered by lack of sleep. Again, perhaps the addition of this sheet adjusted the temp to one more conducive to sleeping and thus her hypertension went away? That and awareness of her health maybe led to other changes in diet, activity, etc?

            Another common story (from my blog post yesterday) is one where people stop drinking diet pop and their MS goes away. They fail to mention they also took medication for MS – and conveniently ignore that could be the reason they got better.

          • Alan Henness says:

            How much do you think a good DBRCT would cost?

  33. Anonymous says:

    I forget the exact number although I remember Sinatra discussing the costs and processes in an interview with mercola a while back on youtube – it’s a formidable number… Clint looked into it and they would love to see this done on a suitable scale but already have invested hugely. Plus the product sells itself, and scientists are possibly not the greatest market I suppose….

  34. Mr.Ober has , and continues to work on double -blind clinical trials with various Universities in North America . He has spent over 5 MILLION dollars of his own money for INDEPENDENT research. …There is far more than Zeta Potential and blood viscosity to look at.. Some of the studies underway presently, won’t be completed for three years at the moment…. I don’t think Skeptoidians are aware of this scientific research.
    Earthing is the greatest health re-discovery of all time ; and it also has a profound effect on one’s BRAIN… Furthermore, it isn’t much of a leap of intuitiveness to see that this is a very earth- friendly philosophy that takes us away from what is damaging our health through the air, water and soil.
    I would love to hear back from Skeptoidians as to what sort of study would convince them that Earthing is legitimate.
    Thank You ! Sincerely, Steve Kroschel

    • Eric Hall says:

      We are not the one’s proposing the hypothesis, thus it is not up to us to design the test. Our job as scientists and skeptics is to evaluate the science, data, and test design if asked and/or given access to that data. Here’s why: we don’t know what question is being asked. If it is “Does Earthing work?” – that does require a very large, long test which cannot easily be achieved. Instead, it would be best to break it down to smaller parts and test each of those questions.

      Great – if Ober is doing tests at universities – I sure hope they are being done with the right hypothesis questions being asked.

      Steve, you say:

      Earthing is the greatest health re-discovery of all time ; and it also has a profound effect on one’s BRAIN… Furthermore, it isn’t much of a leap of intuitiveness to see that this is a very earth- friendly philosophy that takes us away from what is damaging our health through the air, water and soil.

      When one starts with the conclusion – it is hard to trust your “research.” You have a faith that this is true, thus your bias will be present in your research. This is not a fault as we all fall victim to it – one cannot be skeptical all the time. But when pointed out, one needs to realize this is not a scientific approach. I would argue there are plenty of health discoveries which would be ranked higher – even if grounding were true. Germ theory, antibiotics, anesthesia, blood transfusion…

      • Dear Skeptoidians ~ The very fact that I continue this dialogue with this entity is , in itself a manifestation of a quest to test “EARTHING” by fire. Most advocates won’t waste a minute with this forum.
        It already has proven itself to me and hundreds of thousands of others with debilitating conditions. Ironically, I and Ober and other researchers want to prove it wrong through the scientific method thus the millions continue to be spent with this concept with people that are , in a couple ways, like a “Skeptoidian” , but are actually activated to physically do the science instead of just debate a position without lifting a finger. Talk is cheap ; and obviously you cannot prove Earthing is a fraud as well.
        I have really nothing to go on with ideas presented here; to my knowledge, I’ve answered all your questions, and offered suggestions to further the science with Skeptoid; including an invite guest appearance with you and Mr. Dunning; and nothing happens.

        Skeptoidians have edited some of my comments out of this thread; and I do appreciate the chance to offer the readers a different perspective. Obviously, Skeptoidians don’t agree, and obviously they are not about to remove this blog . So , lemonade has been made .
        Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

        • Eric Hall says:

          Steve – when one makes a claim, it is up to that person making the claim to provide the evidence. As skeptics, our job is to inform people when there is a lack of evidence, lack of plausibility, bad methodology, or any combination of those things. Unless you have a generous donor who can pay my salary and benefits and the costs to run a laboratory (in which case I will be happy to design tests and performs tests based on whatever actual hypotheses are proposed) – I need to continue with my day job and support my family. I feel you don’t see this fundamental disagreement – you are making extraordinary claims – and I am saying there is no evidence. You say your film is evidence – which I again have shown it is not scientific. You then say the evidence is forthcoming – well, then I will wait for the evidence. You then say I should run the test – if it is already being researched and tested, why would I need to do so? Or is it, perhaps, that when subjected to the rigors of science, it hasn’t panned out as well? This is, of course, conjecture, but it fits the pattern of every other past miracle of medicine that has come along in the last 100 years.

          I will also note that none of your comments have been edited. I deleted two of your comments after repeated warnings to keep the comments on the topic and not as personal attacks, insults, or involving my family in a negative way. You crossed that line and I chose to delete those specific comments. Your comments have otherwise been posted unedited.

          I also have proposed the terms of my test – more than once. Talk may be cheap to you, but I do value my time (which includes my talk/type) – so when you ask me for my terms and I provide them, I would prefer if you would at least take them under consideration instead of badgering me for something I have already provided.

          • Dear Skeptoidians ~ The evidence of Earthing is abundant. It is everywhere, and there are thousands of people with evidence. For myself personally, I spent two years of my life dedicated to making a film of this “evidence” , yet the Skeptoidians DISMISS my offering saying “it is insufficient” WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING AT THE FILM ! This is extraordinary… YOUR CREDIBILITY IS TOTALLY SHOT right there ! No need to go any further… It simply shows a close-minded Skeptoidian !
            Again, where does one go from there ? Do you want me to write a 36 inch long discussion of the evidence on this forum ? Of course not ! And then I’m criticized when lengthy answers ARE typed in . So I’m stuck with all due respect !
            Skeptoidians HAVE TO DO SOME WORK. And look at the studies. I’ ve repeatedly pointed to the Earthing Institute as your starting point.
            If a Skeptoidian invests the time to study the studies; then this discourse would have ended long ago.
            Let me be VERY CLEAR : The details of these studies will be supplied to you if you send an email to the director of the Earthing Institute . That is their job is to educate the public and dispel all this MISINFORMATION .
            I really think at this point that I have nothing more to add; it seems that after what seems like at least two months of this back and forth we are getting nowhere .
            If the layperson stumbles upon this site, that knows nothing about either side of this concept, God help them……….
            Sincerely, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

        • Alan Henness says:


          You may have missed it, but I asked you a month ago about your evidence and why your distributor in the UK (BEP Technology Ltd t/a Original Earthing) was unable to provide the necessary standard of evidence to the Advertising Standards Authority when I challenged claims they made in an advert:

          Did BEP Technology forget to ask you for evidence or did you send them all the evidence you had?

          • Dear Skeptoidian ~ What the HECK are you talking about ? This is a PRIME example of the DISINFORMATION and ASSUMPTIONS that occur between well meaning people.
            ***** I have NO DISTRIBUTOR in the U.K. ; I’m a film production company and INDEPENDENT of ANYONE or ANYTHING. Imagine that ! If I found the fallacies in Earthing, I would trumpet it to the world in the sequel. ……What I find instead is the extremely BEAUTIFUL . Almost sacred… Now , let’s not get into a discussion of how science can prove there is no GOD. Just , please, stop assuming and get the story straight before it hits this page .
            The Skeptoidian writing this falsehood is assuming that I am involved with distribution of earthing resources , which I am NOT. And so, one falsehood here, one falsehood there, and that is BEFORE we actually talk about the SCIENCE of Earthing….. And therefore, this becomes an examination of affiliate marketing campaigns and what individual people may or may not say. No one can control that, anymore than celebrity gossip can be stifled in the National Enquirer.
            Case Closed ! :-)
            Sincerely, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            Steve –

            What is the status of these studies in which Ober has spent millions? What is the structure of these studies? Since these are being done at universities across North America, do you have the name of the scientists and the institutions so that I could perhaps contact them about their preliminary findings?

            Thanks – Eric

          • Alan Henness says:

            Whatever. Whoever makes/sells these earthing products doesn’t seem to have access to the same ‘evidence’ you seem to have.

  35. There is a very important P.S. Here : And I will now FILM it being printed in case it is deleted:
    A certain Skeptoidian claims he deleted two of my postings because “I crossed the line and did not stay on topic , and engaged in : ” personal attacks..insults and involving my family in any way… ”
    This is absolute RUBBISH… my postings NEVER have been personal attacks , and DEFINITELY NOT involving the Skeptoidian’s family ! WHY on EARTH would this Skeptoidian outright LIE like this?
    The comments I made were about coffee enemas (which I enjoy daily) and the tens of thousands of people that have DIED as a result of prescribed pharmaceuticals such as VIOXX.
    If anyone who reads the above threads can see , I get “insulted” quite regularly; however, to me , it isn’t an insult really, but rather an indication that whatever is being said IRRITATES the self- ordained critics of Earthing .
    Again, I look very closely at the premise of these Skeptoidians and what I’m seeing mainly is very little vetting of the facts; just simple denouncement of Earthing because they just don’t like it….I guess….. The fact that the Skeptoidians have no money to do lab work to prove or disprove their theories against Earthing, suggests a house built of STRAW, with very little to back up their perceived roles as scientific experts to reckon with . WHY should ANYONE believe what you have to say ? WHAT evidence do you have to disprove that Grounding doesn’t work ? PLEASE SHOW ME !!!!!
    I refuse to let the Skeptoidians off the hook with this continued diatribe, because the truth is being bent and twisted and in doing so , many people will continue to live with pain and suffering because they believe these disparaging remarks… When a Skeptoidian will not even look at a 74 minute movie to see the science and proof ; and declare it unscientific without even seeing it; that’s a red flag. A BIG RED FLAG. Thank you , Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

    • Eric Hall says:

      Again – our fundamental disagreement. You have the claim – you provide the evidence. I shouldn’t have to go to the earthing institute for the studies. If they are published in reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals, I would have access to them through any number of resources available to be as a college instructor. A film of anecdotes is not science – as it does not control for the possibility of some other cause for the “miracle.” A study held internally by a organization built around and run by the hypothesis is not good data unless published and independently reviewed.

      Steve – your evidence – as you have presented it – is based on faith and belief. That is not science. That is the point of my blog post – there is not any science which supports the claim that grounding works.

      • It would seem a scientist that is seeking the truth would look under every rock, test any and every means possible, look at ALL the evidence and ASSUME NOTHING !
        The film is dismissed without even watching . The studies are available and I tried to make it easy for you.
        More studies underway as we speak.
        Thank you ! Warmly, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

        • Eric Hall says:

          As a scientist, I am happy to look at at the evidence. But not all evidence is equal. Anecdotes and uncontrolled/unblinded studies are interesting and provide some guidance for future testing, but they are not strong evidence – or at least not evidence on which one can form a firm conclusion.

          If I see a car slowing down – there are many possible causes. It could be someone hitting the brakes. It could be someone downshifting the car. It could be out of gas. It could have had a mechanical breakdown. Someone could be hitting the emergency/parking brake. There are many reasons – I can’t just say that because the car has brakes that it is the brakes slowing the car down. I gather other evidence – ahhh – brake lights – it is likely at least partially due to the brakes. I hear the engine winding up – might be a downshift. I hear metal scraping – might be a mechanical breakdown. If I am now watching several cars in a controlled setting – I can then take measurements to see what caused the car to stop – temperature of the brake shoes. Position of the emergency brake. temperature of the clutch if it is a manual. Perhaps put sensors on the gear shift to know its position at all times. Observing the condition of all the parts before and after to see if any mechanical breakdown occurred. I can’t simply observe the car stopping and say it stopped due to any one reason without actually taking the data and controlling each of the many factors that could cause the stopping.

          • Dear Skeptoidian~
            * If I appear hostile to you and that is influencing your understanding ; I do indeed apologize !
            * Since you can afford to watch the film ; but won’t , because you “don’t have the interest to sustain spending 90 minutes ..” I respond with the following ~
            A. Why are you even contributing to this dialogue then ?
            B. Your feedback in itself reveals an underlying scientifically minded oversite : You are assuming that the film is 90 minutes. It isn’t . It’s 74 minutes. Take that same MENTAL ATTITUDE and apply it to your overall viewpoints and we have a very dangerous mindset in which you accuse me of being “hostile” ( also incorrect) , and yet without ANY examination whatsoever of the facts or evidence, declare I haven’t “proven earthing can cure or treat anything”.
            Thank you ! Warmly, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

  36. Stephen Propatier says:

    Nice dodge, but answer the question. Rather than request I cough up three bucks to line your pockets. Why are barefoot cultures less healthy than western? If being in contact with earth is so critical? Or are you saying that western medicine is what is keeping them healthy? Your responses are full of attacks on the messengers(standard scam ploy). Snake oil seller plan #3 “If you can’t argue the facts then attack the messengers.”
    I will ask again.
    If contact with the earth is critical to good health, how come cultures that have constant contact with the earth are less healthy than western cultures that wear shoes?
    I have no doubt that you don’t have an answer, other than name calling, and buy my movie for the 100th time couched in a nonsensical ad-hominum attack paragraph diatribe.

    • Why would you state that you watched the movie in your first entry , and then admit that you DIDN”T in the second entry response. ( You can’t afford it ). You are basically stating that you told a “lie”.
      Facts :
      * Contact with the Earth is CRITICAL o GOOD HEALTH ; and cultures that have contact with the Earth are far, FAR healthier than western cultures that wear shoes IF all other factors needed for sustaining life are in line.
      1. You need clean water; air and ample food, and SANITATION.
      2. You need to live in peace. ( Not killed in wars)
      3. You need shelter from the elements.
      4. You need protection from predators ( i.e. snakes, mosquitos, Bengal tigers, charging rhinos, hippos ,etc.)
      ……….There are almost an infinite number of reasons why people die early in cultures that are barefoot ; and Western Society’s ills are not shared by these cultures in general terms ; i.e. diabetes, heart disease, cancer, autism, obesity , osteoporosis , ( i.e women in Malaysia have 8 kids and take no calcium supplements or even drink milk and the condition is unheard of ) and much, MUCH , more.
      Not only that, but for all the good that Western Society does, it introduces some extremely dangerous materials into the the global environment that are killing bees, butterflies, birds, and wildlife , ( canaries in the coal mine) , and US… I am dealing , RIGHT now, with an issue of genetically modified ingredients that are fed to captive orphaned moose, which is beginning to point to a seriously detrimental outcome for livestock..
      And furthermore , the U.S. , for example, ranks way , WAY down the list in health care compared to the rest of the world.
      Not ALL of Modern Medicine is Bad ; NOT by far, but the devil is in the details ; and the DISTILLED QUESTION about other cultures that are barefoot is a very clever and deceptive and simplistic retort, that indicates a mis-comprehension of the secrets of longevity !
      Thank You ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

      • Stephen Propatier says:

        To be clear I watched your 90 second promo movie and I see no reason to pay for more of that useless psychobabble. I am more than willing to watch it if you pay me 4 dollars. I do not think that you have any right to respond to my objections until you pay me to watch your movie.
        Secondly you are just showing your racist ignorance about the world with your ridiculous comments. There are no hippos and Bengal tigers in Brazil. however lets take your assumption and put it to the test. Barefoot culture sub-saharan africa. Number one cause of death in adults. Untreated Hypertension. Not tigers, not bad water, not war, not infectious disease(HIV is number 3). High blood pressure.
        You like your western medicine when it sanitizes your water, and cures your strep throat. When it says something you don’t like. For example “there is zero plausibility to your claims.” or “Your claims lack an even basic understanding of human physiology.”, you get angry and demand money. Best part of all you are trying to convince others on a free thought, free cost website to pay for the privilege of challenging your ideas.
        Sure I guess you are right, that if you say something over and over someone besides you may believe it. Since you will not respond with specifics of data without paying I can only guess that you are trolling for marks.
        I am willing to be proved wrong, by all means submit your reproduced, studies, its methods, data, and publisher. I will fully retract anything I may have said that the data disproves and will dedicate my post this week to sharing this new found science. Certainly it will be interesting.

        My Reference:

        “the data suggest hypertensive disease (31 percent), diarrheal disease (11 percent) and HIV/AIDS (10.5 percent) as the leading causes. Data from the AMMP are available by sex and show HIV/AIDS to be the leading cause in both sexes (higher proportions in women) and injuries in males and pregnancy-related causes to be the other significant conditions. All these results suggest that hypertensive disease, HIV/AIDS, pregnancy-related causes, and injuries are the leading causes of death among adults in Sub-Saharan Africa.”

        • Dear Skeptoidian ~ Your misleading and aggressive comments are indicative and insightful. Stating that an observation wasRASCIST is INSANE. You need to read Jerod Diamond’s latest book about cultures around the world and how long they lived and why they died and where our planet is headed…. And to state that my film is “psychobabble” before watching it is premature and unscientific at best, and showing an intolerable arrogance at worst… First, your cohorts call the WHOLE FIL:M a “promo” for Earthing; and apparently you are referring to just the TRAILER. ; and want to watch it for free. I sincerely doubt that you will watch it regardless if it was free or not. If you want to watch it for free, I’ve already disclosed that the film can be seen online right across the page from the trailer of YOUTUBE ; it’s called “The Benefits of Earthing|” and it is a PIRATED copy put up after the free showing of which was offered earlier.
          To start with, WATCH the film , so we have a basis to proceed !
          Thank You ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            Here’s what Diamond says about past cultures:

            “the diseases that killed them, along with accidents and interpersonal violence, were ones that have by now been largely eliminated as causes of death in the First World: gastrointestinal infections producing diarrhea, respiratory infections, malaria, parasites, malnutrition, and secondary conditions preying on people weakened by those primary conditions”

            In other words – many people didn’t make it to get old enough to get the diseases we get in modern society – because modern medicine and science allows us to eliminate many deaths due to those causes.

            What he says about modern disease:

            “that lifestyle includes many components occurring together: low physical activity, high calorie intake, weight gain or obesity, smoking, high alcohol consumption, and high salt consumption”

            He says nothing about shoes or earthing. The above things we know – via science – and go to any doctor and they will tell you – get more exercise, eat a little less, lose weight, quit smoking, limit alcohol, cut down on sodium. Science tells us this.

            So about that earthing…

          • Dear Skeptoidian ~! THANK YOU for looking that up and taking the time to write it ! You made my point very clearly ! This is in reference to your fellow Skeptoidian who was asking why people in Brazil , etc. don’t live very long or die before puberty and they are BAREFOOT ! Thank you ! THUS, in a perfect world , if most of this has or IS being eliminated and they were STILL connected to the EARTH , they’d likely be vibrant and healthy and aware well beyond the 100 year mark. The human body, by design , is meant to last approximately 120 years in a perfect world. However there are several cultures that exist in harmony with nature to THIS DAY where they live beyond 100 years.
            Thank you ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            He says nothing about earthing? How does that make your point? Science made that point.

          • Eric Hall says:

            By the way Steve – you are repeating several logical fallacies very often in your “proof” of earthing. First is your appeal to emotion (watch the film and how can you not be convinced by these powerful stories). Second is the appeal to authority (the earthing institute – they must be good – look at their name, right?). Third is the appeal to antiquity – the notion that the past is somehow better than the present. These appeals make it more difficult to find validity in your claims – as strong evidence wouldn’t require these appeals.

          • Dear Skeptoidian ~ Your first entry was great about Jerod Diamond’s observations. The second one now, which I”m addressing is, not so much … First , once again , you are ASSUMING something about the movie . One can’t ASSUME anything in science, right ? This continues to astonish me how utterly presumptuous this position is by the Skeptoidians. And JUST FROM THAT, you exhibit something utterly lacking in the premise of this debate that would , if this was a game of chess , would have you disqualified.
            Secondly, the Earthing Institute, is suggested as a starting point because they can fairly easily give you studies that are in a consolidated data base. You want to find yourself ? Go for it ! I was just trying to help .
            And finally, YES, the past wisdom holds many gems of knowledge UNSURPASSED by modern man’s smug and selfish cultural transgressions. Do you really think it was a good idea to detonate nuclear devices in the S.W. ? Or pump DDT or other dioxins into the environment ? And the plastic ,that is everywhere, the insecticides that are killing the bees that pollinate the plants that allow us to EAT . ……Do we really know what we are doing ? What we are getting into here is WHY I care and care to experiment with Earthing to start with . And why Skeptoidians are what they are. I am almost positive that none of the Skeptoidian pack will ever change their minds on this Earthing thing . I really don’t . The longer this plays out the more aggressive and mean spirited I find the discourse. … I think we should just stop this back and forth for “a time” , and just take a deep breath and let it all seep in ? ………Meantime, I appreciate you allowing me to participate in this continued discussion with no more edits of my entries.
            THANK YOU ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            I’m not assuming anything. That is what you have stated is the content of the movie. In any case, as stated many times – a film is not how science is published.

            DDT – interesting that choice…because of our discontinued use of DDT, we see both an increase in bed bugs and an increase in malaria in third world countries. Plastic? Depends on your concern. Switching from glass to plastic has saved millions of gallons of fuel for transportation alone by reducing weight. It is fairly easy to recycle (the CEO of waste management said on CNBC last week it is easier than glass to recycle).

            Again Diamond in no way makes any claim about earthing. How you twist something about eating better into a support for earthing is a train of thought I cannot follow.

  37. Steve, I’m wondering if maybe you wouldn’t get more positive responses to your work if you weren’t so hostile toward the people challenging you. I mean, telling someone they “can’t afford it” because they won’t watch your feature length movie about earthing is pretty much a guarantee that you’ll never win them over.

    I can afford to watch your movie. But I’m not going to. Why? For one thing, I don’t have the interest to sustain me spending 90 minutes on it. But since this discussion got started, you’ve consistently insulted those who’ve been responding to you, adopting a condescending “how dare you question me?!?” attitude that nobody else has.

