[HN Gopher] The effects of grounding on inflammation
___________________________________________________________________
The effects of grounding on inflammation
Author : RyanShook
Score : 47 points
Date : 2022-08-29 17:21 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
| oifjsidjf wrote:
| To anyone saying that this is pseudoscience: congratulation for
| being ignorant, this is not how science is done.
|
| Grounding has a profound effect on cell clumping, look at this
| image and tell me again how "grounding is pseudoscience".
|
| There obviously is an effect, to what extent it affects the body
| is still an open question.
|
| https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0708/5713/files/blood_flow...
|
| We understand hardly anything about how the body works and
| interacts on the global level, so it's funny how people comment
| that this is "pseudoscience": in order to mark something a
| pseudoscience you need to have hard concrete proof.
|
| Based on the image above there is far more proof FOR grounding to
| affect the body than the opposite.
|
| Alas, 10k studies later and we still don't know if saturated fats
| are good or bad since studies gives such random results lmao.
| cush wrote:
| Yeah my expectations for this comment thread were low, but it's
| funny to see people with literally zero background in biology
| skim a paper and suddenly become experts in physiology and
| experimental design
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| Remember those pictures of water crystals that had been
| subjected to emotions and formed differently?
| SanchoPanda wrote:
| I was skeptical of those first as well, but seeing that paper
| and all the press it got, I did indeed feel sad. Must have
| been the crystals!
| happyopossum wrote:
| Aside from the almost comically aggressive tone you've taken
| here, all you've brought to the table is a link to an image
| that _claims_ to be of some value in comparing before /after
| grounding.
|
| Said image has a weird and rather unprofessional font, no point
| of reference to any scientific data to back it up, and appears
| to be hosted on a storefront intended to sell you grounded
| running shoes.
|
| Not sure _that 's_ how science works.
| jackmott42 wrote:
| I mean, taking your image at face value, sure. But I don't know
| if it is fraudulent, I don't know if it was properly
| controlled, I don't know anything at all about the procedure.
| [deleted]
| swores wrote:
| Is there a source for that image which confirms what you say it
| shows and from a legitimate experiment?
|
| This whole concept is new to me so I don't have a dog in this
| race, but sharing a single out of context image rather than the
| research it (hopefully) came from doesn't do much to prove your
| claims.
| [deleted]
| nikkwong wrote:
| If you go to the disclosures statement at the bottom of the
| article, you'll learn that one of the authors on this paper--
| Gaetan Chevalier (a cell biology prof at UC Irvine)--has a
| financial interest in promoting grounding. His contributions make
| up a notable percentage of the published literature on grounding,
| maybe 10-20%? There are not many publications on the topic, since
| I assume there is a relatively weak level of financial incentive,
| and it reeks of pseudoscience.
|
| After some digging I have found papers of higher scientific
| veracity pointing to grounding being useful in reducing
| inflammation and potentially improving sleep quality. I remember
| seeing a meta-review come out in 2018-2020 which concluded that
| there is a warm-level of evidence pointing to a health-promoting
| effect of grounding on the human body. Some of the papers that
| met the inclusion criteria I think were assessed to have low
| quality of evidence, though.
|
| I don't have a strong enough background in science to know who's
| right here, but I do have sleep problems so I try to do
| everything I can to improve it. So I do ground my bed and the
| space near my keyboard so that I spend a decent amount of the day
| grounded; and I also consider it to be a completely effortless
| proposition with possibly a positive contribution to my health.
| Or, in the worst-case scenario, there's no benefit and I wasted
| maybe $10 on the copper wiring that I used to DIY it together. If
| I were a betting man my guess is that I will eventually throw
| this setup away when the science ends up being properly debunked;
| but I'm open to potentially investing more when the evidence
| becomes stronger.
| Aardwolf wrote:
| Not sure if stupid question or not, but is there any danger if
| lightning strikes outside while you're grounded indoors? E.g.
| while wearing a grounding strap to work on some electronics
| project
| sreevisakh wrote:
| The danger occurs when a human body is touching surfaces at
| different potentials. In fact, shorting all electric points
| together during a strike (using gas discharge tubes or
| something else similar) is the way to avoid accidents. You
| could ensure that the same applies to you when you're
| grounded - that is, anything else you're touching is also
| grounded.
| amelius wrote:
| Not if you add a highly conductive strip going from the
| location of the strap to the top of your head (lightning will
| take the path of the least resistance by approximation; make
| sure that the resistance is orders of magnitude lower than
| the resistance of your body).
|
| Note: it might take away the positive effects of the therapy,
| as there is now an antenna to ground that takes away the
| "antenna effect" of the body.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| The pseudoscience around grounding or "earthing" is always funny
| because it would be trivial to measure any current flowing into
| or out of the patient, yet that is conveniently omitted in favor
| of vague statements about the Earth being an "abundant source of
| mobile electrons"
|
| Grounding is one of those pseudoscience topics that never seems
| to die because someone, somewhere will produce another study
| claiming dramatic positive results and the true believers will
| conveniently ignore any studies that don't confirm their beliefs.
| Real researchers won't touch these topics because they don't want
| to be associated with such pseudoscience, so much of the
| published research comes from quack medicine practitioners.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| > it would be trivial to measure any current flowing into or