    Thus far, you haven’t proven earthing can cure or treat anything. Maybe you can prove earthing can help someone be civil with others.

  38. When it comes to who should be civil to whom, the opening paragraph on Mercola (egregious errors, woo, misinformation, snake-oil, poor science etc) could take a little polishing too. This is unfortunately the tome of so many sceptic and quackwatch forums, which really makes one wonder what the real motive may be. The quality of science offered here could also use some polishing – examples:
    “Eric Hall says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:10 pm
    We actually have a very good idea of the effects of RF and EMF radiation. Radio waves (RF) are part of the Electromagnetic (EMF) spectrum. RF is much too long in wavelength to have an effect on our body. EMF is of course a concern – but in higher frequencies such as UV (from the sun), X-ray and gamma (from nuclear sources or bursts from the solar system). All of the bunk about Wi-Fi sickness and the like have been thoroughly debunked.”
    Well Eric may not have stood near an HF antenna while transmitting – on ships for example. He may also wonder why it isn’t a good idea to put your hand in a microwave? How can you say RF doesn’t react with the human body? Even at low frequencies like 60Hz it is of sufficient concern to the W.H.O. for example – there is quite a lot of research on this – one good example here

    There are queries about the effect of “spikes” in electricity when switching devices on and off. Why? It is exactly this “fluctuation” of current that causes RF? Why does that need explaining? This is the fundamental principle of radio and in fact how early wireless signalling was discovered – still lives on as wireless morse-code telegraphy, protocol is called CW. Comparing this to an airconditioner drawing 30A is meaningless as there is almost no current fluctuation in that case. we are talking RF not magnetic induction.

    And then household wiring does radiate slightly at 60z even when witched off. The live cable experiences an alternating voltage of 110v (or 220 where i live), at about 50-60Hz. Again this is an antenna, fortunately very inefficient as it is far too short for the wavelength involved. Maybe thats why that frequency is used? Just a thought? At any rate that’s the principle that stud detectors work on, they pick up the radiation form the live wire.

    These are small examples but I don’t see the need to labour this at all because EMF is only a small piece of the puzzle and is not foundational to the earthing hypothesis at all. The fact that our bodies carry a small inductance relative to earth is primarily because of our own metabolism (which consumes electrons), and because of toxins (eg smoking, heavy metals, many others), or in fact from disease, including inflammation. These electrons can be replenished either by “anti-oxidants” such as vitamin C or others, or by earthing, as it turns out. There is a plausible reasoning for this. The “free radical theory of aging” is old and well established (Harman, 1950s). So our bodies carry a charge somewhat positive to earth. It therefore follows that when we “earth” we gain electrons. Question is, is this really useful, and do we gain enough electrons for this to be significant? For this we are limited to the limited studies offered to date, plus strong and consistent anecdotal evidence. The effects on blood are however quite strong evidence. The case is at least very interesting, and not worthy of the scorn shown in the opening paragraphs.

    I would go on to say that nothing is as blind as the “blind pursuit of science”. 99% of the information we live by is not based on DB RCTs etc. Take Gravity for example: who can show a DB RCT that gravity works. we don’t even have a plausible scientific explanation for gravity – purely observational. And Newton’s laws don’t stack in general relativity either. A sceptics dream I think. Then there’s water. It sustains life. It comes from the earth. Pure and clean. Too much woo? And again no DB RCTs – nor any needed. And so on.

    A blind insistence on rigour and process is a cheap tool to throw mud at any claim, even some perfect ones. What really is needed is an open-minded examination of any subject, to a point where a valid hypothesis exists. Then it may or may not be worth quantifying with DB RCTs etc. As far as I can see – the only times DB RCTs are actually used is to prove the validity of drugs like statins. Even then, the failed results have not usually been published, and the hypiothesis they are used to prove are flawed concepts to start with. Why are DB RCTs so difficult to get approved and so expensive. One may think only rich corporations such as drug companies could afford these things. Mmmmmmm……. I wonder why that is?

    Let common sense and open mindedness prevail, and time will judge the outcome on earthing. My personal experience on earthing is enough for me until then. Truth comes from all the strangest places!

    • Eric Hall says:

      Similar to Steve – this is where grasping at straws and moving the goal posts becomes evident. I will try to briefly counter your points and show how they actually don’t support grounding.

      I brought up the wavelength thing because for an individual photon – the energy is inversely proportional to the wavelength. Thus the longer the wavelength (or related the lower the frequency) the lower the energy per photon. This means that in order to feel any significant effect, one must interact with many, many photons because each photon has lower energy. Standing next to a transmitter, even say an FM transmitter, would have an effect because the number of photons (and thus the little bits of electric and magnetic fields) are additive – because they are both vector quantities. Microwaves work a little differently in that they set up a standing wave inside the box. Also those microwaves are at a much, much, much different in wavelength. Microwaves as a band in the EM spectrum form lower end to high end have energies that increase by a factor of 1000 over the range. So a microwave on one end is much different than one from the opposite end. It again is also about proximity. I can hold my hand a half a meter away from a 100W light bulb without getting burned – but if I hold it 0.5 cm away it is much different.

      Also – metals are much different than our body. The electron structure is much different – which is why they can transmit and absorb so many different wavelengths.

      Regarding your WHO report – the first interesting quote from the first chapter is here:

      “For a given external electric field, the strongest induced fields are for the human body in perfect contact through the feet with ground (electrically grounded) and the weakest induced fields are for the body insulated from the ground (in “free space”).”

      In other words – grounding increases the effect due to an external field. Is that what we are looking to do?


      “None of the three direct mechanisms considered above seem plausible causes of increased disease incidence at the exposure levels generally encountered by people. In fact they only become plausible at levels orders of magnitude higher and indirect mechanisms have not yet been sufficiently investigated. This absence of an identified plausible mechanism does not rule out the possibility of adverse health effects, but it does create a need for stronger evidence from biology and epidemiology.”

      In other words, there is no evidence that any of these exposures cause disease. So your report seems to verify my premise – that the null hypothesis is still valid because no evidence has been produced otherwise.

      Stud detectors do not pick up radiation. Mine, for example, uses sonar to detect density variations in the wall. Others actually look for the nails and/or screws in the sheetrock, indicating the stud to be behind there. If stud detectors picked up radiation from a wire – may studs would be missed because not all of them have a wire running along them.

      Electrons move at a high rate due to random thermal motion (on the order of 10^6 m/s). Even in the presence of a fairly strong electric field, the drift velocity is on the order of 10^-4 m/s – meaning the number of electrons that would enter your body due to the earth’s weak electric field is very small compared to the number consumed in food – it is negligible at best.

      Actually – Newton’s laws are just an estimation of relativity. Over small distances at low relative speeds, you can ignore many of the variables in relativity and get Newton’s laws. Double-blind studies are used in medicine to account for placebo effects. Randomized trials are to prevent selection bias. When taking data from nature, matter and energy don’t have those effects or bias, so the process of studying those things are different – there are other ways to control variables. Nice try to say “we know nothing about science” – but we actually do know quite a bit.

      A DB RCT in this case wouldn’t be hard to get approved because we are not asking patients to ingest anything, there is low risk to the patients (other than to their wallet) and the devices are already in use. It would seem to me there is more apprehension to actually do the trials than there is obstacles to getting one done – but I will admit that is speculation – but a speculation based on history of dealing with similar claims.

      • I’ve been away from the computer for a single day, and here we go again ! The challenge is, how does one wade through all this ! I’ll try to help :
        * Nobody is “grasping at straws and moving goal posts ” ; and you can cut the hidden jabs of “similar to Steve” ; okay ?
        Phillip has excellent points ; give him some credit for his observations and participation to expand the thought process here !!! Here are some additional observations from me in a categorical fashion for our beloved Skeptoidian :
        1. Skeptoidian reference … ” In other words, grounding increases the effect due to an external field . Is that what we are looking to do ? ” End Quote from Skeptoidian .
        My Answer : YES. When a conducting object is grounded , electrons from the ground come into the object and the result is a much better field reflection resulting in an increased external electric field and a DECREASED electric field INSIDE the object. That is why a Faraday cage to be effective must be grounded, otherwise it acts as an antenna. Same thing with the human body. Grounding the human body increases the field outside the body but decreases the field inside, thus reducing the interference from external fields to the delicate biochemical processes going on all the time inside the body.
        2. Skeptoidian’s declaration : ………..” in other words , there is no evidence that any of these exposures cause disease.. So your report seems to verify my ( Skeptoidian’s ) premise, that the null hypothesis is still valid because no evidence has been produced otherwise”…
        My Answer : This has really nothing to do with Earthing . As stated before, there is STILL DEBATE and research about the effect of EMFs on the human body. If you keep exposure to EMFs to a MINIMUM, and be grounded as much as possible, grounding will give the body the best chance to repair itself. Earthing or Grounding TRUMPS EMFs is where the evidence is leading us.
        3. Skeptoidian’s declaration: “Electrons move at a high rate due to random thermal motion ( on the order of 10 6m/s).. Even in the presence of a fairly strong electric field , the drift velocity is on the order of 10 -4m/s- meaning the number of electrons that would enter your body due to the earth’s weak electric field is very small compared to the number consumed in food – is negligible at best .
        My Answer : WHAT ?!!! Now you’re a nutritionist too ? !! NONSENSE. It is true that even in the presence of a fairly strong electric field , the drift velocity is on the order of 10-4 m/s. This does NOT MEAN that the number of electrons that would enter your body due to the Earth’s weak electric field is very small compared to the number consumed in food , because when one eats food , you eat a substance that has the same number of electrons and protons. Food is generally neutral so to speak.
        Now , when you are in contact with the Earth, ONLY ELECTRONS are entering your body and the number MUST be significant as discussed numerous times before since it unequivocally reduces inflammation and human physiology as per the published research in peer reviewed journals…..Have you found them yet ? AND , HAVE YOU WATCHED THE MOVIE to learn more about what this subject matter is about ? No? Won’t do it ? It’s FREE to view as I’ve repeatedly stated .
        Bottom line : We are repeating ourselves over and over and over again. Only using different words each time , and going over the same thing over and over and over again. What I am seeing , is one of the embarrassing elements of what happens to ego-maniac researchers/ scientists/teachers, who learn SO MUCH ; and THINK they’ve got it all figured out , and LOSE a good measure of humility in the process and fail to allow others to suggest they might be wrong.
        I did not choose this “fight” , the Skeptoidians did, by publishing a highly damaging and disparaging blog : “Mercola Misinformation” ……Calling him names, and brutalizing a beautiful discovery which IS Earthing to the point of confusing people and discouraging them from even trying it because of the almost unbearable posturing based upon “true and irrefutable science” that a sect of Skeptoidians seem to think is bullet proof . It’s not ! Where does this arrogance come from ? And it IS arrogance. Not real science in all aspects. The website itself is called “Skeptoid” … indicating some kind of mutant version of something … “toid” is not a good add on to a forum to discuss collegiate level understanding of “science”. My Goodness, what people will do and say in the name of Science.
        And you’ve really helped me realize , as a filmmaker , how much I need to sharpen my pencil to deal with this….. So Thank You.

        • Eric Hall says:

          Now we’re a faraday cage? When our skin is made out of metal and has all of our outer electrons in the conduction band, then I will believe you. Until then, it is nonsense.

          The moving the goal posts and grasping at straws reference is not a jab at you, but at your premise. I don’t question your intelligence, nor your ability to make a good film. Perhaps you feel that difference is subtle, but to me it is not. Your insults were against my broader intelligence and my ability to teach science. I am, with my best effort, trying to stay focused on the arguments being made.

          So for food… you mean to now tell me our body doesn’t use any of the ironically bonded foods to generate current in our body? What causes a heartbeat? A nerve impulse? And if all food is neutral, then all this claim that we get positively charged and need excess electrons would be BS. If we intake neutral food, and make positively charged free radicals – where did the negative charge go?

  39. Happy Thanksgiving ! Now you seem confused again. Please consider :
    * Our bodies carry a positive charge due to oxidative stress ; anti-oxidants can be found in foods, BUT IT IS NOT THE SAME as the ELECTRONS from the Earth. Research is being done on this in earnest currently on a number of fronts. AS I’ve repeated, the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, MA. is a good place to start since you don’t want to go to the Earthing Institute. You don’t want to enlighten yourself by watching a movie for free, where there is no work involved and you will discover the science and compelling evidence, ( besides the “movie experience” that apparently is deemed as too emotional by Skeptoidians).
    So I offer you a wonderful discussion by Dr.James Oschman on audio with Dr.Mercola on the April 29, 2012 article entitled “Caution : Wearing these Can Sabatoge Your Health” In this discussion your above questions will be answered with wonderful clarity ! Just ignore the fact for a bit that you don’t really like Mercola ; so set your bias’ aside and open your mind to the SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION presented by a Ph.D who will through several tidbits of delicious data onto your Thanksgiving dinner plate.
    * Yes, STAY FOCUSED on the arguments being made ; and I will do the same !
    God Bless ! Steve Kroschel /Kroschel Films

    • Eric Hall says:

      Again – a movie is not proof. Is your movie published in a scientific journal where it can be peer reviewed? Is Mercola’s conversation published in a scientific journal to be peer reviewed?

      I went to the MBL website. I searched for earthing and for grounding. zero results.

      So if our bodies carry a positive charge due to oxidative stress – where does that excess charge come from?

      Electrons are elementary particles that cannot be distinguished from one another in any way. The idea that electrons from the earth are different from any other electrons is complete pseudoscience.

      • More comments for your consideration:
        * Of course the movie isn’t published in a scientific journal ! First, you complain it costs money to watch and I say it is free, then when you still won’t look at it you now ask if it is published in a scientific journal where it can be peer reviewed, before you look at it .
        How many movies are published in scientific journals where they can be peer reviewed ? That is absurd. The film hasn’t even been released to mainstream audiences yet. The only “peer” reviews in the offing are going to be coming from the New York Times and Los Angeles Times and so on .. The film is for YOUR edification and enlightenment . It is for your BASIC understanding of how Earthing works .
        In the final analysis , it may very well be referenced in medical journals; but conventional medicine is not likely to embrace such healing modalities. Which leads us down the pleasant path of your health and politics … Which is why many people HATE such treatments to start with …. but that is a different discussion.
        * You are “toying” with me, dancing around and cherry picking my feedback . You’ve got to dig deep . For example, Albert Szent Gyorgi’s work at the Marine Biological Laboratories isn’t going to be on the HOME PAGE. What the HECK are you doing ! Maybe it would be better for you to simply go to Wikipedia and look up his name and start there .. Why are you playing these games with me ?
        The rest of your questions are fully answered on the Mercola article of April I just sent you.
        Do some work , and avoid knee jerk replies within a 30 minute span of time.
        Your behavior suggests to me that you’re not interested in learning, your are interested in ARGUING for some reason ; and perhaps it is born out of your educational background which has somehow fed an insatiable ego of self importance… Ultimately, all you are proving is your close-mindedness. I’ve spent an incredible amount of time pushing back the ridiculous accusations leveled against me on this commentary from you and others, that have nothing to do with the science of Earthing. Let’s refocus on how to get you in the know.

        • Eric Hall says:

          They have a custom Google search on the site – neither earthing or grounding came up with any results.

          I searched Albert Szent Gyorgi on wikipedia – still nothing on grounding or earthing in his entry.

          I told you when I can dedicate more focus to your film I will watch it. But it again is not evidence. I hope you understand it doesn’t change my mind in how to set up a proper test to show grounding works. A produced film is full of bias – in what is filmed, what is edited, etc. It is probably almost worse than anecdote on the scale of evidence. So I don’t know what you hope to accomplish – because even if it is compelling emotionally – it is not evidence.

          • Once again in less than 30 minutes you respond. The fact that you are looking for the words “earthing” and “grounding” means you’re already not aware of the HISTORY of Electronic Biology or Earthing or Grounding or Clint Ober or a long list of prominent physicists in the know about this . Clint Ober coined the “Earthing” phrase POST GYORGI…Albert Szent Gyorgi studied electronic biology in the 80’s and much earlier than that .
            The film would have shown you that. …….But , I guess you didn’t know. FURTHER evidence of what damage a partial understanding of the truth is . .. You also would learn a LOT from the April , 2012 article on Mercola interview with Dr.James Oschman. THEN you would not have wasted your time thus far looking in all the wrong places.. But to listen or learn from that interview alone would take almost an hour or more… TIME. Instead, you just want to come back to this blog with more “evidence” of how wrong I am. Sorry, ain’t gonna happen… I’m just afraid that as this keeps going, and I hit closer to home with these truths, that you’ll simply DELETE my responses… It could happen at any time now.. Thank you ! And HAPPY THANKSGIVING :-)

          • Stephen Propatier says:

            I agree with Eric, your promo included a edited Brian Dunning comment to make your film look like he thought it had plausibility. In 90 seconds you show exactly how the film will have zero credibility. I suspect everyone in the film except for a few devotee’s and maybe a fellow financial interest will be the only persons not edited to support your claims. You pick and choose responses to objections, to limit your exposure to reasonable objections. Then you use a common tactic of five paragraphs of word salad babble to distract readers.I have found this behavior consistent in scam artists wishing to confuse readers rather than search for the truth. I am not saying you are a scam artist, just this behavior is consistent with those activities. You attempt to get people to fill your paypal account by watching the movie. If grounding is the next great thing and the proof is already available on You Tube, why are you charging to see it? I mean why not spread the good word to all for free?

            Peace and love
            delete my responses
            Happy Thanksgiving
            Skeptoidians and Thank You!

          • Well, there you go “assuming ” again. Your comments are incorrect if you watched the film. And that goes for Brian Dunning and the film in general … If I held a mirror up to your face and showed you what you really look like you would be astonished of what the reality really is.
            …………..The film is shown in many venues for free ; and I do what I can in that regards, Dear Stephen………However, when I’m starving and freezing to death with no phone and no nothing up here in the Alaskan Bush, are you going to air drop a load of organic food and nice things to survive ? …….Do you work each and every day for nothing ? That comment in and of itself makes me question both your motives for saying it and your attitude and your knowledge of Earthing. So far, NONE of the Skeptoidians have shown a shred of respect for anyone other than themselves on this blog commentary ; and REFUSE to listen or see ANY OTHER POINT OF VIEW . EVEN when it is served up on a , umm, “silver platter” …..( no pun intended, being it is Thanksgving)
            We DO have one thing in common, we both have the same first name at least : Stephen.

          • Stephen Propatier says:

            I am sorry that you feel that I did not respect you. That was not my intention. I would agree that my attitude about earthing is poor.

  40. Stephen Propatier says:

    My favorite thing is when you put grounding into you tube hundreds of movies. Many with contradictory theories and activities. you need a tree you don’t need a tree, Once a day, once a week, all the time. Bare feet, sit on the ground, don’t sit on the ground. I just kept laughing the more I scrolled. Earthing bed sheets, grounding mats, barefoot walking shoes. I mean really, really, this is funny. If you want to sell people made up BS, just sell a magic wooden box of dirt. Wait wait I found that too for you unfortunates that live in high rise. I cannot believe that this article Eric has 200+ posts. Ridiculous, who buys this stuff? Good luck Steve selling your movie, nice try trying to get the hits # up on the you tube site. Remember there is no such thing as bad publicity, and there’s a sucker born every minute as evidenced by the You Tube bonanza.
    Sorry Eric I know you are posting something serious here but it is funny.

    • What would you expect with something that is billed as “The Greatest Health Re-discovery of all Time ?” ……It’ll bring strange people out of the woodwork :-) ….However, that does not mean that there is also the TRUTH ! Trouble is , what you are doing , is soothing your skeptical bent by putting all of it in one big slop pail ; and all that does is show a lack of understanding of what the REAL EARTHING is to start with !
      I’m glad you’re laughing, because I am , too……..At your observations and those of others.
      Warmly, Mr.,Kroschel

  41. @Stephen – I’ve found the same thing with a lot of woo, like the post I did about oil pulling. Nobody can quite agree on how to do it or what it is, exactly. But they know it works.

    • Your point being ?
      It is “a lot of woo” because no one can get the story about how certain things work so therefore the concept is rubbish? How many people can articulate accurately how a car engine works once they put the key in the ignition?
      What are you trying to say dear Mike ? Are you absolutely CERTAIN that EARTHING is nonsense and doesn’t work at all ? Are YOU ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN ?
      “Yes” or “No” !! No more than that. Just , YES or NO.
      At this point , many innocent people that stumble onto this lengthy commentary may wonder why I am even bothering to continue this dialogue. The reason ? It’s because I’m learning how Skeptoidians reason and make their deductions. That in itself is fascinating and helps me to polish the Earthing science from the perpectives of a documentarian even more so.
      Sincerely, Steve Kroschel /Kroschel Films

      • Eric Hall says:

        But you force us to repeat the same things over and over.

        Would a scientist say, when asked in that way, if we are absolutely certain something works? No. Science is about data, and the more data we have supporting a hypothesis, the stronger the likelihood the hypothesis is correct. Relativity – pretty clear it is correct.

        However, earthing and the hypotheses that go with it have weak or nonexistent data to support it. None of the data you have provided follows scientific protocol. It is not up to us to prove your claim false, it is up to you to provide evidence to support your claims. You expect us to accept it on non-scientific data – and that my friend is religion. That doesn’t work for science.

        • There are AT LEAST 15 Double blind clinical trials that are published on Earthing. The fact that not ALL of them are in your idea of mainstream PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS, are for reasons that may or may not be for the right reasons. Take Morris Fishbein , for example , who strong-armed the Cigarette companies to financially support the JAMA for decades… And so, out came cigarette advertisments of doctors smoking Camel cigarettes.
          There is enormous evidence to prove Earthing and that follows scientific protocol . The evidence is there as I’ve said repeatedly. Just because you can’t find it , doesn’t mean it’s not there. I’ve told you where to look and you don’t look ! And because you don’t look, you say it doesn’t exist. And because you say it doesn’t exist, therefore you conclude Earthing is a “religion”.
          That, my dear Eric, is astoundingly unscientific where I come from ; and much more. Did you listen to the Dr. James Oschman interview at least ?
          Thank You ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

      • Stephen Propatier says:

        You are right about one thing. I do not know what THE ALL CAPS TRUTH is because you have offered no evidence just a “for sale” sign on you movie and a lot of rhetoric. You have not even offered any research or anything but statements that convinces me that your TRUTH is any different from the other 100 people who have claims to the TRUTH. Have you watched every single one of their movies? If you haven’t how can you possible dispute their findings. I mean they have a movie right. So how can they be wrong and you’re right? Seems like a push to me. Unless you think that they need evidence to prove that their movie is better than yours. No we have already established that movie is proof of earthing, done case closed. The science is in the movie, and according to you nothing else needs to be satisfied. I pick the earthing sheets they are my favorite movie. I actually got to watch the earthing sheet video for free. Steve, you have no idea what you are talking about, the movie is the science therefore earthing sheets proved, your barefoot whatever movie useless. My electrons will be satisfied and anti-oxidized by 1500 percal sheets that have acquired the needed electrons from the earth. You need to watch that movie and buy those sheets so you can know the truth.


        • Dearest Stephen,
          Because of you , I’m going to stop referring to you as a Skeptoidian. In fact, from now on , I’m going to refer to each of you people by your names; because you are all so unique under the umbrella of .
          Here’s my advice : READ the reply I”ve just typed for Eric.
          Therein lies the science. The research. The papers. The evidence. Abundantly.
          Thank you ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

  42. Stephen Propatier says:

    More exaggerations and confabulations.
    “there are AT LEAST 15 Double blind clinical trials that are published on Earthing. The fact that not ALL of them are in your idea of mainstream PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS, are for reasons that may or may not be for the right reasons.”
    Wrong, 4 studies none controlled, none blinded, some didn’t even use the method of earthing you report. all published in the same journal. And all still support my earthing sheets. I still think their scam is better than yours. At least I get something tangible out of it.

    • Not so first Dear Stephen ~! Whatever 4 studies that you are talking about have NOTHING to do with those which I was referring to ……Have you scoured the globe via the magic carpet of the internet in the past 60 minutes ? .. And so, you run back to the computer with this announcement ? Are you that SURE you are RIGHT ? Are you ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT YOU have shown me to be EXAGGERATING and ERRONEOUS in the previous comment that was allowed to be posted on this site about these official studies ?
      YES or NO ~ Just YES or NO , please… If you put anything other than that in your reply; you’re not to be taken seriously.
      Thank you ! Stephen Kroschel / Kroschel Films

      • Stephen Propatier says:

        Sorry Steve as much as you would like me to be Silenced and minimized I am not going to silenced. I stand by my opinion. That said I did make one error in my last statement your are right there are not 4 studies. There are Zero double blind controlled studies. Brown university library, journals at ovid, pubmed,proquest database, online full text scolar, and USC periodical index online. Not one, as you claimed, double blind placebo controlled study. Please feel free to prove me wrong I am absolutely certain that you cannot produce a methodologically randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled study showing the grounding has a medical benefit. I will not restrict it to mainstream journals. Anything at all. Please feel free to use all the yes/no demands you want. Thereby proving that you have no argument and are not to be taken seriously. I would like to see this study and if you can only obtain a citation I can get almost any journal published outside of north Korea through Brown. So go get it let us all take a look at it. If you can’t afford the journal tell me where and I will get it and post it.

        • Not a “yes” or “no” obviously ; just a nice exemplary paragraph of your testosterone charged conjecture that I want you to be “minimized” . All I’m asking for is a “yes” or “no” for clarity……….Thank you !
          Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

  43. Steve (not to be confused with Stephen) says: “How many people can articulate accurately how a car engine works once they put the key in the ignition?”

    I would imagine a lot of people can do that. Automotive engineers, designers, mechanics, car enthusiasts.

    And to answer your “simple” question, I am not “certain” that earthing is nonsense. But I’m not at all convinced it’s not nonsense, either.

    • Hi, Mike ~!
      Thank you for your answer about the “car engine ” question. In other words, hardly anyone can articulate accurately how a car engine works once they put the key in the ignition. Since automotive engineers, designers, mechanics and car enthusiasts make up an ultra-micro percentage of the overall population. And when you compare THAT number with the percentage of people that drive a car , obviously it is much different .
      Same with Earthing ; very few people that suffer that suddenly have their lives back even care HOW it works, they are just happy they got their lives back ! And whilst you and I and the other people that run Skeptoid debate which way an electron is going, hundreds of thousands of people’s lives have been dramatically altered.
      Sort of like the old saying, “dead right” , but “dead” all the same.
      *** As for the question about Earthing and asking for a “yes” or “no”; you didn’t do that. Instead, you gave an answer which softened the impact . It either is NONSENSE or NOT NONSENSE , and you aren’t sure.
      Stephen P. also failed with that question; although I asked him a second time……
      Happy Thanksgiving ! Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

      • Eric Hall says:

        Steve – again – this is why we are not likely to trust your film as a source – science doesn’t work in absolutes. Can I say with 100% certainty that any scientific theory is correct? No. The evidence simply makes it more or less likely. Relativity and evolution are two good examples of theories with such high degrees of certainty it is nearly impossible to imagine them being overturned. Same with Newton’s laws – they are still correct even with relativity – just they were estimations where the estimation errors were so small they were not noticed until much later.

        The 1/r^2 relationship of the electric field due to a point charge – we know to a high degree of accuracy that the exponent is 2 – but because the relationship is derived experimentally, there will always be some uncertainty (I believe we know at least the first 8 digits after the decimal of the 2 to be zero). So can I say for sure it is 1/r^2? No. But for all practical purposes, yes. But if someone asked me – is it FOR SURE 2 or not, I will give the above explanation.

        You want an answer to say earthing is 100% nonsense or not. We continue to answer that it is highly likely to be nonsense – which does not satisfy your dichotomy. But it is the best we can do. We have basic science to give us good certainty it is nonsense. Looking at the tests thus far, as well as the tactics used by proponents – it strengthens the likelihood it is nonsense. But even with the scientific method applied – we cannot say with 100% certainty it is nonsense. It is just likely to be so.

        • Moving beyond your lengthy explanation of the evidence and absolutes and additional reasons for you and yours being wrong , yet being right ……..somehow…….What happened to Stephen P. and his absolute certainty of the studies ? He’s not making a peep anymore … Perhaps he, unlike you, has discovered that the double-blind clinical trials DO EXIST , he just missed them. Or is just too upset to respond?
          The evidence can’t be seen if the eyes are closed.
          Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Stephen Propatier says:

            “Please feel free to prove me wrong I am absolutely certain that you cannot produce a methodologically randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled study showing the grounding has a medical benefit. I will not restrict it to mainstream journals. Anything at all. ”

            Still waiting lot’s of rhetoric no study.

          • “I am absolutely certain that you cannot produce a methodologically randomized , blah, blah , blah……..” …….
            1. You couldn’t find any earthing studies at PubMed ? .. I found three on PubMed :
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pmc/?term=Gaetan+Chevalier
            2 “The effects of Earthing on Human Physiology “- European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics” Jan. 31, 2006,600-621
            3.Journal of Environmental and Public Health Volume 2012, Article ID29154, 8 pages, doc.10.1155/2012/291541
            4. Subtle Energies and Energy Medicine / Volume 18, Number 3 ; page 11 ; Integrative Medicine Volume 10 , No.3, June/ July 2011
            There’s much more , but here’s enough for you to get upset over , or laugh about , or whatever the heck you might do.. BTW , There have never been any double -blind studies on 747 airliners, whether parachutes work, prune juice helps constipation, water is good for dehydration , Mercury Fillings, vaccines for infants, MSG and a whole Witch’s Brews of nastiness.
            ………..Much more to come , if you’d like , Mr. Stephen :-)
            Warmly, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            I put that exact link in my browser – here’s what I get:


            The blood viscosity I have already addressed (not controlled or blinded). The second is the one you point out from Journal of Environmental and Public Health which is simply commentary – there is no actual experimentation or data collection – simply commentary. The third is a pilot study – in which I notice a few problems right away. Most interesting is they say they measured cortisol levels – but those levels don’t show up in their results anywhere. Secondly, they set a threshold of 10%, in which only 6 of the 21 measures reached that threshold – then they go through some statistical gymnastics to show that the threshold they set then didn’t really matter. They treated each day individually – comparing to the baseline rather than look at the trend from day to day – which in a small study of just a few individual would be important. One other thing of note is it was 8 subjects – 4 of each grounded and ungrounded – but they only studied one at a time. They claim it was to “control variables” but there is a huge variable of environmental variation. For example, if the weather was different each week, the baseline for each subject would be much different. The study also doesn’t indicate any gender or racial variables – which we do know those can have an effect on results from countless other studies.

            Again – you are confusing medical science with other science observations. Observing a 747 doesn’t change how a 747 works. However, our brain chemistry changes when we tell someone we are treating them for some disease. There is much more variation to body chemistry. Bodies have emotional responses. 747s don’t. However, we do have something comparable in industry. Depending on the accuracy need for a part, the parts will be sampled at a certain rate. When I worked in a manufacturing setting, some parts were tested for every single part. Some every 5, some every ten. Same with parachute material – we know how a parachute works via physics – so we test what might vary (the material) and not the physics. If one has constipation – we do know hydration helps – so prune juice can be a solution. But I have never had my doctor tell me it works. Water is good for dehydration – and there are plenty of studies on it – ask those who invented gatorade how much studying they did of water versus an electrolyte solution. Fillings are a macroscopic physical repair and not one that is subject to the placebo effect. If you are referring to the mercury in fillings – we have plenty of studies on the effects of mercury – and the stuff in fillings is not the kind that causes an issue. Vaccines are also well studied and continue to be studied. MSG also has been studied and when double-blinded is found to have no effect on people – it is all in their head – much like those “sensitive” to WIFI – plenty of study out there.

            You continue to amaze me in how rather than provide actual data, you continue to attack the process of science. Because grounding cannot pass the muster of science, you want to change the well-established rules of science. That’s not how it works.

            As a note, I did delete comment number 3 of yours for calling another commenter an “idiot” while claiming an outright lie. We allow most things to post here, but I have a limit to my tolerance of those tactics. Call it censorship if you’d like – but I have allowed you to post any misinformation you want on here and gain tons of free advertising for your film and your park. I will not tolerate insults or misinformation about others who are commenting here.

          • Dear Sketoid ~ Am travelling and read this extremely misleading reply of the studies… have you looked at them carefully and all of them ? ALL OF THEM CAREFULLY ? No , you have not; instead there is the predilection to state that the study you’ve looked at is unscientific ; ( I’ll send you more) and oddly, Stephen P . does not seem to respond to any of this that I’ve found. Is he perphaps WRONG and has nothing to say ? Furthermore, you are deleting messages ; and if you can prove , PROVE that I’ve called anyone an “idiot” of your group ; I’ll apologize; but the fact is , I did NOT. Furthermore 2 : You seem to think that you are providing ME with free advertising ? I’m sorry , but it is the other way around , dear Skeptoid supporter, and over a quarter million people have seen the movie just from a pre-release audience test ? Your whole listenership or “following” doesn’t hold a candle to even that small number… How many of your blogs have this long of a response ? How many ? Apart from the trueness of REAL SCIENCE , a careful analysis of your responses, and observations have almost invariably contained serious inaccuracies ; and then you will ask readers and students to accept without question your understanding of the sensitive data on Earthing ? And Furthermore3 , I sincerely doubt if more than a handful of people are even reading this commentary. And I mean a handful . There is a propensity for an inflated importance of your interpretation of these commentaries and the misinterpretation of the true science that follows from your responses. I believe there is no way that you’ll ever change your point of view , however; but one can only hope . … The ramifications of the website probably cannot tolerate being “wrong” on such an important topic as Earthing.
            Thank you ! Sincerely, Steve Kroschel / Kroschel Films

          • Eric Hall says:

            Steve – you know as well as I that every time you post and put the link to your website in your login information it is good for traffic to your website. It doesn’t even have to be from this site – but just having the links all over the internet helps your search results.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Looking for a study is not science. You continue to make claims of studies, “proof,” etc – but so far have produced none. You use names of scientists who long ago studied the body’s electrical systems – not grounding – and yet somehow submit that as proof of grounding working.

            Humans to wear animal skins, including on their feet. I notice in your pictures on your website you are wearing modern clothes and modern footwear. Is this also not dangerous to your health?

          • Alan Henness says:

            Eric Hall said:

            Steve – you know as well as I that every time you post and put the link to your website in your login information it is good for traffic to your website. It doesn’t even have to be from this site – but just having the links all over the internet helps your search results.

            Fortunately, most blogs, including this one, add a rel=”nofollow” attribute to all ancjor tags submitted by commenters, including the login website, so they make no difference to Steve’s website’s search result ranking.

          • Haven’t a care about traffic to my website on this blog. NOT AT ALL. All I care about is eradicating the skeptoid misinformation and false accusations like name calling I’m accused of which is totally unprofessional and I would never do against a specific person at …What I am trying to achieve is a level of scientific edification to help clear away those you clearly besmirch that work tirelessly to combat the wrong -headed physics taught here…. I am clearly seeing a diminished response to what I have presented , which indicates maybe I’m getting somewhere ?
            I will now only sign my name as Steve K… does that make you happier ? :-)

          • Eric Hall says:

            I’m not sure what you mean by “wrong-headed” physics. Again – E&M is one of the best understood areas of physics. Even those relationships which are derived experimentally are known to a very high degree of accuracy. In fact, it is this knowledge that makes it possible for the technology we are using to write these comments. While you have pointed us to some legitimate science – none of it has to do with grounding, but with the electrical systems of the body. Yes, our body uses electricity for many functions – that alone doesn’t provide any proof for the need to “ground.” Grounding advocates can’t even agree on how it works or how it should be administered (as point out by Skeptoid Steve).

            Given the lack of evidence and lack of plausibility, my conclusion is safe. Now, if you set up a trial as I have stated previously and there is an actual measurable effect, it would be interesting to find out the cause – because it isn’t what you are saying it is (that’s what physics tells us), but knowing he cause could lead to better treatments. I do not have high hopes for the outcome, but a proper study would be a place to neutralize any bias and look for any possible effect.

          • It would be good for you to acknowledge the false accusations against me of name calling and editing comments and other non-scientific nonsense before we proceed with addressing the science and physics which will be fully addressed therefrom .. There tends to be a sprinkling of anecdotal editing all along this discussion by Skeptoid, So, back up and address that issue(s) immediately please to maintain order and professionalism.
            Thank you.

          • Eric Hall says:

            I have not edited any of your comments. I deleted three of them where you either insinuated a lack of intelligence (educated idiots were your words) or used over the top hyperbole (extremely dangerous is what you called my post). Otherwise your comments were posted as is.

            I do find your stance concerning – both to people’s wallets as well as the claims made by the few “experts” in grounding – because as with many other treatments that follow this path – people end up getting harmed because they do not seek proper treatment and instead think this type of treatment will magically cure them. In the proper context, I don’t see a great potential for immediate harm in grounding, but certainly I don’t see any benefit and a small but real possible long-term concern. But if you notice, I again keep it in the proper context.

            As my fellow bloggers have pointed out (the other “nonsense” I am assuming to which you are referring) – your pattern follows that of nearly any other treatment of this type. It is unproven (because the FDA is holding you down), it is unknown (what “they” don’t want you to know), it cures all “modern” illnesses (as Dr. Sinatra says, heart disease, cancer, etc…), demonstrations which do not properly explain the science (look, something changed and trust me it is because of this product), misuse of existing science (look, this has some similarity, even though it doesn’t actually prove treatment X works, it must because they are related), and small, uncontrolled studies as proof (look, this worked even though we didn’t control for other possible factors which influenced the outcome).

            My point here is – there isn’t any scientific evidence for grounding to work. It also has limited plausibility. If you’ve got money to burn – go ahead and do it – but not until you’ve discussed it with your family doctor to rule out any conditions for which one would want an actual, proven treatment. I for one would rather stay “grounded” in reality (YAY PUN!!).

          • Eric ~You are laying down damaging falsehoods virtually every time you reply.
            First, you claim I called you or one of your bloggers an “idiot” , now you say it is “educated idiots” , plural……I would like you to repost what I said exactly so everyone can see how misleading your statements are . Why is this important ? Because there is a continued pattern of misinformation and “twist” which is causing serious damage to people and even my reputation.
            Also :
            * You state that I refer to a Nobel Prize Winner Albert Szent Gyorgi who studied human electrical systems of “long ago” and has nothing to do with Earthing. Well, it HAS EVERYTHING to do with Earthing. Don’t “twist” your personal interpretation to quash the truth of this healing modality.
            * You find my stance concerning . Really ? I find YOUR STANCE concerning ;since you continue to reiterate that Earthing is hurting people’s wallets and getting harmed because they do not seek proper treatment. First , Eric, Earthing is FREE . Go barefoot or connect to the earth in infinite creative ways. If one wants to buy a comfortable resource to do such it so be it. Costs range from less than $30 bucks to whatever .. And a majority of the people that do this are trying it BECAUSE the “proper treatments” as you called them have FAILED them. For the love of God , these statements you are making about Earthing and Grounding are misleading and defamatory and disrespectful and you proclaim it with an authority as if you are an M.D. or a scientist engaged in the research , and you are NEITHER.
            * Last but not least, you state proudly : ” There isn’t any scientifici evidence for grounding to work”.
            THIS is the WORST possible statement of all.
            There have been now almost 30 years of scientific scientific research on Earthing. With double -blind , clinical trials , and placebo and blah , blah blah… What I’m going to do is start to send you ONE STUDY AT A TIME , so I can critique your critique, this is the ONLY way we can proceed to follow and examine carefully how your Skeptoid team manipulates both the public and the truth on “scientific evidence” of Earthing.
            I am extremely busy as I’m sure you are, and will continue to drag this out to the benefit of those who are still not fully nauseated by this discourse.
            I for one, as a filmmaker ( and I’ve been fully continuing to document your blog) am not going to allow you and your Skeptoid buddies to lambast and damage this science without presenting the truth along with your distortions ; whether it is here at this site, or elsewhere .

          • Eric Hall says:

            Does the term “educated” change the fact your deleted comment referred to us “Skeptoidians” as idiots? You won’t let me correct the many errors in Ober’s video and say he simply misspoke or simplified the concept – but then want to try to say the “educated” detail somehow changes what you did? This is my post – I gave you fair warning – and have been very open that I deleted 3 posts that didn’t add to the discussion or contain anything of value – they were also insulting. It happens – as people we are emotional – I chose to delete them for the benefit of everyone.

            I would love it if you would send the studies. I believe that is what we (“Skeptoidians”) have been looking for since you started commenting.

            Tell me – how does studying the electrical currents through the heart prove grounding works? Is that like studying a light bulb and saying that’s how a computer works? Just because they have electricity in common doesn’t make one proof of the other.

            I want people to understand the science – it is why I do what I do in the first place. One basic premise is correlation does not equal causation. If I walk barefoot, do I feel better because of electrons going into my body (which is not what is happening) or is it because I am relaxing and walking outside and thinking about feeling better?

            You claim there is 30 years of research – WHERE? Is it science? If so, I should be able to find it in a scientific journal – and one with a good peer review process.

            As an aside – you continue this false dichotomy as if there is only “mainstream” and “alternative” medicine and that somehow me discussing how the science as described is bad is somehow an endorsement of everything “mainstream.” There are problems that arise in the processes of science-based medicine as well. However, the beauty of SBM is that it is self-correcting.

          • Put the comment that you deleted stating that you are an “idiot” that I allegedly posted. .. along with what was REALLY contained in the messages …. I want everyone to see it exactly as it appeared. Please do it. You twist the words around just like earlier stating that Dr.Sinatra declared earthing was a “cure for cancer”. . DO.IT . We will move this snail-paced from now on, because that is all the faster this process seems to work. I want the truth to be shown. Additionally, you’ve already been shown the science of Earthing ( I’ll point to more studies) , but this far, you then turn around and denounce it as unscientific. Of course you would. But now, I am going to dissect your offerings as if they are a frozen lab frog, because there is way to much slop being painted over what I and others state.
            Notice no one participates on this commentary any longer except you and me. Everyone has left the party long ago for obvious reasons.
            Thank you.

          • Crystal says:

            Steve K, I didn’t mean to separate those two links… the first link is regarding EMF exposre. Both links are for Question #2. The first question needs no link. :)

            Kind Thanks

          • Eric Hall says:

            I’ve been shown conjecture and anecdote on how a few people think earthing works. None have followed valid scientific processes, or they are simply commentary – which is fine for forming a hypothesis, but it isn’t proof of a hypothesis. Otherwise, it is a circular argument of faith (it’s true because it’s true)

            Please – provide the studies. I really do want to see them.

          • Crystal says:

            Ugh, yes, I’m still reading these drawn out comments in my inbox.

            Steve K is right, this is lost it’s momentum long a go.

            I just want to add;

            1) I read where Steve K said “educated idiots” and it was directed to the group discussion, including himself, to express that the arguing was making you all look bad. Another person in the group used the term “mental masturbation” which is no different. What Steve said was completely harmless and was actually a humorous way of stating the sad truth of what this discussion is becoming. Especially with the addition of the “other Steve” who is overly aggressive and called Steve K “racist”. That was disgusting, bizarre. His comment was the most offensive yet. Was it erased?

            2) Eric, you keep saying that grounding proponents say it cures cancer. You just said that again in your last post. There is not a claim anywhere that allows you to continue stating this. A cure happens AFTER a person has already has the disease. If a proponent of grounding says they would HOPE that grounding may “stave off” certain cancers (preemtive), then there is no fallacy in this. The Dr. Mercola quote you used in your earlier argument stated…. “…I’m THINKING certain cancers…” He was expressing possible hope but not stating a fact. If you don’t like that they HOPE it can prevent certain cancers, that’s fair to say in the correct context…but please discontinue using this CURE claim if you want to be taken more seriously in this debate.

            3) I thought Eric’s last post was pretty fair. Steve K, you should avoid continually calling him totally unreasonable. Eric says that the way proponents describe the process of how grounding works is not entirely accurate… there is truth to this statement….but he’s NOT saying with a certainty that there is no benefit to it. He just states that it would be nice to see more respected studies showing exactly what the benefits are so the proper way to use an earthing mat can be determined. There is a difference between earthing naturally and using a mat. I believe Erics’ concern is focused on the mats. There are highly respected supporters of CAM who do not agree with using earthing mats, like Dr. Gonzales known for his cancer treatment. He advised Dr. Mercola against them…. So it is not just scientists who are leery about casual use of earthing mats because there are too many unknown, unforeseeable variables that can actually do more harm than good.

            4) I have confronted Eric a lot in this forum. Steve K, I have two questions for you. Please answer these two questions clearly and stay on point.

            First Question:
            It is apparent to me that inflammation is reduced and there is blood decoupling after one uses an earthing mat. So question #1) If a person has a specific type of cancer, possibly unaware of it, wouldn’t it be unwise for them to use an earthing mat since decoupling the blood could actually feed the cancer?


            Second Question:
            Several studies I have looked at show that using an earthing mat, under certain circumstances/environments, can actually expose a person to even more EMF’s (making it worse)…Do you think Dr. Gonzales and his associate, world renowned EMF’s specialist David Stetzer are both wrong?

   (listen to interview at 3min 10sec)

            I look forward to your simple pointed answers.

            4) Finally, so far in my research and in this forum, I have noticed that earthing is not separated into two types as it should be… A) Natural/barefoot. B) Earthing Mats. There is a difference when it comes to the concerns of health & safety argued in this forum. Also, in real scientific debate both parties should acknowledge that there is usually truth found on BOTH sides of an argument. I have look at the studies, the thermographic readings, the blood samples…something good can come from earthing mats. HOWEVER, there are too many variables like cancer, ones location/environment that make it a big guessing game as to safety. Eric’s concern is legitimate as long as he stops being too bias an using over exaggeration. Steve K also is correct that the current studies cannot be ignored. No one will ever be satisfied by the methods used…like, the temperature of the room, the comfort of the chair, male or female subjects, lighting…blah blah blah. It’s easy to pick apart any study.

            Please guys, let’s get on with discussing the common ground you have. It is there. Stay on topic and keep it as simple as possible. This is the only way to get to the point and to show no real bias. This is getting real tired and most people will just make up their own minds anyway when this forum becomes a confusing mess. Deleting harmless comments creates missing links….confusing new visitors. Isn’t helping people the point of this forum?

          • To all of us that are left at this table :
            You’ve been provided with studies already ; and all trashed by , okay, I won’t bother with any of those then. Let’s start with the below and then we”ll work from this ! :-)
            Here are several double -blind / placebo studies all wrapped into one :
            Journal of Alternative Medicine : Volume 17, Number 4 , 2011
            pp. 301-308
            Copyright Mary Ann Liebett , Inc…….DOI: 10.1089/ ACM 2010-0687
            ***********Let us please move forward with this , out of POLAND .
            Steve K

          • Crystal says:

            I am left at this table… I had two questions above for you Steve.

            I am the least bias person left at this table so please don’t overlook me. :)

            I look forward to your reply.

            Kind Thanks,

          • Eric Hall says:

            None of the studies were well controlled. For example, the second experiment says “all subjects managed to maintain a similar diet.” However, the diet was not controlled by the experimenter. There are many nutritional studies which show how bad we are at estimating how much and what we eat. I find it difficult to rely on self-reporting for that important piece of info when measuring for things that can be affected by food intake.

            I will take a closer look in a few days at some of the other data.

            As a general comment however, a study with these multiple scenarios all in one study tend not to be valuable. There seems to be no clear hypothesis, so it is really exploratory in nature and not one which would provide proof – only perhaps a basis for a hypothesis. I also will again note this is a journal where the peer review process is poor and is not considered reliable by most of the medical community. Now don’t take that as being dismissive – it is simply a piece of the puzzle in weighing the strength of the evidence. If a study was stronger, it would likely be in a more widely accepted journal. Being in the The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine says it isn’t a strong study.

          • Crystal says:

            Are my questions above not scientific enough? I hope I get a reply from Steve K to my two simple questions, unless he has answered them already in the tangled mess of conversations above.

            I’m not even questioning if earthing is scientific or legitimate.

            I’m completely non-bias…perhaps that makes me insignificant??

            Feeling invisible here :(

          • Hi, Crystal ~! Sorry , I just complemented your input and now read your new comment ! I have avoided up til now mentioning your name or such to avoid dragging you into this dark and ugly mess ………I LOVE your input ! But , can you remind me of what two questions you have for me in this “tangled mess” of back and forth that I totally agree is a major MESS !!

          • Crystal says:

            Yay! Thank you Steve :)

            Thank you for wanting to shield me from the chaos…it is messy in here and I am certainly not as well spoken when it comes to scientific terms as you all.

            I wanted input from both the biologists and someone who has worked with people “in the flesh” since I believe this holds much weight compared to journals and confusing data.

            I want to clarify that Eric has been very gracious to converse with me even when we have disagreed.

            I was also pretty excited when you and Eric got “oh so close” to a possible “merger” but I understand it’s much more complicated than that simple of a resolution. So, on we go…in what I’ve been labeling the pursuit of truth.

            My questions are two or three comments above….

            First Question:
            It is apparent to me that inflammation is reduced and there is blood decoupling after one uses an earthing mat. So question #1) If a person has a specific type of cancer, possibly unaware of it, wouldn’t it be unwise for them to use an earthing mat since decoupling the blood could actually feed the cancer?


            Second Question:
            Several studies I have looked at show that using an earthing mat, under certain circumstances/environments, can actually expose a person to even more EMF’s (making it worse)…Do you think Dr. Gonzales and his associate, world renowned EMF’s specialist David Stetzer are both wrong?

   (listen to interview at 3min 10sec)

            I look forward to your simple pointed answers.

            Kind thanks for acknowledging me :)

          • Crystal says:

            Eric you go back and forth between saying “I’m not saying there may not be some kind of benefit, but let’s prove it” to… “”they all believe in this stuff” so I’m confused as to whether you believe the inflammation & blood decoupling is a total sham. If you have cancer concerns then you MUST believe that the blood zeta is improved.

            When you acknowledge that something IS clearly happening, but ask “exactly what is causing it?” Then that is a more reasonable approach when it comes to science. I thought you you’re interest in “why is this effect happening?” and “can it be duplicated consistently?” made more scientific sense. Also, the cancer concern is legitimate too.

            Can you get to the bottom of those concerns without dismissing earthing quite yet? When you refer to the current findings as “stuff” then you already show bias and also demean the opposer.

            Did you erase Stephen P’s racist comment but he way? That guy really stirs the pot in here and makes a big mess. I like to read the discussions you and Steve K have though.

            I hope it stays on point!

          • Eric Hall says:

            I am trying to show there is a disconnect in the information from these “experts.” If grounding is the cause of this blood decoupling, it would seem to me that would be harmful to a cancer patient. But if grounding can prevent cancer – how does it do so? What if one has an undetectable or undiagnosed cancer? Would it prevent its spread or increase the speed of the spread?

            Observation is one of the first steps in doing science. I will assume that the improved feelings and this blood decoupling is true only to then move to the next step which is the formation of the hypothesis. The hypothesis proposed by the grounding proponents doesn’t make sense for even the basics of physics, so I am very skeptical. The hypothesis is also vague and broad – and also varies depending on the expert asked.

            We need more data (a larger data set) to first determine if there is even truly an effect. If grounding is cheap and easy, let’s get a large group doing it and check out this blood data. Now, if there is an effect, then let’s form a hypothesis and test it on a large group. Let’s do it in a controlled setting. Then let’s repeat the test independently. Then we are doing science.

          • Eric Hall says:

            I have been involved in the scientific skepticism community for a few years now. What I can tell you Crystal is that when you start to read about all of the miracles of medicine that have come and gone over the last few decades – they all have a similar pattern. I have no doubt Steve believes in this stuff, and the people pushing earthing are very convincing. In fact, the people pushing earthing might even believe it themselves – but it clouds their judgment of the science. They ignore the contradicting info, design studies which will show positive outcomes, vague or broad hypotheses – it all fits the pattern.

            I really feel the proponents are reckless in their attitude towards using grounding. Without a good, specific hypothesis there is a potential for harm. I brought up the cancer idea earlier – and I never got a good, definitive answer (IMO). What about houses with older wiring? There is not a zero risk here and I think it is being largely ignored.

          • Your comments are as predictable as the likelihood of rain if one sees lightning in the sky… Of course you are going to dismiss these ones too ! These were THREE independent studies. However, forget the studies for just a second. Because the other day, BEFORE you received any of them , you also stated “STUDIES” aren’t necessarily important either ! And as for the format of the Journal of Alternative and Complementary medicine ? Why some of these studies ARE reviewed in conventional; but like I wrote the other day , Morris Fishbien , onetime editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association, had the tobacco companies like Philip Morris being the main contributors of that journal . Why ? Because if they didn’t contribute, he’d expose the studies which pointed to the dangers of tobacco. For DECADES. What am I trying to say ? Has anything changed ? Of course not ! In fact, it’s WORSE. So , who the heck is going to print stuff about Earthing that basically shows that you don’t need billions of dollars worth of drugs to be well and stay well ! But this opens a whole new kettle of fish , Mr. Eric H.
            Where is Stephen P. now that there are some studies which he was certain didn’t exist ?( I’ve got many more , but will await your final critique )….
            I’m very appreciative of Crystal’s viewpoints. We both ought to listen to her.

          • Eric Hall says:

            Could you please clarify your comment? Are you stating that Earthing can replace all medications now?

          • Crystal says:

            Grief! Spell check is ruining me!

            Sorry my words are jumbled. I hope they make sense in the replies above.

          • Eric Hall says:

            In the case of tobacco – a couple of points:

            The null hypothesis is the one that is accepted until enough evidence exists to move away from that. In the case of tobacco, it would be it does nothing. In the case of grounding, it would be it does nothing. From there, we then form specific, clear, concise hypotheses to test, test them repeatedly, until we have enough data to either accept our hypothesis or stay at the null.

            Yes, all humans have bias. Politics and human emotions can interfere with that. But without the peer review process, those human qualities only interfere more, not less. The Lancet published Wakefield’s study too – it was quickly refuted, but took over a decade to get the Lancet to retract it. The process of science can be messy – but it is still the best thing we have.

  44. Eric Hall says:

    Steve –

    i deleted another comment. I will not have you make claims about my lack of knowledge of physics or science. You haven’t met me – and have no idea about my education, my experience, or who I am. I never once questioned your abilities in your field of filmmaking, I have kept it to this topic – that the “layman science” as you put it is not science – at least not complete science. Observation is only the first step in science. One must do the remaining steps before it becomes evidence. As scientists, we make mistakes and accept when that is so. We discuss. We disagree. We don’t question another’s intelligence for doing so. When you do so – it degrades the process of science and of discussion. If it continues, I will chose to end the conversation on this. As Crystal points out – it could lead to a better hypothesis to be tested, but you seem unwilling to listen to that possibility. You say Ober has lots of studies going on – where? How? What’s the hypothesis being tested? What methods are being used? When are they expected to be published? Are they independent?

    • Well, of course you will delete where you feel it starts to jeopardize your position and you can make up any misleading story. That way , you have a safe playing field . This proves there is no winning this “game” here. This commentary only “appears” to strive for answers. And you’ve just proven it .
      Thank You
      Steve Kroschel

    • Crystal says:

      Wait, what? Another deleted comment?

      Can you just leave harmless comments intact and address the incorrect statements in your reply for all to read? A stern correction would set the matter straight more effectively.

      How does Stephen P get to call out “racist” and have his comment still intact? How does accusing Steve K of having a connection with product distributors get glanced over? C’mon let’s play fair game here.

      I do agree with Eric that more discussion and testing is needed when it comes to inflammation, cancer and blood. It’s truly the bullet point of this whole argument in my opinion….but I also think the process of “science” is long delayed as well. If scientist are unwilling to study a forbidden CAM subject, then turn around and say….”we’ll believe it when it’s in our approved journals”…then it will never get done and it will continue to give them reason to refute the existing research.

      Eric, I don’t doubt your knowledge. It’s very impressive. I appreciate science and it’s needed…but there is politics involved too. You do not represent the areas that are wrong with scientific method. So why not use your ability to get to the bottom of what is causing the decoupling, the relief of inflammation if there is not one study you can find that refutes these results?

      I’m interested in seeing more studies and hearing Steve’s reply to my two questions. Please don’t delete the ones containing his answers.

  45. Eric Hall says:

    Steve – I will quote most of your comment here (leaving out the inflammatory part) and briefly respond:

    Steve says: “As for me, personally, I made a film ( that’s my job) about Earthing, and I was skeptical ; and I did tests and studies that the average layman would find pretty darn convincing. I did NOT want to believe this .. But I spent almost two years in tests. Of course , that’s in a movie, and it’s free, and your own Brian Dunning is in it but you won’t watch it because it’s “a movie”. There’s YOUR bias.. And then YOUR conjecture :” I have no doubt Steve believes in this stuff”, but , Mr. Hall , “Steve” also is ready to show it’s flaws and denounce its basic science and merits, but I can’t find where it is wrong.

    A film does not work as published science. There is no statistical analysis, no in-line citations, no raw data (I am assuming you did some editing of the film). A film is a piece of art. And although there is much art and science can gain from one another, the processes are different. It isn’t personal, it is simply a fact that a film does not constitute science. There are documentaries on 9/11 being an inside job, that the moon landing is fake, etc. It doesn’t make it true, even if it is convincing. I don’t doubt your experiences, but that is far different from being scientific data. The best a film like yours can do is serve as an observation to form the question/hypothesis – but that is an early step in the process.

    Steve says: “All I see and hear constantly is people around the world in the millions that hold this as an amazing example of our fragile planet’s ability to sustain and give a vibrancy to our lives that isn’t toxic, doesn’t cost anything, is beyond politics and religion, and has stood the test of time for thousands of years.This is nothing new ; and nobody is “pushing” earthing in the sense that you want us to be seen as . |You see, you and collegues, are coming across as an expert in medicine , in physics and have the answers to everything from UFO’s to Sacred Geometry to the Bermuda Triangle and Bigfoot. That alone , raises MY skeptical eye. Nobody “knows” everything.”

    This is flawed reasoning. You are saying because science doesn’t have every answer at this moment, then anything is possible. Does that mean it is possible there is a second moon orbiting the Earth? Sure, anything is possible, it just falls on a scale of likelihood given our knowledge of science. It is very unlikely there is another moon because we would experience its gravitational effects, and very likely would be able to see it. So can I ever say, for sure, that earthing doesn’t work? No. But the science tells me it is not likely. Now it is not as unlikely as the second moon scenario – but still unlikely.

    Steve says: “No one is IGNORING the contradicting info. , so, Eric, STOP right there. STOP. WHAT CONTRADICTING INFO? What is vague or broad ? What fits a “pattern” ? HOW are proponents reckless ? For example, Clint Ober himself has spent millions, MILLIONS, of his own money igniting independent studies with no end in sight. There are dozens of new studies all over the world right now on Earthing. Do you know that?”

    That’s fine. I’ll wait for the science. I have asked questions about the studies – such as what hypotheses are they testing, where are the studies taking place, what parameters are they using, etc. But if you don’t know, that’s fine! But a current study without any context doesn’t serve as proof either. Hundreds of studies on various medical treatments are happening all the time – very few of them actually turn out to be useful.

    From there you went on to tell me I don’t know about physics. I think if I said you know nothing about the film making process, I think you would feel similarly insulted. Do I know everything about physics well? No – it is an extensive field that touches on every other science. Am I aware of a large majority of physics? I had a pretty extensive education on a wide variety of topics. I do know the basics pretty well. I won’t have people making claims who do not know my background or experience make claims about my education. I do make mistakes, whether it is misreading something, misunderstanding a topic with which I am not familiar, make math errors, make logical errors, etc. However, I haven’t found any mistakes in my interpretation of the science here.

    If you read my original post again – I am simply saying that Ober, Mercola, et. al. are making claims that are not supported by science. They have a set of observations that are interesting, but they have not yet formed a good hypothesis or tested this in a robust way that would point to grounding as the cause for any effects they are seeing (trusting they are accurately reporting the effects, which for now I will assume are not fabricated). I also think Ober is either misunderstanding or misreporting the physics in the video, I don’t know which. That’s where I come in – I know their hypothesis for what is causing the effect (the electrons explanation) is not correct. Could it be something else? I can’t think of anything plausible. It doesn’t eliminate the possibility, just greatly reduces its likelihood.

    So – if they are so confident in this effect AND in the fact grounding is causing it, they should be able to form specific hypotheses which can then be tested with good controls and good blinding with large numbers over longer periods and see if there is indeed an effect. So far, that science is not out there (in a finished form) so we cannot conclude grounding works – so it for now remains a hypothesis only.

    • I’ve read the above, and notice the streaming of outright lies and continued twist of the truth yet again. It’s not worth the time to even divulge a response here anymore.
      Eric Hall, like his colleagues, has a need ; and his need is to be right on his self-created bully pulpit. God Bless him … If I see this comment posted and left intact completely, he will have won a fraction of a brownie point with me .
      And I need to answer Crystal, with her questions, and I will politely ask that Crystal google my name, find my website, contact me, and I will answer her personally there. I have much to say about Dr. Gonzales , ( who will likely appear in the upcoming sequel) blood thinning, Earthing and cancer , etc…..
      Thank you ~ Steve Kroschel /Kroschel Films

  46. Eric Hall ~ I’m investing one more reply to you .. And as I essentially stated above, responding to you or your colleagues is not worth it … So one last time for not your sake, but for Crystal’s mainly…You ask : “What lies Steve ?’ Just on your above comments alone :
    1. Inflammatory remarks against you personally : Lie
    2.I am viewing the movie as published science. : Ridiculous lie and misleading. The movie provides sources to the science.
    3.You state that there is no science behind Earthing : Not only a total lie, but defamatory, and misleading to the general public, and an obvious insult and is a reflection of your personal perceptions of the concept of physics and own bias for whatever reasons.
    4. That I have stated you “don’t know about physics” : Lie. Out of context . Excuse to delete effective responses to a stream of half-truths issued by you and yours.
    5. You repeat by name that Dr.Mercola, Clint Ober and others are “making claims that are not supported by science”. Huge Lie crossed with brazen bias . Inflammatory, defamatory ;and by the Skeptoid website’s very design , it suggests a false and inflated mindset of Skeptoid’s short list of colleague’s collective knowledge. Extremely damaging to the public at large in many cases in my opinion.
    6. Your final statement : “So far, the science is not out there…” ..Huge lie and misleading and twisted.
    ** Now , this is for Crystal and like-minded individuals about their concerns about blood thinning due to Earthing and is relation to cancer :
    * The slipperiness of the blood cells, the “zeta potential” that keeps them separate and moving easily through capillaries is, in fact, a preventative for cancer in the long run. Otto Warburg( Nobel Laureate) knew that tissue deprived of oxygen develops into cancer way back in 1924.
    When the blood cells are clumped together into rouleaux, they cannot be forced through the capillaries, thus starving the cells in the furthest reaches of the capillary system of oxygen. This sets up a condition that is pre-cancerous at best, carcinogenic at worst. Earthing prevents clumping, promotes oxygenation, tends to prevent deterioration. And for many people, that means no more medication in many instances. Which consequently will have implications for a business that is worth hundreds of billions per year.
    * 85% of all medical procedures in daily use in the US have NEVER been tested for safety or effectiveness . And some practices and substances that have NEVER been tested to any real “scientific level” of proof of safety or effectiveness include :
    Mercury Fillings for teeth ( I’ve personally filmed the mercury vapor de-gassing off teeth and drifting to the floor)
    Vaccines given to infants
    Genetically Modified Foods
    Antipsychotic drugs for children
    Statin drugs ( anti -cholesterol)
    Massive programs are approved by the FDA , mandated by the government , administered to tens of millions of recipients, sometimes against their will or knowledge, that have never been subjected to any “scientific ” examination that Skeptoidians hold so dear. The number of articles published in the established , peer -reviewed medical journals that are WITHDRAWN annually has SKYROCKETED. The articles have been found to have been fraudulently prepared, that reviewers have massive conflicts of interest, etc. Vioxx anyone ? Not anymore . Tens of thousands dead because of it .
    But going barefoot ? ………..
    I’ll leave it there .. it’s just too much. Go barefoot, try Earthing, believe Skeptoid and don’t try it or whatever… We all are able to make our own decisions based on our own research and go from there…. Don’t take my word for it , or Skeptoid’s… I did my own research for almost two years, made a film, and am doing a sequel and utilizing the thought process of Skeptoidians in a sequence which will give them even MORE visibility yet again. Ironically. But , in the end, we all must seek the truth on our own.
    Thank you !
    Steve Kroschel

    • Eric Hall says:

      You said I don’t know physics, and insinuated it here. That is inflammatory. I gave you an analogy. It is insulting and inflammatory.

      As I said – we are going to disagree here. I think I, as a scientist, might have an edge here in stating what constitutes properly published science. Unless you specifically cite every paper during the movie when a statement derived from such a paper is made, it is not a citation. So not a lie – this is how proper science is done – in publications, in writing, with peer review.

      Every paper you have cited as the “science” of earthing are preliminary, exploratory, and not well controlled. They do not answer any specific hypothesis. This means the process of science on earthing is not yet complete. Not a lie – a definition.

      Here is your quote from the deleted comment: “you know hardly NOTHING about the breadth and scope of physics.” Did I lie? no.

      I have shown how many of the claims made by Ober and Mercola in the video don’t match up with basic physics. I can cite any number of intro physics textbooks as my citation. The electron explanation is an important one – because they do get the physics mostly right in explaining drift velocity, then ignore that in saying we uptake electrons and that somehow makes us neutral. It doesn’t match up. So unless they’ve either discovered something about drift velocity that has changed, or they are only offering a hypothesis it is electrons – that is a long way from proof or evidence (science).

      The science is not out there. Maybe it is in process, but complete science is not. Go ahead. Show me a study like one I have outlined on several occasions –

      As far as your generic oxygen claim – that is not the whole story. There are over 200 kinds of cancer, and they all react differently to oxygen. Those that start in low oxygen environments are thought to adapt to those environments and can be slowed with exposure to oxygen. However, those that are well oxygenated can be accelerated by oxygen. So it’s a mixed bag. There are some interesting papers about this and actually differentiating tumors by their oxygen content in order to customize therapy depending on the environment in which the cancer has adapted. To think there is one simple explanation to cancer is a gross over-simplification.

      Here’s a list of vaccine safety studies in infants and children :

      Here’s a list of resources which link to studies showing the safety of Dental Amalgam

      Fellow blogger Josh DeWald has more info than you could read in a week on the safety of Aspartame:

      You bring in one specific example which does reveal a shortcoming of the drug approval process. It doesn’t negate the scientific process – it in fact shows its power. The weakness is in the politics – the FDA didn’t react fast enough because it is underfunded and understaffed. However, your Vioxx statistics are overstated:

      Also see commentary of what we learn from these type of incidents – science is self-correcting and always improving – another of its beautiful features:

      Go walk on the grass on a warm day – I agree – the relaxation is good for all of us. I just don’t agree it is good for the reasons you are claiming – because it doesn’t have a good scientific basis.

  47. p.s. for Crystal ~
    * The term “blood de-coupling” is apparently a Skeptoidian invention. I’ve never heard of it before . It does not exist in the literature.. Earthing causes the blood to become thinner.
    * David Stetzer’s filters actually increase the noise in the electrical power they are supposed to decrease ( electromagnetic pollution).. A Canadian lab verified this.
    EMFs increase outside the body and around a person when grounded, precisely because the EMFs are better reflected from the body surface and are better eliminated from inside the body. This is called shielding. A shielded room “shields” better when grounded as well…..

  48. Crystal says:

    I wish the answers that were directed at me were not intertwined with yours and Eric’s bantering. My questions did not get answered. :(

    I’m aware of the good health effects that decoupled blood has on the body, inflammation and to hopefully stave off certain cancers….my question was specifically:

    1) If a person HAS cancer, possibly unknowingly (which is most common in it’s early stages) do you think it would be unwise for them to use an earthing mat?

    2) Did you listen to the interview Dr. Gonzales & Dr. Mercola had, that I linked? It was only 2-5min worth of discussion regarding earthing mats & EMF’s. Do you disagree with Dr. Gonzales?

    This is not a trap. I’m completely neutral here. I would like to get your honest opinion please.

    • Crystal ~ Sorry for intertwining my answers with Eric. .. But I’m growing tired of wasting my time on this site when all of us could be doing more productive things elsewhere with our time. To answer your questions:
      1. No, it is unwise to NOT be Earthing if a person HAS cancer ; in fact the Gerson Therapy now uses Earthing as an adjunctive to the therapy.
      2. No, I did not listen to the interview between Dr. Gonzales and Dr.Mercola. However, I am very much aware that Dr. Gonzales has NOT had success with using Earthing either for himself or for some of his patients ; and that is an aspect which I will get into in the sequel because there is something that is not correct here that makes no sense but we hope to find an explanation.

      • Crystal says:

        Amen to that….I came back into this thread like a moth to a flame. But I am grateful for this website and other resources I’ve used. I think even with all of the disagreements, it is a valuable tool to have a hub for each of the parties to have it out.

        I have not agreed with Eric several times in this forum and I’m not sure I would agree that using earthing “mats” are good for all types of cancers. Aren’t certain cancers actually fed by decoupled blood? I’m still in research stage on this one. Studies are conflicting…

        I do know that during cancer treatment patients are put on blood thinners to avoid blood clots. So, it seems that earthing mats would just provide the inevitable doctor-prescribed blood thinning treatment. However, the patients on blood thinners are also undergoing treatment at the same time…. where a person using a mat while “unaware” they have cancer, would be getting thinned blood without the proper therapy (including dietary changes, etc).

        There are just so many variables and types of cancer. It appears I have more research to do.

        You really should listen the Dr. Gonzales interview. It’s very informative and he articulates very well why he urges caution with the mats. It should be a pretty important piece to your research in my opinion as he is not bias.

        Thank you for sharing your opinion!

        • Stephen Propatier says:

          I should warn you that the statements made by a filmographer with an obvious financial bias is not the best source for cancer advice. Cancer is a variety of diseases not a disease. Commonly cancer causes hyper-coagulation, or easily clotting blood. A common misconception here is that thin blood is desirable. It is not, Hemophiliacs die and have terrible complications without treatment for failure to clot. People can have life threatening side effects from anti-coagulation. Not because it is a drug but because of the change in your normal body function.
          1. lets assume for the moment that the study he posted is a well controlled randomized study.(it is not. They hand picked volunteers, did not blind them, did not control for medical factors that affect blood coagulation, and did not disclose all data, did not control for the effect of grounding itself. This study says nothing about anything except what these individual’s blood work was for that day, The methods for statistical evaluation show numbers consistent with normal variation for a population that size).
          2.Consider this. If you walk around barefoot and it reduces your blood’s ability to coagulate, barefoot walking would be life threatening, If you tripped and fell you could have a catastrophic intra cranial bleed and stroke.
          What you have is study that tell us nothing about grounding and claims an undesirable outcome.
          This is the “best evidence” for a nonsensical treatment? If you cut through the rhetoric on this page and look at what is really being said here you can see problems and errors in thinking. You are better off getting health advice from your doctor. Medical treatments are not perfect, at least the people who offer them actually understand how the human body works. As opposed to the promoters on this page who obviously do not.

          • Crystal says:

            Hello Stephen,

            Thank you for your warning but I’m not here seeking medical advice. I was asking a Seve K his personal opinion as apart of accumulative research I have been doing on “earthing” proponents themselves.

            My research involves the social aspect of these types of debates, as well as certain topical interests. I would never take anyones advice over the internet.

            I am well aware of blood thinning being prescribed by doctors for patients undergoing chemotherapy and you will notice that I already told Steve K that I was not sure I agreed with him and I am continuing in my research.

            I understand that the confusing mess this forum has become may have prevented you from seeing my previous posts here and identifying my role in this debate…but you will notice I am neither a proponent of earthing, nor a a member of Skeptoidian “team”.

            The term “skeptoidian” was initiated and used by Eric and those who participate regularly on this forum. Regardless if he chose that term as “tongue and cheek” it is used here by yourselves. It is no different than the terms “quack”, “woo”, etc, used by yourself and others on the Skeptiodian team (or in your own blogs I have also read through just as thoroughly) I was pointing out that I am not one of those people, so Steve would be honest is in answer.

            As far as the social aspect of all this debating. I decided not to use an earthing mat on my own but I’m not convinced that they do absolutely nothing. I have come to my own conclusions based on research done elsewhere in very reputable journals….not due to the influence of this forum. The personal attacks (including the accusation of “racism”) the demeaning tone, outright exaggerations show clear bias on both sides.

            This has been an interesting study of the human behavior and the power that personal agenda has over finding even one shred of common ground to start building a proper hypothesis for…. well, anything.

            I just got finished reading on of your threads regarding Manuka Honey… I don’t buy into it myself. I’ve never own a jar of it… so don’t take my words as any indication that I am into “woo”.

            I ended up actually laughing out loud at how quickly the comments became hostile. People using clever user names, throwing out complex words to add legitimacy to their points, insulting each others intelligence constantly. I understand that these extremists do not represent all who respect science…and I repeat science myself…But I also know that not all who use complimentary medicine are unintelligent suckers to B.S. or “woo.

            So that’s who I am. I fall somewhere in the middle. An intelligent person who does a mind numbing amount of research and steers clear from bias tainted opinions.

            In the end, hardly one person will benefit from these forums. It’s very humorous and fascinating though. In the meantime, I may dabble with the occasional forum or two, but I’ll stick to reading journals and official studies.


          • Crystal says:

            PS… This forum is SO disorganized because it posts replies in mid conversations out of order. A frustrating format for such a complex discussion. I’m not rue where this one even will land.

  49. Crystal says:

    …PS: I came to this forum with my research and was the first to throw in the term “decoupling” as it is used in many studies, links I have given to Eric in our discussions. It is not a skeptoidian term, as I assure you I am not a skeptoidian myself.

    • Stephen Propatier says:

      Hi Crystal
      No one could read this post’s 200+ comment section without crossing theirs eyes. I will take your word for it about Eric using Skeptoidian first. I have not seen the word used before this comment section. Also I have not seen it used in any of my post’s comment section. I have not seen other posters utilize it as an identifier. So I naively assumed that SK had co-opted it from another commenter. I do so now issue a correction. That said, it clearly was used a derogatory fashion to the casual reader. Which supports to my original conclusion about its usage in an argument.
      I would also like to point out the the division called complementary medicine is in fact a created nonsense category. There is only medicine. There is treatment based on science(a method of evaluation and learning), treatment that subscribes to ideology(used, despite evidence that it does not work) and treatment that is genuinely too new to call( a very tiny percentage). I find anything that remains “complementary” moniker, for years, is related to its inability to pass muster in scientific evaluation.
      I make no judgments about intelligence in persons who subscribe to any type of pseudoscience. It has nothing to do with how intelligent you are. The human brain has a multitude of inherent failings that make things seem plausible and correct when they are not. People don’t lack intelligence because a magician can fool them. It is the nature of our brain that it can be tricked. Learning that our own mind is unreliable is the key to critical thinking. Not how intelligent you are. High intelligence is in fact a failing since it can make you over confident and susceptible to confirmation bias. Science is the only method that is reliable to prevent fooling ourselves.
      Expression in the comment section can be very impassioned. Following the comments and responding helps sharpen your own critical thinking and sometimes, like your comment, I learn something.
      We both agree that you will learn more from exploring the references in the post rather than the comments section:)

      • Crystal says:

        I agree with much of what you are saying. When I say complimentary medicine, I’m referring to other people who choose to use them. I do not necessarily consider myself that person…although I don’t need a scientist to tell me that the caffeine in a cup of coffee can help a head-ache a little. I don’t call coffee medicine, I call it “complimentary”….. which covers quite an umbrella of subjects, many of which are used by very experienced doctors.

        For example, eating non-chemically sprayed produce vs chemically treated.

        Come on… let’s not insult my intelligence and try to show off silly little ways that just anyone can come up with a study to prove that eating all organic can appear to cause cancer, just because organic sales are on the rise at the same time as certain cancers. I know that studies can be twisted easily…I KNOW. The point is though, those are examples of how facts can be twist…it’s not an argument that eating food sprayed with pesticide and weed killer is just as healthy as eating non-sprayed produce. So to bring these silly study/examples up becomes a diversion from the real point at hand… the difference of chemical free vs chemical treated produce.

        I am not a believer in guru’s, earthing mats, spiritual healing, manuka honey. I will never sit through a Longevity conference, etc. I am a person that believes in the proven benefits of eating healthy & getting plenty of exercise. I eat home made cultured veggies for probiotics too. I have read very strong promising medical studies and have way too many clear personal observations (not capable of being placebo) to mention. But when I’ve mentioned this in these debates I’ve been mistaken for a CAM supporter even though I do not do one other thing considered “CAM”.

        The overly passionate/spiritual styles of gurus are unappealing to be, but on the same coin many “skeptics” over-exaggerate the shortcomings of well known Doctors who promote CAM. I can see right through the bias on both sides.

        On the subject of intelligence… I completely agree with you that what one believes in, does not reflect ones intelligence. It’s just too bad that the contributors to these types of forums don’t seem to agree with you…because they constantly insult the intelligence of each others.

        Now, about this word “Skeptoid”….Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this entire forum called Skeptoid? I’m very confused as to how you are unaware of it’s origin. A person in your Monuka Honey blog referred to this “Skeptoid” forum. It’s a word Eric used to name this forum.

        To say that the word was made up to attack and “poison the well” sounds a bit “us against them” to me …. It’s simply Eric’s name for this forum.

        • Eric Hall says:

          Steve K did start using the term “Skeptoidian” when other bloggers started commenting because, I believe, he felt defensive because others were stating what I have been saying.

          That aside – Steve K’s problem is he either doesn’t understand or doesn’t trust the scientific process. If a legitimate study shows grounding works, I will retract this blog, write one about the study, and even appear in a Steve K film.

          • Crystal says:

            Well, on top of the fact that this forum is called Skeptoid, of course, and originated here. Steve K saying “skeptoidians” was not a far fetched attempt at identifying a particular group. It’s as demeaning as calling someone who believes in the Trinity, a Trinitarian (which isn’t even a word that exists in the Bible) and I’ve never met a Catholic who was offended by being called that.

            Anyway, it’s such a pointless topic to debate.

            I don’t know Steve K. He is clearly very passionate about the subject and I believe terms like “quack” and “religion” understandably upset people like him. There is an “us-against-them” attitude on both sides for a reason.

            I also understand that you hold scientific process as the ultimate authority. I am not as passionate as Steve K but I can tell you that I’m perceptive enough to know that science is not void of bias and politics. I believe in modern medicine (real medicine) but I also know when Big Pharm has much to gain by pushing unnecessary prescriptions. I’m a skeptic about everything. We’re all strung up like marionettes to a certain degree.

            You did say you were willing to look at the studies repeatedly Eric. I think that was very reasonable. It appears that Steve K’s studies did not meet your criteria, and I understand that you wanted to see one that was done by the scientific community. My opinion is, even if you’re correct in stating that earthing proponents are wrong in their description of electrons… which is very legitimate… the scientific community should recognize that the blood decoupling and inflammation gives enough reason to do a study that could help form the proper hypothesis. Perhaps earthing would still be found useless for some, but helpful for others in specific situations. Eh, whatever.

            Until then…debating it here is like punching at the wind…. even if I really do appreciate the effort you put into making it available. :)

  50. Stephen Propatier says:

    Skeptoidian is not a word at all it is a ad-hominium attack and a attempt to “poison the well” about an argument. It is a defense that someone uses to distract from the weakness of their arguments. I would not call a grounding proponent a “Grounder”. It is an example of attacking the source when you cannot defeat the argument. A common tactic used by people for whom their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.
    “You shouldn’t listen her she just a left wing liberal or He’s just a right wing wacko”. Common ploys that denote a problem with either the argument or the advocate.

    • Crystal says:

      Stephen, see my replies above. The disorganization of this forum! :)

      • Crystal says:

        Stephen, I should also say that I don’t mean to sound combative. I’m just winding down from the aggressiveness on this forum. It’s all I can do to not put my “dukes up” with all of the sucker punches going on in here.

        You ended your last reply in a reasonable manner and definitely on a common ground for us both.

        Kind Thanks

  51. Carlos Leite says:

    If big Pharma could profit from earthing there would be tons of studies done…. Tons!!! So many you would not have time read them all… So I don’t think you will ever see a flood af any studies for you to judge. You will see a lot of the people promoting it trying to be discredited, disgraced by big Corporations.
    Sugar X Fat…. Fat won… the detractors of sugar were put to shame, their book out of print, who would want to read pseudo science? Big pharma has tons of sudies put out everyday and their products are killing us… Longer life? yes… any quality? I would say a lot of more deseases to deal with.
    Do I belive in grounding? I have an open mind… I don’t know why a Billionaire or ex-billionaire wants to make money on something that could help humanity. Who can afford 150 dollars for sheets? He seems like BIG PHARMA, PROFFITING FROM PEOPLE’S PAIN. I’m doing my own experiments using things from radio shack and home depot, I will come up with my own conclusions. Any scientific value? who cares if it does me good? any results so far? It does give me more energy, makes me fall sleep faster. Do not wake up during the night as before. Sleep in one position for most of the night.. The money saved on Ambien helped pay for my personal study so far. Pains? Let’s see what time does… can’t tell if they are lessening. But for sure it does not keep me from sleeping. If I can go back doing Hot Yoga again I will sound the trumpet like I’ve discovered it myself… Let you scientific minds go… Do your own studies with friends and family… Electrodes costs little, so does wires and ground rods ( 6 bucks at Radio Shack ). Do not poison their minds before it or flower it for a nice placebo effect… Anything that would keep you away from the grasp of big coorporations will find a tremendous, if not impossible, wall to climb.

  52. Chris says:

    Hi, I did as well as I could, but I eventually lost the will to live with these comments. I never did find out which way current goes, or whatever the question was. I am only posting to say that the Earthing Institute was right to note that the German study that Crystal posted was flawed because they put the grounding sheet BELOW the mattress, not on top of it. As my cube sensor is broken I can’t tell whether correcting this would make a difference to their conclusions.

  53. Darryl Learie says:

    I am open to try Earthing and see if it helps for what ails me without any conceived notions of why it would or would not work.

    Obviously the debate is over the ‘active’ mechanism at work when other more subtle unknown mechanisms could be at work, maybe for example standing on the dirt disperses forces put on ones feet better than that of shoes ?

    If Earthing works – I would say it’s too early to say,’this is why’.

    It would be far better to say wow it works and we don’t know why.

    But as I understand it, your potential charge on the ground is 0V. In other words your fair game for lightning as the ground your standing on.

    I don’t know about this ‘surplus of electrons’? Our environments can give us a net positive or negative charge depending on static build-up, atmosphere, etc.

    So if your even 0.5 volts positively or negatively charged, earthing will simply render you to 0 volts.

    How this would affect ones body chemistry I have no idea because every part of your body would be grounded to a potential of 0 volts.

    It’s not like there is a traffic of electrons suddenly moving in the body – it’s only potential charge! And 0 volts means you have no electrons to spare or grab.

    Thing is … It does not hurt to try it. 0 potential 0 risk :)

    • Why not, if you can try it for free. But the con artists are hoping you will “try it” — they don’t care whether you stick with it, as long as they get your money.

    • Eric Hall says:

      And that’s what they are banking on – most people do not have an understanding of electricity. Electricity was one of my harder classes as a physics graduate student, so the subject is not easy which is why it is easy to throw around a word salad and make it sound legitimate.

      The ground is often what we set as zero potential – but it is zero because we pick it to be so. Electric potential, like mechanical potential energy, is really all about where we pick zero. All it means is we run all of the potentials higher than the ground, so charges will want to flow there. If something is at a negative potential relative to ground, the flow is opposite. In other words, the potentials we talk about are relative potentials. meaning how much more potential is at this point versus another. It is convenient to pick a spot as zero, usually the ground.

      Volts are not the only story though. When you scuff your feet on the carpet or rub a balloon on your head, the potential can be 5,000-10,000 volts (not 0.5 V). The way I explain this to my intro physics students is that potential is in a sense the energy each charge has. The current tells you about the number of charges and multiplying the 2 together tells you about the total power (rate of energy). So as I explained in the comments and article – scuff your feet across the carpet, and you get plenty of electrons. In fact, anytime you touch any metal – if you had an excess of positive charge you would pull some of the electrons off the metal and into you because the metal’s electrons move easily.

      One: it is unlikely the grounding is doing anything.

      Two: even if it was, you don’t need a special mat or run around barefoot to get the electrons.

  54. Andy says:

    occam’s rzor?

  55. dara says:

    Gosh — I have read all the comments with great interest and learned 2 things. Firstly most people confer with Karl Popper and that the theory of knowledge builds upon the prior knowledge – expanding and growing — only falsification can move us from this core knowledge. Secondly Thomas Kuhn promulgated, much to the disgust of Karl Popper, that a significant shift in knowledge can occur only after a revolution caused by crisis and we experience a paradigm shift. Much academic effort was wasted in this philosophical war on how we gain knowledge; most academics now agree that both philosophers were right in their own ways.

    Hall – your understanding of electricity aka physics is outstanding – of that there is no doubt however “for every metal, there is a temperature at which it will melt’ therefore Kroschel’s movie may not portray mainstream electricity as we currently understand it but there is no doubt in the minds of those persons who are using grounding sheets that they are gaining real health benefits.

    To ridicule the published peer reviewed studies of grounding is not only unprofessional – but inappropriate from a person of your standing. It seems to me that the growing number of medical professionals that are recommending grounding sheets to their patients don’t support your assertion that grounding is unlikely doing anything.

    The real test – try a grounding sheet for a few weeks — whatever you think you know, whatever you teach to your students, whatever you have written and published —- won’t matter a jot when you yourself also gain the real health benefits that can only come from grounding.

    I speak, sadly from a similar place as yourself but after a few weeks on a grounding sheet, I am buying grounding mats for all those I love and cherish.

    Maybe you will too, maybe you wont — who knows

    • Eric Hall says:

      If you go back and look at my “ridicule” of “peer-reviewed” studies – the problem is the peer-review process is weak. Also, the methodology is very flawed – they reached conclusions based on factors for which they did not control. Those are hallmarks of a bad study. So it isn’t ridicule – it is the scientific process. Think of it as me peer reviewing the work.

      You then make the similar mistake to say – just try it…but why? It is a waste of money as far as we can tell to this point. Would someone think it is curing something and delay real treatment? Another interesting side note – what would happen if an electrical storm passed by and struck the house or ground near your house while hooked up to the “properly grounded” outlet? I can imagine a few too many electrons getting into your body then.

  56. Bruno says:

    Why is anecdotal evidence frowned upon in Science as a put down and yet in a Court of Law its the evidence presented. Why this double standard?????

    • Eric Hall says:

      As we are finding out – maybe we shouldn’t accept anecdotal evidence –

      It is estimated a few percent of inmates on death row are innocent. So while anecdote can give us direction to look for hard evidence, it doesn’t in itself constitute evidence – at least in the world of science. It probably should have much less weight in courts as well.

      • Bruno says:

        Thanks Eric but if this is the case then no one is trustworthy. What makes you think that people will be honest and open using the Scientific method.
        After all if we all have the possibility of tainting the evidence then there is no reason that we will follow the scientific method.

        Just a thought?????

        • Eric Hall says:

          Because science doesn’t rely on people. It relies on data and reproducibility. If I drop an object from the roof of my house, I should measure an acceleration of about 9.8 m/s. Now I could be biased because I want you to believe it to be faster than it is. But I reveal my methods and equipment for measuring, and you are then free to reproduce that data independently and either confirm or refute it. If you get the same result, it adds strength to my data, making it more likely (never absolutely) correct. If you get different data, it means one of us or both of us is wrong. Now the more people that do the experiment, the more independent data we get, the closer and closer estimation of the truth is reached.

          Science is not a dichotomy (a yes or no). It is a process.

          • Bruno says:

            Correct Eric I fully agree with you however it still relies on humans to carry it out.

            When you have commercial interests, power, arrogance, closed mindedness, and wanting to be right, the possibility of that process being used correctly often seems to go straight out the door.

            Look at what happened to our Financial Institutions or even Big Pharma where using scientific processes , they bury all their failed trials and often convert failed trials into successful trials using the peer review process.
            Dr. Goldacre ( for Big Pharma) highlights this and more in

            As Moshe Kroy philosophy lecturer would say ” The charlatans are entrenched in the Scientific system where every one believes and no one questions. Especially where there is Financial interests.

            How could our Scientific Institutions not pick up on the Junk processed food being served because of slavishly following the interests of the Food Companies with the result that obese children now have become a huge health problem faced by Western Cultures.
            Is it not simple shit in your mouth begets a shitty body????

            Dr. Sheldrake also questions the dogmas of Science in

            So I am suggesting to you if you want to use your skeptical viewpoint by all means do, but look also at our so called Scientific culture and assumptions that no one dares to question rather than
            spending time on such a insignificant topics as earthing.

            Yes I am an earthing enthusiast and I use it daily, especially after breaking and ankle, and then followed by a freak bicycle accident where unfortunately for me I had to have a hip replacement.
            It works for me and even if its a placebo affect I really don’t care because I am better for it.

            The Skeptic society IMO seems to go for soft targets rather than looking and criticizing at the heart and soul of Science at use in the practical world.

            Pity that.


          • Eric Hall says:

            Yes, humans are involved in science. It does mean that it fails. But it fails temporarily because the scientific process corrects that. It is a built in error check because someone is checking you. There are plenty examples. I will give you a couple in my own field. A few years ago, after many internal reviews a group published a paper saying they observed neutrinos going faster than the speed of light. It took a little less than 6 months, and it turned out there was an equipment problem giving the incorrect readings. Once the corrections were made, the speed of light barrier was still in effect. This year a group published findings on gravity waves. Now other scientists are looking at the data and it appears to be more questionable.

            In drug research specifically – do you have any idea how many compounds are studied and never make it to market? So yes, because they look everywhere for things to help humans live better, there will be many things that end up being harmful as well. Because so many harmful things get rejected, and occasional one will get through. But it doesn’t take long to fix that.

            As Bill Nye said – the scientific method is the greatest thing man has ever discovered. And if it isn’t, the scientific method will fix that.

          • Chris says:

            I take your point, Bruno – you have to be skeptical (sic) as to why they choose such, as you put it ‘soft’ targets…

  57. Janice H says:

    Okay, I guess it is my turn. I agree with Janice (not a bad name since that is also my first name). Janice you are correct in what you have said thus far. As one who has had Rheumatoid Arthritis since the age of 15 (I am now 61), a severe IgA deficiency from splenectomy in 1983, hypothyroidism, and chronic pain and other health issues including an INability to heal without antibiotics are just a few areas that my health has challenged me through the years. I’m not here to convince but only to give my personal experience from Earthing. I was a HUGE skeptic at first and thought, oh gee, here we go again, another claim to make a fat $$ off of ill people. That is, until I decided to have an open mind and do the research published in the Journal of Alternative Medicine reporting ‘legitimate’ double blind studies done, thermography pictures from before, during/after Earthing contact showing inflammation levels significantly lower; showing significant blood viscosity changes (hence the warning to those who try Earthing that take meds like Coumadin that they should work closely with their doctor to monitor their blood viscosity), sleep pattern improvement and much more. After reading I decided I had nothing to lose and though the medical reports gave convincing evidence, I remained cautious but gave it a try since western medicine failed miserably for me after decades of various treatments only to result in reaching the point where I cannot take any treatments for my RA due to my severe IgA deficiency except treat the pain. In retrospect, all they could offer were pharmaceutical drugs that only ended up causing ulcers, allergies to meds and intolerance to antibiotics because I’ve had to take so many different treatments to fight infections. So, I bit the bullet and purchased a half sheet. Like I said, I didn’t expect anything to change but within one (1) week, a massive foot sore with scabs healed up after repeated unsuccessful attempts to treat and heal it through conventional measures over the course of four (4) years. The medical team affiliated with Grounding warn that if one is on thyroid medication to work with their doctors and closely monitor thyroid levels because Earthing has shown to ‘normalize’ the levels which if not caught, can result in being over-medicated. Due to my skepticism, I did not heed that warning. Hence, I paid a price. After several months of Grounding, I became hyperthyroid after being hypothyroid for at least two decades. Because I did not take their advice and monitor this, I ended up over-overdosing on thyroid medication which can be dangerous but it was my own fault. when I did realize what was happening, I contacted my endocrinologist who refused to believe me. As a result, she gave me no alternative but to take matters into my own hands which was frightening. Because of the frightening cardiac effects the medicine caused each time I took it, I made the difficult decision to stop altogether and hope for the best, trusting that the Grounding was indeed doing what it was supposed to–normalize the levels. I made an appt with a new Endocrinologist and went an entire month without any more thyroid medication until I saw the new doctor. He had every right to question me but he wisely kept an open mind and decided to see what the blood work revealed. Sure enough… the levels were normal for the first time in two decades after a month of taking no thyroid medication. One month later (2 total) the levels remained normal. They say once you need thyroid medicine, you will be on it the rest of your life. Tell that to the many people who have been able to discontinue their thyroid medicine after they began Grounding. No more hypothyroidism thanks to sleeping Grounded. Laugh and discredit all you will but I can personally testify that until one has health problems that allopathic medicine cannot help, manage or even heal it is amazing how open minded one becomes, even if a full blooded skeptic. I’m NOT claiming this is a cure-all as each person and health situation is different. It was by accident that I found this site. I became amused by the claims that this is nothing short of charlatanism (my interpretation). But there are too many backed-up testimonials of its benefits, including my own. Therefore, I could not remain silent. I have been laughed at for believing in this and even promoting it yet those same people can’t explain medically why I have improved. Explain that. Explain the blood changes. Explain the inflammation/pain improvements after over 40 years of pain and inflammation even with anti-inflammatory drugs. I can guarantee you that it is not psychosomatic. By nature, I am a positive person despite health challenges and disabilities. I only share what this has done for me health-wise. Continue to try to argue the theory behind Grounding all you will but friends who have known me for a long time have witnessed this amazing health discovery. And, I have only mentioned a couple of several major health improvements/changes that have occurred. I can’t speak to whether the electrical information and facts given by Mercola,, but I can testify to the Grounding health effects. Thanks for allowing me this opportunity to share. Best regards, Janice #2

    • Eric Hall says:

      In my previous post and comments, I explained the massive shortcomings of those studies. They are not controlled, nor are they double blinded. I offered a few, much simpler explanations for the results of the studies, and would say those reasons would also holds for you.

      • Janice says:

        As I said, I’m not trying to convince you except to present my own experience which turned out to be favorably consistent with what they have reported from their studies whether or not you agree with ‘how’ they were performed. Frankly, with all due respect, I don’t wish to t get into an argument over this as it is fruitless when minds are made up that no amount of debate will change. I can see by the comments that it has become a matter of who is right and anytime it reaches that point, there is no more discussion. In the end, you are going to believe what you want and that is your God-given prerogative. In closing, I thank you for allowing me the platform to present my experience for which I am grateful. Best regards to you,

        • Bruno says:

          Janice its funny how words are cheap and anyone can quote so called scientific understandings and theory but cannot accept other peoples personal experiences.

          Especially ones like yours where you have been on the treadmill of orthodox medicines pontifications with much cost , suffering and not much result.

          Having found something different, unorthodox and free people become skeptical of your claims and I cannot understand why, after all you are not selling anything but an idea that there is something out there that may help if you start looking outside the box of conditioned thinking. So called sciencetism.

          Good Luck Janice and I am happy for you that earthing worked for you, and that you are telling people.

          Of course there are no guarantees it will work for everyone , but one will never know this till they try it.

  58. Reg says:

    Hi again Bruno. With all respect, we only have Janice’s description and perception, but that’s all it is, a perception.

    As I’ve mentioned, the electroscope effect could cause polarization within some critical cells but there is no solid theory to guarantee any result from grounding.

    Such grounding in fact opens up the prospect of greater susceptibility to the passing charge on a low flying cloud. (No joke.) Those charges are relative to the Earth while the air in between is the charged dielectric traveling beneath them. (Lots of shifting Earth currents there and whoopie, related to wind speed.) I can see an opening here for an audio monitor with cloud polarity indications. :-) :-)

    Now for some “Blue Skying.”

    UNground yourself and your head takes up the charge equal to that at your height relative to cloud height. If the charge on the cloud relative to Earth was 1,000,000 volts and you were tall enough to have your head in the cloud as it drifted over-head, you have provided a path of discharge. That’s why people standing on the golf course get struck. They quite literally invite lightning to use them as a path of discharge. So we could say that Earthing ourselves increases our degree of risk. Separate ourselves from Earth and put your head into the cloud and the gap between that million volts and Earth becomes the distance between our feet and Earth.

    However, if we had a series of charged clouds drifting as described and each with a different charge, as they passed above our bodies, we’d experience an alternating component at each arrival and departure. Such a series would exercise our tiny mental electroscopes and in so-doing attract a greater proportion of the oxygenated blood in the brain. Sounds good to me.

    Only problem is that if we were Earthed in fine weather with no crazy drifting clouds we’d have no alternating component and the little electroscopes would be stuck either with their wings up or down or maybe out. Clearly there is a need for an alternating device to accommodate such fine weather. This could be tricky, not to say dangerous as the floor and the ceiling would have to alternate between Earth and active by perhaps a few thousand volts or we could do the same with a simple alternating 1000 volts pp between patient and Earth. We could even vary the frequency and slim those little guys down to perfection.

    Why we haven’t even investigated yet whether a constant voltage or an alternating voltage will provide a better outcome. What amplitude? What frequency? Because the Earth is not a constant potential, it’s only the reference we’ve come to regard as constant, regardless of the fact that it’s ripping through space and rotating at the same time while being flooded with enormous heat on one side and extreme cold on the other. (I’ve always admired that one cycle per 24 hours as a most respectable low frequency reference.)

    Gotta like the idea of a brain gym, so much easier than going through all that sweaty stuff.

  59. Bruno says:

    Hi again Bruno. With all respect, we only have Janice’s description and perception, but that’s all it is, a perception

    “Reg I think its more than a perception. Something drastic happened to Jane, to turn her health around. I have never had RA however it must not be a pleasant illness to have tormenting your body and soul.

    Also lots of the anecdotes litter the Earthing book. It has not happened just once but many times to different individuals. Most seem to be elderly and as I have stated before why would they lie about such a drastic event that turned their health around to living a more normal life.

    To gain attention?????? There is no money in it for them unless they are Shills??? ”

    That’s why people standing on the golf course get struck. They quite literally invite lightning to use them as a path of discharge. So we could say that Earthing ourselves increases our degree of risk.

    ” I believe you and that’s why it is suggested when storms and lightnings are around then it is wise to unearth yourself . Nothing worse then waking up fried, with the Coroner findings suggesting that idiots that earth themselves leave themselves open to being fried when lightning strikes. The odds are pretty minimal however there is that possibility.

    Reg I don’t have any explanation why it works or if its the placebo effect.

    I am just a curious guy who likes to try things out.

    I enjoy the discussion and your input.


    • Reg says:

      Tell you what Bruno, I’ve got a long term Rheumatoid Arthritis sufferer in the back room, no joke, and when she gets back from visiting our son in Germany I’ll slap an Earth on her and withdraw all that expensive medication, then see what happens. ooohh, just thought of the static charge distribution in flight, I know I always feel dreadful after a 17 or 21 hour flight from Sydney to Frankfurt or SF.

      I expect some resistance, physical I mean, you know how headstrong nurses are and they are dreadfully dedicated to following doctor’s orders. Best plan is to threaten her with losing her Television rights, she only watches blood-letting programs anyway, no head for science at all.

  60. Bruno says:

    Reg my wife is a Physiotherapist and also skeptical. For a long time she has complained about a hip pain suggesting she may need a hip operation. I bellowed out in frustration ” we are too young to have a hip operation” . We are both in our 70’s and she still works 3 days a week.

    Much to her surprise after earthing her pain also disappeared. She still would not acknowledge the earthing however I have noticed recently that she does earth herself with out any prompting from me but says nothing about it.

    Last year we were in Beijing and as part of a city Tour we were taken to a Chinese medical office where our feet were massaged freely and then the professor came out and offered his Chinese Medical opinion to the group. My wife was the bunny and he looked at her and later on place his hand close to her forehead and started to grunt and oink for a while whilst my wife shuddered backward and forward as if there was an electrical force between the good professor’s palm and my wifes forehead.

    It was impressive however when my turn came I refused treatment as I suggested to the professor one in the family was enough for that kind of treatment.

    My wife was a little shook up and all the other people in the group were also interested to ask what had happened.

    Later on that night my wife noticed that her body was very supple and relaxed and that she could flex her hips so much more than she had ever done before. She was so surprised for as a Physiotherapist she understands how here body works.

    I mention this because for all I know it may not have been the earthing that has helped her with her hip pain but part of the CHI force that the good Chinese professor bestowed on my wife.

    But in the end who cares, my wife feels better as her pain is gone. What happened we will leave it for the inquisitive s that like to argue about these things whether they are scientific or not not.

    After 70 every good day is a bonus, and I hope the bonuses keep on coming till its our turn to bow out.

    cheers Bruno

  61. Reg says:

    Well … this is helpful. I really did want to know whether there was an earth contact with the ground that preceded the wheel contact, but this will have to do. It really disturbs me to visualize electrical sparking across bearings-races.


    ” User currently offlineA/c train From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 501 posts, RR: 4
    Reply 1, posted Fri Feb 14 2003 13:12:51 your local time (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5216 times:

    Basically Aircraft tyres perform the following functions,
    – They provide a gripping surface
    – Absorb some of the initial loads on landing
    – Provide an easily replaceable wearing surface
    – Discharge electricity on landing
    – Multiple wheels spread the aircraft weight
    – Provide a means of anti-fire action on the brakes by discharging the Nitrogen in the tyres through FUSIBLE plugs.
    And incase you dont know what a Fusible plug is, its basically a piece of solder which melts at a pre-set temperature, the colour of the plug dictates what temperature it melts at, these plugs you can find on the wheel and look for a bolt head, the fusible insert is inside. The fusible plugs reduce the possiblity of explosion due to thermal pressure build up.

    Red plug- melts at 155 degs/c
    Green- 177 degs/c
    Yellow- 199 degs/c

    kind regards
    a/c ”

    Good eh? No-one seem to point out that those wing discharge wicks are for voltage equalization rather than grounding. If you’ve watched any of those visuals of helicopter power line maintenance, it’s a part of the process that the helicopter is charged to the power line voltage or some significant part of it. So if you look carefully there is a very real contact provided with the Earth in advance of touching down, and watch for the zap.

    We tend to regard the term “shock” as an electrical contact but it actually refers to the muscular reaction to such a contact. The one whereby we toss the heavy object we’re holding in response to the shocking surprise of muscular contraction. The “change of state” is the thing, not the static state.

    Although to be fair, muscles in a permanent state of contraction would feel much better if they were in a state of relaxation. Muscle alternation does that, a bit like, there are NOT only permanent magnets, there are also permanent capacitors, but no-one gives the latter a thought. Discharge those muscular capacitors and the muscle relaxes. Probably also related to those painful cramps and the magnesium fix.

    Just a thought Bruno, do you think it is possible you wife was hypnotized? It happened to me once and I was shocked to think I was susceptible to such manipulation. In that state I was fully aware of everything that was happening but powerless to change it.

    • Bruno says:

      Just a thought Bruno, do you think it is possible you wife was hypnotized? It happened to me once and I was shocked to think I was susceptible to such manipulation. In that state I was fully aware of everything that was happening but powerless to change it.

      “Never looked at it that way but that”s a fair comment.

      I asked my wife whether she had her eyes opened or closed . She clearly remembers watching the professor intensely and skeptically as his hands were moving and trying to look down his sleeves of his loose shirt to see whether he had any electrical contraption hidden there. She was very suspicious of him and wanted to catch him out cheating????

      When he started to grunt and oink after after some time with the palm of his hands close to her forehead she claims she felt the electric shock move her whole body backwards and forwards.
      Its wasn’t a painful shock but more a transfer of energy shock .

      I saw it as she was right next to me and I was anxious and a wee frightened as it was strange to see her jerking backwards and forwards like that. That’s why I refused his treatment when it was my turn.

      My wife teaches Tai Chi and is familiar with the concept of Chi energy.

      However when the good professor finally finished his diagnosis he did suggest various herbal remedies to be bought and my wife duly signed with her Credit card.
      When I advised her that she had just bought $1050.00 dollars of herbal goods she balked and said No she didn’t.
      When they brought back the chit I was correct and of course we cancelled the order and paid about $150.00 instead.
      Ironically the herbal medicine sits in some cupboard still unused.

      So the hypnosis makes some sense regards her behavior of the purchase, although often it is easily to get confused when purchasing items overseas.

      Thinking over what may happen regards the Earthing issue I grant that belief would have something to do with it also , as the placebo is a wonderful natural healing tool that possibly would supplement any natural subtle occurrence that one has with mother nature whilst being grounded that we have yet to discover.

      Dr. Lisa Rankin says this about the Placebo and how we should take advantage of it.

      Looking back I was inspired when reading the ” Earthing Book “so I just ran with it hook line and sinker.

      So if you think of introducing your wife to her RA challenge I would cover all basis just to make sure she has a best shot at it. A little preparation may make all the difference.

      And remember if a man in a white coated had suggested the above to you, you possibly would not queried his/her authority.

      Trust your own judgement here.

      Good Luck

      cheers Bruno

      • Reg says:

        Bruno, a point.

        It is my impression that hypnotism can by applied by voice rhythm and stress, at least that’s been my experience. Perhaps the eye thing is just a simple oscillation that lulls the mind into accepting other planted ideas without consideration.

        I consider myself strong-minded but since that includes accepting all propositions for consideration I make myself vulnerable. The Earthing thing is a bit like that, it has an element of truth but doesn’t stand up to rigid testing in the form suggested by some.

        Your wife’s big spend was a rather startling tale. Shudder…. Now you know why she’s taken to the Earthing. Anything!!! :-)

    • Bruno says:

      Although to be fair, muscles in a permanent state of contraction would feel much better if they were in a state of relaxation. Muscle alternation does that, a bit like, there are NOT only permanent magnets, there are also permanent capacitors, but no-one gives the latter a thought. Discharge those muscular capacitors and the muscle relaxes. Probably also related to those painful cramps and the magnesium fix.

      “I have read in ” Healing is Voltage ” by Jerry Tennant MD> a similar idea where he says Cells store electrons working as Capacitors or words to that affect.

      Just curious Reg what is your background???

      I taught Humanities subjects in the TAFE sector for the past 25 years. I fell into teaching and enjoyed the student contact and the fact that I also enjoyed educating myself working in the system.

      • Eric Hall says:

        However, those electrons are supplied locally by the chemical reactions in the cells, not by electrons from the ground due to being wired to it.

        • Reg says:

          So now you’re accepting my common mode rejection defense Eric, however that does not completely rule out an external modification of the local effect.

          We’re potentially speaking about millivolts in the local sphere and millions of volts in the external one. This ratio demands more than an open mind. However Bruno’s two or three volts fades into oblivion, because of that CMRR.

          • Eric Hall says:

            In the video I discuss in the article, they actually claim your body is taking up extra electrons — and even hint at the idea these electrons are somehow special. My point being is the electrons are supplied by what we consume and is broken down by digestive and cellular processes just fine. We don’t need extra electrons from the ground or shuffling our feet across the carpet.

            Yes of course there could be modification of the electrons based on an external effect. A good example of this is a defibrillator – the electrons are certainly modified there – but we are talking about a much stronger field by thousands of times than what is emitted by a wire.

      • Bruno says:

        I have posted this twice Eric because the first time I placed it in the wrong spot. My apologies Bruno

        Well I am not arguing for why it happens Eric, I just believe it because of all the anecdotal evidence presented that something does happen.

        I also would like to up date your knowledge that your’e Chemical reaction is really a bio electric charge between +ve and -ve ions.

        You could update your students for 21st Century Science by at least making them aware of the Bio-electricity of the body.


        Also look at page 4 of slides in

        • Reg says:

          Eric, electrons are continually being transferred into and out of capacitive devices as the Electro-Motive-Forces alter.

          This is not new.

          For that matter I would strongly suggest that there is no difference between chemical interactions and electrical ones.

          The two grew up separately and it’s convenient to retain the philosophy by which we approach each topic. Nature tends to agree in the manner by which it applies interdomain conversion of impulse transfer, alternating between electrical and chemical.

          I presume that is the best method evolution has come up with for the time being, given that it optimizes “nervous cross-talk” and minimizes induction from external sources.

          Tiny diversion. About this Earthing or Grounding connection.

          Now I do not wish to encourage self-harm, but a connection to an open wound would probably be far more effective than to variable skin resistance. One could probably electrocute one’s self with a nine volt battery using this method. Tongue to open cut.

          Don’t try this at home, you may stop your heart.

          • Reg says:

            … and Eric, much to the consternation of two cardiologists and their body does not respond to defibrillators. Perhaps you can tell me why a heart rate of 151 is somehow related to the normal heart rhythm? Seriously.

            Getting information directly from cardiologists is like trying to get blood out of a stone. It seems they’ve caught the internet habit of quoting chapter titles without the detail.

            An interesting development that. It appears that if someone makes a blind statement on the internet and it goes unchallenged, then it is assumed to be correct and may be quoted ad nausium.

          • Eric Hall says:

            That’s not really true about the movement of electrons. Electrons move at what’s known as the drift velocity when exposed to am electric field. In your house for example, nearly every electronin the wire that was there when the house was built is still the same ones there now. In a DC circuit that flows in one direction, the electrons flow at about 1/4 of a meter per hour in a 1 amp current in a typical wire. Of course in AC they simply oscillate back and forth a few hundreths of a millimeter. The electrons’ random movements are much faster than the velocity caused by the EMF.

          • Reg says:

            Simple question then Eric.

            What is it that shifts from the cloud to the ground when the energy is discharged so that electrostatic equilibrium can be re-established?

            DYNAMIC. The principle of radiation of energy is that the fields, whether magnetic or electric, (neither of which can exist without the other,) can have travelled with such rapidity from their source, (300,000,000 metres per second,) that it is simply impossible for them to return in the time allocated by the rate at which the originating current has altered.

            STATIC. Here’s a puzzle for you Eric, if we have an oil filled capacitor and we charge it up with 1000 coulombs, then drain off the oil, how many coulombs will be returned to us when we try and discharge the capacitor? 1000 or near ZERO?

            The energy is primarily stored in the strained dielectric and we have removed it! Is that stored oil a threat to life and limb? Theoretically that charged capacitor could have stayed charged for-ever.

            Moving charges about is only one part of the story, the most important is the RATE at which they are moved. That is why this discussion is so one sided and it is ALSO the reason that engineers are accused of NEVER providing a direct answer.

            The person asking the question frequently needs to be taught why his question is silly in that the full breadth of the task has not been taken into account.

            If I recall correctly, that’s exactly what the French Open-Mindedness video was talking about. First gather ALL the facts.

    • Bruno says:

      Reg recently the back of my left hand close to the wrist has been painful especially when I rub it and I couldn’t figure out why. I thought that maybe in my sleep I may have accidentally hit the desk that is close to my bed which may have caused this.

      The other night I had an Eureka moment and realized that it was the left hand that I used with my walking stick and so I may have been putting much more pressure on it and thus caused this pain due to extra weight and use placed on it.

      Last night I earthed it by placing an earthing patch on top of my wrist exactly where the pain was and woh this morning the pain was gone.

      Now it wasn’t a deep pain however when I rubbed it ,it was severe enough to cause discomfort especially when I rubbed the bulging vein at the back of my wrist.

      So what happened???

      Don’t know and don’t care but I can tell you that I will be again placing an earthing patch (One that sticks on your skin) tonight .

      Cost wee exorbitant 25 cents maybe???

      I hope you are well

      • Reg says:

        Well that sounds pretty accurate to me Bruno. The association with the walking-stick pressure I mean.

        I had exactly the same in both wrists after I fell on my face in Tacoma from trying to climb a lovely green winter garden with a sheet of ice underneath it. Two years without being able to point Percy at the porcelain reliably was most embarrassing. Wish I’d known about grounding then.

        My current brain MRI discloses that, ” There is a marked tortuosity of the left PICA leading to compression and posterior deviation of the left inferior penduncle.” Thank God, I told them when I turned my head to the left I could knock myself out every time.

        Only thing is if I slap an Earth collar on, will I be better or worse? I still get a giggle out of the magnificent breath of the term Earthing compared with the parochialism of Grounding.

        You know Bruno I really do give myself the sh**s sometimes but I have an answer for your rubbing observation too. This is a bit long and it has to do with achieving complete relaxation and it WORKS.

        If you are lying in bed and conscious of pressure points, address each one of them in sequence by gently moving their immediate area. The theory is that the local nerves tire or deplete their activating hormone, and simply give up on feeling. You can no longer feel the pressure point. Persevere and you will find that as you get closer to total relaxation you begin to feel as if you’re floating.

        The final result is more than a little startling, so much so that I dare not type it, but it’s related to the final muscle to surrender. Works every time and I feel sure it even works for the ladies.

        Hope that’s of some assistance.

        • Reg says:

          Example of misunderstanding.

          Team of guys here of unknown nationality breaking concrete, no ear protection. Told my daughter i said to the guy to keep the ear protection I gave him as a birthday gift but I didn’t think he understood me.

          “Don’t be an idiot dad” she said, “he couldn’t HEAR you.”

  62. Tyler says:

    I’m surprised this post got so much attention. I think there is something to be said about being outdoors, letting your body touch the ground, breathing air that hasn’t been fused with our indoor environments and drinking plenty of water and fruits/vegetables that haven’t been tainted by chemicals that are harmful to us.

    I don’t believe there is value in buying any supplemental shoes, however, there are PubMed studies (yes – it was people who wrote these studies – and yes – they may not be cold-hard facts) that show it helps with sleep, reduces blood viscosity, stress – and other people say it helps reduce pain.

    Maybe it’s taking the few minutes out of our day to remove us from what stresses us out that is actually the “magic sauce” – just as many things of these things have been correlated to prayer. Reconnecting with ourselves is important – even if that includes stepping outside barefoot, breathing fresh air and smelling the roses at the beginning and end of every day.

    As for a TV celebrity selling snake-oil and hope? Well, the TV is a portal for someone on the other side to make money – that’s not surprising. I believe that natural things in life (stretching, eating raw fruits and vegetables, water, warmth, relationships, etc…) nurture health and longevity – it’s the “modern snake oil” – certain supplements, processed & fast foods, preservatives – that take life away.

    It’s sad to see someone who’s sharing knowledge and new perspectives to the masses to become a sellout and offer flimflam products and sports drinks as new solutions to old problems. It’s idolatry at it’s finest – (half humor, half truth) – but in the meantime, I’ll continue stepping outside barefoot while enjoying ice water blended with a few strawberries or blueberries. It tastes good and breaks my tendency to rush in the morning – which enables me to radiate with glowing electrons to share with the thousands of people I grace my presence with every day =)

    • Reg says:

      I agree with everything you say Tyler yet even walking or jogging bring their threats of impact injury and the world is driven to find a short-cut for everything. So it’s a continual battle to sort the fanciful from the effective.

      Obviously the human race began with total ignorance so that in spite of our pride, the fact is that we’re still closer to ignorance than enlightenment. Given the variable rate of this advance among the population, there are few who lead the search for knowledge and comprehension and many who lag behind. Then there are the cheats who dash in from the side-lines as the marathon approaches its completion, hoping to be showered with unworthy glory.

      Thanks for bringing a solid earthing reference to the discussion.

  63. Bruno says:

    If you are lying in bed and conscious of pressure points, address each one of them in sequence by gently moving their immediate area. The theory is that the local nerves tire or deplete their activating hormone, and simply give up on feeling. You can no longer feel the pressure point. Persevere and you will find that as you get closer to total relaxation you begin to feel as if you’re floating.

    The final result is more than a little startling, so much so that I dare not type it, but it’s related to the final muscle to surrender. Works every time and I feel sure it even works for the ladies.

    Hope that’s of some assistance.

    ” That makes sense Reg. Any info on how one finds the pressure points???

    Sad however that one is wary of telling things as they are regards the final muscle surrender. All these Scientists here who are supposed to have an open mind and look at things as they really are presented balk and IMO cannot handle the truth just because the person reporting it may say something radically different to what they have been taught!!!

    I like Leonardo’s statement “Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using his intelligence; he is just using his memory.

    • Reg says:

      Yeah but don’t forget Leonardo, that all learning depends on memory otherwise we’ve learned absolutely NAUGHT! I mean, when you rubbed your sore wrist you were doing the exact relaxation action I describe, that’s why we rub our sore muscles and scratch our itches. Scratch an itch and it stops itching and bleeds instead. Critical threshold. Love that word threshold, so descriptive to the receptive.

      I’m sure they can handle the truth if it is the truth Bruno, but if it doesn’t fit the observations then we have to go searching for the truth.

      Pressure points? Where you’re likely to get a bed sore. The pressure hurts … a bit, there’s no such thing as a flat body on a flat mattress. That’s why they have pneumatic tyres on cars, the road is never flat and the inflated tyre, by it compressibility, smooths it into one of acceptable flatness while ensuring the essential contact is not lost. Clever guy Goodyear but I wonder if he knew the physics and why shock-absorbers are essential? Dampers in the US I believe.

      Ha- funny again, a fix for a problem that had not yet been observed. First observe the oscillation of the undamped sprung wheels, then invent the damper of the mass and spring combination. Alter the wheel weight at your peril.

  64. martin says:

    I sleep grounded and it definitely feels better than sleeping without the grounding it’s like being in the womb of mother nature, very relaxing. You can be as skeptical as you like, but don’t knock it till you’ve tried it. I can tell by feel whether the earthsac I sleep in is grounded or not so there is certainly something physiological going on. I can sense WiFi too though and I am EMF sensitive.

  65. Roman says:

    People who present themselves as skeptics are no better, if not worse, then the snake oil salesmen they claim to be exposing. There is really no “smoking gun” in this persons tirade. Just a lot of inference and misrepresenting the person he’s accusing of having done the same. There is a lack of research about grounding. I’ve looked into it and found that both sides tend to be blathering on with little to know evidence hoping to mislead their listeners into putting blind faith in their superior intellect.
    I don’t know why research is so lacking but I do know there is enough information out there to show there is SOMETHING to it. It’s just not known what. There are some health benefits regarding blood viscosity and also some interesting research with infants that is far from being pseudoscience. It’s entirely possible that there could be major health benefits increasing longevity and it’s also possible there could be some health changes but no real benefit.

    IN my experience most of the people who read skeptic articles like this are either ignorant people who spend the other 99% of their day surfing the web looking for bible thumpers to attack and they know very little about anything other then that the safe route is to always make fun of anything mainstream science doesn’t acknowledge. They usually just make comments about the pathetic intellect of the human race but usually steer clear of saying anything tangible because they don’t know anything. Or alternatively they are people who have a very narrow yet advanced knowledge of certain scientific disciplines and they’re looking to branch out into being scholarly hero’s by educating the masses but in all honesty they do not qualify and never will.

    Bottom line, if you’re opinion is always in opposition to what the world believes to be quackery history dictates you’re going to be wrong much of the time. You just aren’t likely going to be around when they discover you were the fool!

    • Eric Hall says:

      Can you please then comment as to where my science is incorrect? I believe I tackled all of the important points such as the physics, plausibility, etc. Being skeptical does not mean rejecting everything.

      • Roman says:

        It’s probably easier to just state that most of your article is just you showing off your knowledge of electricity and trying to convince everyone that whatever gaps you can find in his knowledge and fill yourself makes YOU the “Guru” and that those gaps just so happen to provide the smoking gun that brings down this whole circus.
        So lets just skip ahead to the conclusions you believe you’ve proved and avoid wasting time.

        ““Go barefoot outside for a half-hour and see what a difference it makes on your pain or stress level.” As David Gorski points out, “Can you say “placebo effects”? “

        First of all, I don’t really share the same mocking disdain for the placebo effect or those who are affected strongly by it. The placebo effect is extremely powerful and I’ve come to believe perhaps it’s a gift possessed by the mentally healthy rather then the mentally weak.
        Second, if your right then you’d have to explain the recent Penn State study that showed infants in intensive care responded to being connected to a grounding outlet.”

        “The improved vagal-nerve activity—which a previous study linked to reduced risk of an inflammatory bowel disease common to newborns—disappeared when the electrode was removed”

        Unfortunately for those researchers you just single-handedly proved that calming effect from grounding are nothing more then the placebo effect. And that was just with the knowledge in your head and no scientific study! Amazing!

        Also, Perhaps you’d like to do something constructive and perform an experiment to rebuff previous experiments that have shown grounding improves blood viscosity, which is actually a serious health problem that effects pretty much all of us as we get older and can really contribute to countless diseases. If I can sleep at night with healthy efficient blood simply by grounding myself then I can’t imagine why I wouldn’t. But as you’ve claimed, it’s all just BS and there are no health effects right?

        What you’ve written is basically an article showing off your knowledge of electricity and grossly overestimated what you’re capable of proving or disproving with it. Can you prove there may be some holes in this guys understanding of science or electricity? I suppose. Can you prove grounding for health reasons is a complete waste of time? You have not even come close to that and if anything you’ve written something that is even more susceptible to criticism then the works of the man you’re seeking to discredit!

        • Eric Hall says:

          A single study never throws out all existing science. It would take several in order to lend strength to this hypothesis. And here’s a couple problems with the one you mention specifically.

          First, it isn’t published yet. Thus, no one can review it, look for problems in data, etc. Thus it isn’t a study at all. Until it is published and has had time for scientists to look at it, it is not a completed study.

          Second, it was a pilot study. A pilot study is really there to prevent spending lots of money on a hypothesis which might not be valid. So let’s assume for a second there is nothing wrong with the methodology – it simply means the results warrant further study with a larger population to see if it actually is valid. It doesn’t constitute proof at all.

          • Reg says:

            ““Go barefoot outside for a half-hour and see what a difference it makes on your pain or stress level.” As David Gorski points out, “Can you say “placebo effects”? “

            If sauntering around barefoot in the damp grass calls attention to your cold wet feet instead of your frantic mental gyrations then, “placebo effects.”

            Tugging on your ear-lobe also alleviates pain, but apparently that’s too simple.

    • Reg says:

      Quoting ROMAN “I’ve looked into it and found that both sides tend to be blathering on with little or no evidence, hoping to mislead their listeners into putting blind faith in their superior intellect.” (Corrected)

      Thank you for your God-like wisdom and your bottom line with its inference that you are probably wrong.

  66. John Truth says:

    The author does not have a clue about this topic and shows little appreciation for scientific integrity.

    The article is not helpful at all.

    A good critique should.

    1. Quote from the literature to support claims made by the author.

    This article failed to do this once.

    On the one occasion that a calculation was attempted, the author got the wavelength of AC wrong. But far worse he went on to compare the biological effects of static and time varying fields as if it were obvious they were equivalent when it is clearly documented in the literature that they are not.

    With a little effort I was able to find a review of the literature by Robert O Becker on the biological effects of ELF fields dating back to around 1970, so this is hardly news.!

    Even applying basic physics would have informed the author of this piece that Faraday’s law does not apply to static fields and that there is therefore a fundamental difference between static and time varying fields.

    In any case trying to understand biological phenomenon using only physics is a flawed approach. I shall demonstrate this flaw with a recent example.

    Gamma and other hard radiation causes damage in two ways. 20% is caused by direct interaction between the photons and DNA or mitochondria. This can be understood using pure physics.The symptoms arise on cell division and include cancer.

    The second mechanism is via the creation of free radicals (OH-). These then go on to act biologically in a number of ways. One mechanism is to use up stores of anti-oxidants like vitamin C and glutathione when a state of scurvy arises and the symptoms are consistent with that.

    The second mechanism can also be induced by WIFI radiation, which depolarises the calcium channels in cells. The result is over stimulation of the Nitrous Oxide Synthase enzyme which produces OH- ions.

    The effects are similar biochemically though not in magnitude.

    This illustrates why caution is needed when using only physics to assess the impact of fields on biological systems.

    You also seem fixated on tracking effects in terms of electrons.. You keep quoting drift velocities. This is a rookie error. When electrons move you do not look at the individual electrons. You should look at the net displacement.

    An example should make it clear.

    100 children stand in a line. In one second each child takes one step forward covering half a meter. The displacement of the whole line is 0.5 M.

    But the effective change is as if the child at the back of the line ran to the front in 1 second. So the effective velocity was 1 child at 50m/s.

    You also seem unclear on the idea of electron balance. More is not necessarily better.. The Zeta potential of red blood cells is measurable and relies on the red cells carrying a net negative charge.

    If the body is exposed to a flux of positive charge (like from a CRT) some of this charge can be lost. But skin is not a great conductor so should expect a relaxation time of some minutes for this exchange to take place.

    You could have written an interesting article brining together all the known science. Instead you indulged your ego and produced an article with no science at all.

    • Eric Hall says:

      You accuse me (the author) of not using science because I didn’t cite any sources, but then you cite no sources. How is this any better than what I did.

      I also think you misunderstand the point of a blog post. I cannot teach all of E&M in one blog post. That requires quite a bit more math and work to do that.

      Finally, how does your example help with drift velocity in the post? The electrons are not all sitting there with just one moving much faster while the rest sit still. The better example is marbles in a pipe – the marbles cannot pass one another (in reality they can a little bit, but not easily). So the child cannot run to the front of the line because there are walls against their shoulders.

      It seems to me you are trying to justify grounding with Gish Gallop. Most readers here will recognize that quickly.

  67. Colleen says:

    My pain management doctor is a non narcotic type who after trying injections, nerve blocks, and many other approved treatments for pain caused by chronic inflammation for 10 years suggested I try the earthing patches. I also have dysautonomia. The malfunctioning of my autonomic nervous system was causing heart arrhythmias and other disabling syndromes. After just a few days earthing my postural orthostatic tachycardia was gone, then the pain in my side was gone, next I was actually digesting my food and finally free from gastroparesis. I no longer need IV nutrition, don’t faint anymore, and have started a training regime with classical ballet, horseback riding, and am planning to do my first 5 K race in a few months. I didn’t walk outside or go barefoot (Canadian winter sucks for that) just used the 30 dollar kit from amazon. I was spending way more than that on medications alone that I no longer need. Earthing has actually saved me money, and given me my life back. I don’t even care how it works I just know it did. I can literally feel when my cords have become disconnected by the adrenalin dumping and overactive sympathetic response my body is awesome at. It seems to me that this article was written based on zero real world experience with actual patients. The reviews on were more enlightening than this article was. What a shame I used to be such a big fan of the podcast but on this one you guys certainly missed the mark.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Let me propose an alternate hypothesis which would also seem to fit the facts.

      You are prescribed a placebo which makes you feel a little better. So you start eating a little better and exercising a little. You are more relaxed, feel better, so you continue on that path. Eventually, because you are now living a lifestyle known to be healthy, you are healthier.

      I have a feeling you are leaving out many important details. Examples of details which would be important in deciding if it was the grounding or something else include basics like weight, height, family history., etc. Also important would be mental health history. While I am not asking for you to disclose that information here nor am I offering a diagnosis, I am saying you cannot claim the grounding as proof while leaving out many of the important details.

    • Forgive me colleen but you introduced your personal experience. Why was a pain management doctor treating a neurological disorder that is a multitude of unclear co-morbitities, like fibromyalgia. It is not so much a disease as a description of an autosomal genetic linked disorder. A disorder that lacks clarity if it is a separate disease or a part of a panacea of symptoms that plague others who have long term pain complaints. Assuming that one factor in your life, the grounding, is the cause is not evidence that it does work. You cannot possibly eliminate all the factors that effect us from water coming out of the tap to the amount of stress in out lives.
      People also can get dysautonomia from outside sources including botulism exposure. Buying a grounding kit from amazon instead of seeking out treatment would be dangerous and maybe life threatening.
      I am glad you are better but it is irresponsible to recommend that your experience is cause for others to seek out grounding as a treatment.

  68. Bruno says:

    Wow Eric what a great teacher you are!!!!

    Here is a prime case of a lady that has tried all the so called scientific proven methods who you blindly accept because that”s what fits into your so called scientific belief system, and nothing worked for her. The fact is according to her it made her sick.

    Now she participates using the earthing technique and her health gets better, appetite , she wants to exercise etc etc the results are there for her to see.

    Now even if it is the placebo effect who cares. Do you think this woman gives a!!!!!
    She is better and that”s all she cares about and I would care about also, namely that the mind and body may play a much greater role in healing than your so called Scientific theory gives credence to.
    Also the fact that in the last 30 years China has manufactured most of the shoes of the world and that most of us are walking with rubber or plastic under our feet ( great material to insulate us from the earth) would be a cause to at least have an open mind to at least look at the earthing claims .
    It is renowned that we are an Electric body . The chemical processes that take place in our bodies are electrical and even though we do not fully understand them compared to the chemical processes ( In which we more fully understand and control to some extent) does not negate Colleens claims . Many other usually elderly folks have stated that in their opinion it was the earthing process that they think turned things around for them.

    Eric your questions regards Colleens health are valid however it seems they happened after
    her health got better.

    You remind me of the types of people that were around at the time of the Inquisition where their belief system of the Bible was the word of God and that when they burned their victims to the stake they were doing God’s work.

    Are you also doing God’s work ( In this case namely that the present knowledge of Science has the full picture so no need to look anywhere else )

    • Eric Hall says:

      Bruno – let me ask you a simple scientific question – what is the resistance (approx) of rubber soled shoes? If a person were to pick up a potential difference relative to the earth, how long would it take to discharge the person?

      • Bruno says:

        I don’t know Eric. I am open to your explanation.

        • Eric Hall says:

          I actually assign this problem to my physics students – because electrical discharge can be an issue for sensitive electronic equipment.

          If you stopped moving and allowed the charge to dissipate through your shoes, it would take somewhere between 2-10 minutes for you to reach the same potential as the ground. Now it isn’t the seconds it takes using a better conductor like a wire or grounding pad, but it isn’t like you stay at some charge infinitely either. So this idea that rubber soled shoes are the cause of health problems because they are an insulator is really silly. Yes, they are much more resistant (an insulator is simply a material with really high resistance). But they do still let charge leak through.

          The other thing is, again, the idea of “potential” or voltage…potential is always measured against another point. We are only measuring the difference in voltage – it is never truly an absolute measurement. Birds don’t die sitting on power lines because their whole body ends up at the same potential. If we were to hang from a power line, we wouldn’t get hurt either. However, if we had contact with the ground, it is the difference in potential which would kill us.

          Our blood – the zeta potential – doesn’t really care about our body’s potential relative to the earth. It only cares about the charge on it and other cells. If I was hanging from a power line, it wouldn’t instantly change my zeta potential…though the stress of hanging there would!

          • Reg. says:

            Although everyone tries to dodge the name, Scientology seems to have all the answers. Then again standing in brilliant Sunshine dissipates charges quite promptly. Go get some vitamin D.

          • Bruno says:

            “If you stopped moving and allowed the charge to dissipate through your shoes, it would take somewhere between 2-10 minutes for you to reach the same potential as the ground.”

            Have you done this experiment ?? How did you measure yourself and could you see the charge slowly dissipating over time???????

            Every time I measure myself the voltage varies depending where I sit or stand in the house?????

          • Eric Hall says:

            Bruno – the thing about science you keep missing is it doesn’t mean I have to do the experiment. It means if I did, I should get the same results with the same conditions. If several people do the experiment with the same conditions, it is more likely to be true.

            For example, I don’t need to make my own star map, then wait until an eclipse 6 months later and observe gravitational lensing to know that general relativity works. The experiment has been done thousands of times, thus it has a high degree of likelihood to be true. It has held up to so many experiments, we consider it a scientific law – meaning the chances of it not being true are so small we don’t normally consider it. If some observation doesn’t agree, that observation would face alot of scrutiny. Does it mean we would dismiss it? Not necessarily, but if it was some convoluted method to get these alternate results, it is more likely it was an error in measurement and not that relativity is wrong.

            So again – understand individual stories are not evidence. They can serve as a reason to do controlled experiments – something the grounding people have continued to fail at doing. Yes, there are published studies, but they are so poorly controlled that they don’t hold much weight. If this is truly some miracle cure, it shouldn’t be so hard to prove that – but like all miracle cures – those careful experiments never seem to come…just years of pilots and preliminary studies with no follow-up. Essential Oils, mega-dosing vitamins, superfoods, etc…they all follow the same pattern…

          • Bruno says:

            Well if rubber shoes do not affect you in any way please cite the experiments to me on the internet. You claim your students have done this so you must have plenty of experimenter you can point to.

            I really am curious and more than happy to look at so I can inform myself!!!!!!


          • Eric Hall says:

            Bruno – if being grounded is natural, then what would explain those early humans that lived in arid climates? Dry grass and the surface of dry ground are not great conductors either. They weren’t grounded – much like us with our shoes.




            Yes, this is a common experiment done in basic physics labs – and why in certain situations people do wear grounding straps or static dissipating shoes so they do not damage sensitive equipment.

          • Eric Hall says:

            And what do you mean by they don’t affect you? Sure, the shoes cause it to take a few minutes to discharge, but touching a doorknob will do it almost instantly. And is that ten minutes a big deal? Again, your insides don’t care because it puts your whole body at the same potential compared to ground, so inside they only care about potentials relative to each other.

    • Always my favorite thing, eric when people using a belief system to support their argument then accuse the scientific method of being a belief system. When you accept what someone tells you as true, bruno you believe it is true. When you demand logical, systematic, and reproducible evidence to prove something is effective it is not a belief system. That is what is called the scientific method. Belief gave us the inquisition, science has brought us out of the dark ages. It is method that shows us what is not what we believe. It is flawed because it involves people not because the method is a belief system.
      And yes the believers of the inquisition did burn people who questioned the validity of what was said? In this context you, not eric, are verbally burning Eric for not believing in your beleifs because they lack a logical systematic evaluation.

      • Bruno says:

        “Stephen said,
        When you demand logical, systematic, and reproducible evidence to prove something is effective it is not a belief system. That is what is called the scientific method.”

        I agree with you totally Stephen.

        But in this case Eric has not done this or quoted studies that its wrong. He quotes from his Science background and refutes that grounding does not work on theoretical grounds. Just like the Inquisitors did burning people to the stake on Gods word!!!!!!!

        ” In this context you, not Eric, are verbally burning Eric for not believing in your beliefs because they lack a logical systematic evaluation.”

        Fair comment to a certain extent. I have never claimed I know why it works but have had experience that it works and much anecdotal evidence from all these elderly people that have had problems.

        Your claim about using scientific method to show that it works needs people to do these experiments.
        Why would any company in a Capitalistic system such as our do this , by showing the public that being grounded helps to solve many medical ailments??? There is no money in it its FREE.

        Also we have evidence that big Pharma is not interested in testing örphan drugs” that show promise because there is no monies in it for them.

        So all that happens is that people do studies and you shit can them because they are not done by people that hols your belief system.

  69. Matt says:

    In my personal opinion there is much information that indicates health benefits can be gained from grounding. From looking at the studies (linked below) I find it difficult to understand how somebody can dismiss these benefits out of hand. I guess some people are so embedded within their world view that they resist strongly to having it challenged and react defensively to an idea or thesis that does so.

    I would also like to point out that the mere fact that someone is trying to make money off a phenomenon should in no way invalidate or detract from the phenomenon itself. This way of thinking would invalidate most things that humans have found to be beneficial to health as I am pretty sure that most have been commercialised in some way (along with everything else). The skeptics get all concerned when someone tries to sell a few earth mats but turn a blind eye to the fact that drug companies are making billions by constantly pushing through drugs with questionable safety levels on the back of studies with questionable funding and aided by extremely questionable lobbying. Are these companies just “too big” for you skeptics to handle or are you skeptics in name alone and not willing to go the hard yards that would be required to tackle the companies that are doing real damage to health globally?

    Hopefully the naysayers will be able to suspend disbelief for long enough to have a look at a few of the studies below and maybe, just maybe they will have a change of heart. At the very least, I find the presence of these studies provides ample reason for further investigation.

    Differences in Blood Urea and Creatinine Concentrations in Earthed and Unearthed Subjects during Cycling Exercise and Recovery (2013)

    Earthing (Grounding) the Human Body Reduces Blood Viscosity—a Major Factor in Cardiovascular Disease (2012)

    Earthing: Health Implications of Reconnecting the Human Body to the Earth’s Surface Electrons (2012)

    Emotional Stress, Heart Rate Variability, Grounding, and Improved Autonomic Tone: Clinical Applications (2011)

    Earthing the Human Body Influences Physiologic Processes (2011)

    Chronic Disease: Are We Missing Something? (Editorial) (2011)

    Pilot Study on the Effect of Grounding on Delayed-Onset Muscle Soreness (2010)

    Changes in Pulse Rate, Respiratory Rate, Blood Oxygenation, Perfusion Index, Skin Conductance, and Their Variability Induced During and After Grounding Human Subjects for 40 Minutes (2009)

    The Effect of Earthing on Human Physiology, Part 2: Electrodermal Measurements (2007)

    The Effect of Earthing on Human Physiology, Part 1 (2006)

    The Effectiveness of a Conductive Patch and a Conductive Bed Pad in Reducing Induced Human Body Voltage Via the Application of Earth Ground (2005)

    The Biologic Effects of Grounding the Human Body During Sleep as Measured by Cortisol Levels and Subjective Reporting of Sleep, Pain, and Stress. (2004)

    Medical Thermography: Clinical Earthing Application in 20 Case Studies (2004)

    Grounding the human body to earth reduces chronic inflammation and related chronic pain (2003)

    Grounding the Human Body to Neutralize Bioelectrical Stress from Static Electricity and EMFs (2000)

    • Noah Dillon says:

      I’m very doubtful about these, but can’t really comment about any of them in the specific. Those look like they’re almost exclusively from questionable publications. Groundology seems devoted to promoting the practice without actually asking difficult questions about its plausibility or efficacy. Others look like they’re from journals that will accept anything as long as you pay a fee. Such magazines been known to publish “research” attributed to cartoon characters. The strongest one of the bunch, the only one I would take seriously, is the one on NIH’s website. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to read past the abstract. Maybe someone else can provide better commentary about the links here and the essays attached to them.

      Your point about profit motive not being a disqualifier is a good one, and worth keeping in mind. I think a lot of skeptics bring it up more in the reverse: we’re accused of defending greed by people who are happy to support their own pet billion-dollar industries because those preferred corporations seem like businesses less than Pfizer and the like. I think more skepticism of drug companies is totally warranted, especially with regard to their abuses of the patent system and preference for high-profit, low-benefit drugs (e.g. painkillers, blood pressure medications, Viagra-type drugs, anxiety-suppressing sedatives, or ever-more-pervasive antidepressants) over really important developments like vaccines or a better way of dealing with bacterial infections, or just general healthfulness like diets and exercise.

      I think that these are two different problems that arise from the same root: one is often a treatment of symptoms for a profit, the other is a magical panacea for a profit. Neither really get at underlying causes, such as poor diets, sedentary lifestyles, too little exercise, and a desire to live optimally forever with little effort. Those are cultural problems that neither alternative nor conventional medicine really deal with adequately and it would behoove us to think seriously about how to address them, rather than seeking pills or magic that allow us to avoid them.

    • My favorite one is the “groundology” study, the name I love but I digress, from that study “Grounding the Human Body to Neutralize Bioelectrical Stress from Static Electricity and EMFs (2000)” and it opening statement “From the beginning of time, except for the past few generations, humans lived
      their entire lives primarily in direct physical contact with the earth; therefore, it is assumed that humans throughout evolution were naturally grounded.”

      Lol average life expectancy in 1900 was 47 years old 1998 80 years old when the study(and I use that term loosely) was done. Almost double….
      Ya good theory I mean humans had short death ridden starvation ridden, disease filled lives, but at least they were grounded. Obviously you should discard all of modern medicine and stand in the dirt. Because I mean just two generations ago we were dying but we were of course nicely grounded.
      From that point on the study goes downhill not up.
      I loved the one with the identical photos of the legs and ankle. I mean really you take photos of the same wound with no marker for size, different lighting and compare them, and then you check their cortisol levels. Why didn’t they just record eye blinking instead of of all the rigmarole surrounding checking your cortisol levels. It has the same significance as eye blinking does for body inflammation. Cortisol levels doesn’t correlated with chronic inflammation. I would guess that if you know to test CRP and Sedimentation rate for inflammation measurement, well then you wouldn’t be attaching wires to someone’s legs to “ground them” lol.
      Matt I am soo convinced after reviewing the links.. It convinced me that you must be selling something otherwise why would you be pushing such a ridiculous thing as this. The studies made me giggle. TO even trot out this load of nonsense you must think that everyone who looks at them is pretty stupid. Operative word LOAD. I’ve seen more convincing ghost hunter episodes, or finding bigfoot episodes.
      If you want magic at least pray for healing. It wont give you scabies from dirty feet and no one will mock you (much) for being religious. :)

  70. Bruno says:

    Noah what about Coleens experience with grounding and also Janice’s before her.
    Are these people lying or are they shills????

    I have read countless accounts similar to these in the Earthing Book.

    Usually the people are elderly and tell similar stories to the above. Why would elderly people lie
    telling others of a free process such as grounding.
    There is no money making scheme here!!!!!!!!

    And if you wish to ground yourself all it needs is a piece of wire, a stake and a computer bracelet.
    About $20.00 material at the most.

    I am presently grounded using a mat that my keyboard lays on ( I purchased the mat) and I am wearing Chinese shoes with a rubber sole.

    I have measured myself presently with a Voltage electronic meter and un-grounded I am approx 2 Volts ( Fluctuating meter) however when I touch the mat with my hands it measures 0.035 V. ((Also fluctuating )

    Assuming the Voltage meter is out as it is a cheap one, there is still plenty of discrepancy of nearly 1 and 3/4 volts that one could take into account. Something is being measured and I have yet met anyone that can explain clearly what it is???

    • Eric Hall says:

      Bruno – 1. You are ignoring everything I said in the piece and the comments. 2. You are setting up a false dichotomy. 3. You misunderstand my reason for writing this.

      1. I never said they were lying. I said that we are missing several pieces of important information. We have no idea if they were taking medications during their recovery. In fact, stopping them cold turkey could be dangerous and I imagine they tapered them. We don’t know about their medical history. I have no doubt their stories are true, it is simply that they reached an incorrect conclusion based on personal bias. That isn’t accusing them of anything – it is a perfectly normal thing for the human brain to do. As Steven Novella put it,

      “When someone looks at me and earnestly says, “I know what I saw,” I am fond of replying, “No you don’t.” You have a distorted and constructed memory of a distorted and constructed perception, both of which are subservient to whatever narrative your brain is operating under.”

      Which leads me to 2. They are neither lying or a shill. They are misinformed about the scientific process. Which leads to

      3. I am trying, both in my career and in this blog, to get people to think critically about science and the world. I want people to be scientifically literate. Go with me on this for a moment. Let’s say someone reads their experience and decides to quit their medication and rely solely on grounding and they get worse or die. Or, less extreme they give up on their recovery program of physical therapy and diet and rely on grounding and get worse or never improve. If, instead, we could find the much more plausible cause of their recovery, we could then share that story to encourage others on those paths instead. To me, that’s a cause worth fighting for – and if you want to bring g-d into it, then I would think a benevolent overlord would be pleased with me trying to help people.

      • Bruno says:

        “I have no doubt their stories are true, it is simply that they reached an incorrect conclusion based on personal bias.”

        I am glad you believe their stories and the fact that similar stories are often told does not affect your perception. I fully agree with you that there are many variables we have not been told about but boy the stories all sound so similar.

        ““When someone looks at me and earnestly says, “I know what I saw,” I am fond of replying, “No you don’t.” You have a distorted and constructed memory of a distorted and constructed perception, both of which are subservient to whatever narrative your brain is operating under.”

        Steven Novella speaks with a fork tongue here. Why does he question everyone else about what they saw and not himself????
        If what we saw is distorted then how could science work.
        This leads to a numbers game and that is mob thinking over individual discovery?????

        The scientific process run my the mob!!!!!! Group think!!!!!
        Is this what you are advocating??????

  71. Bruno says:

    Thanks Matt for posting all the URL addresses for anyone wishing to follow up on grounding.
    I thought the second last one listed which I have copied below , a paper given by Clint Ober the founder of Earthing may answer some of the questions curious people may ask.


    Funny how people pass judgement but are not prepared to look at the evidence.

    Is it because you cannot patent the idea??? No money in it!!!!!! I wonder????

  72. Jamandapieceoftoast says:

    So what about the actual make-up of grass, soil, bugs, moisture etc…compared to as you had said, Eric, carpet….or metal? Do you think this would create a difference? Say rubbing your feet on carpet made out of the material it is compared to rubbing your feet into the grass and dirt…..? Out in the sun/air… different in my mind.

    • Eric Hall says:

      Electrons (the charge carriers that can easily move) are identical. If I look at an electron, I have no idea if it comes from metal, grass, my finger, etc. The material makes no difference as far as how the electrons look.

      As I acknowledged above, certainly walking outside on a warm day in soft grass barefoot is going to feel good. It will help you relax. It doesn’t take scientific nonsense to tell us that.

      • Bruno says:

        Hi Eric ,
        Thank you for the leads on Static Electricity.

        “In fact voltage is strictly a potential difference, measured at a point compared to another point defined as zero volts. In practice, the potential of the earth (ground) is normally used as the reference.
        from ” from

        Following what Vere said a few months ago that earthing was basically discharging yourself via the ground, close to zero Volts as possible it still makes sense in my mind that when I measure myself with the basic voltmeter this is what is happening. I can clearly observe the voltage slowly washing out of my body and heading towards the earths (ground) state. So something is happening which is observable.

        Now the question becomes is this healthy for you and according to tons of anecdotal evidence and some studies many people say that they sleep deeper and often the pains and aches slowly dissipate when they are grounded.

        Eric you have not shown me any experiments where you claim that the voltage of the body naturally discharges. You are correct that we often get an Electrostatic discharge usually a spark , but the question still remains if we are carrying this charge in our bodies is this good for your health????

        • Eric Hall says:

          You are confusing two concepts which is charge and voltage. If a bird sits on an electric wire, they don’t gain more charge instantly. What they do gain is voltage (what is known as electric potential). This means free charges will either flow off of them or on to them if they were to touch something at a lower or higher potential respectively.

          We will always have charges that can move. Without them, you would die. It is how signals are moved in our body. In our body, the signals work all based on potential difference, not the amount of charge (at least not by itself – that gets a little more complicated). But if you are at some higher voltage, your body is at that higher voltage and it wouldn’t affect the potential difference inside you. Again, if 1 or 2 volts on your body could affect that, it would dramatically affect it because the differences in the body are in millivolts.

  73. Bruno says:

    So we finally agree that the body has charge and may we say we are also electric beings????

    We do not fully understand the electrical processes or have the same control presently as that of the biological chemical process paradigm that reigns today.

    Therefore it is not such a big step that grounding in some way can be most helpful to many people as the anecdotal evidence shows.

    Whether it works or not its up to each and every one of us who may have some persistent health issues that are not being treated by the reigning health paradigm ( Chemical process) to experiment with it and see if it helps.

    You will never know unless you “Suck it and see”.

    • Eric Hall says:

      No, again you are misunderstanding me. I said the body does contain charges which are free to move (which in itself is a relative term). this doesn’t mean we are “charged” or the body has charge. The body contains charges – because we are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons.

      And yes, we do have a pretty good understanding of the electrical processes in the body. And even more so, we have an understanding of the physics of E&M. Your logic is flawed on its initial assumption.

      Grounding is very, very unlikely to work. In fact, I would argue the only thing to come out of grounding is if everyone did it – we would start to see deaths from it when lightning strikes their house or the ground near where the grounding post is stuck in the ground.

      Unlikely benefit, small danger…sounds like something to avoid doing.

  74. Bruno says:

    “No, again you are misunderstanding me. I said the body does contain charges which are free to move (which in itself is a relative term). this doesn’t mean we are “charged” or the body has charge. The body contains charges – because we are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons.”

    Eric thanks for your follow up on this.

    However looking at your above statement what do you mean by that ?? Can you please explain or send me a web site that makes it a little clearer for me.

    Professor C BARR from clearly is able to measure the electrical charge in the body and runs a Bio-Electricity Quantitative course from Duke University in the US.
    When I asked him what the optimum voltage of the body could be, he answered ” I don’t know . we don’t look at it that way???”

    So my assumption was well its not that there is no charge its just that convention at the moment does not look at the body as a whole but just looks at its parts. Eg. Heart pace makers

    • Dr. Barr does not subscribe in any way that the earth’s electromagnetic field is curative in any way. He is a Cardiac Physiologist and Neurological specialist. Do you use quotes from astronomers to justify astrology?

  75. Bruno says:

    “Dr. Barr does not subscribe in any way that the earth’s electromagnetic field is curative in any way. He is a Cardiac Physiologist and Neurological specialist. Do you use quotes from astronomers to justify astrology?”

    Stephen I never said he did. I just asked him “What was the optimum Voltage / Charge ”
    for a healthy body and he said ” We don’t look at it that way”

    Can You tell me in simple words to convey scientific information what you think Eric means when he states

    “No, again you are misunderstanding me. I said the body does contain charges which are free to move (which in itself is a relative term). this doesn’t mean we are “charged” or the body has charge. The body contains charges – because we are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons.”

    I have never claimed I know or understand why so many people state they are getting such wonderful results (eg Colleen) however being curious I would like to know more of what may be happening if anything?????

    • Eric Hall says:

      Again, Bruno – I don’t have time to teach an entire semester’s (or more) worth of E&M to satisfy you on this point.

      Anything made of normal matter contains charges. In a simple sense, anything with an excess of charge will have a potential difference with something that doesn’t have an excess charge. However, if an electric field is applied to an object, it can be in a position of higher potential with respect to some other position without having an excess charge. This gets more complicated in the real world because of how charges move depending on the resistivity of the material.

      Your body being at some potential doesn’t necessarily change anything about the potential differences within the cells. It is actually the discharging of that potential too quickly that can be damaging.

  76. superman says:

    @Eric Hall:
    -about grounding, scientific investigations:
    -about the same effects but with batteries:

  77. Bruno says:

    Eric I discovered today that when I am sitting on my mattress in my bedroom and I measure myself with the voltmeter I am approx 1.8 Volts.
    However when I stand up away from the bed I am approximately .888 Volts.
    Just wondering why there is a difference???
    Any suggestions???

Leave a Reply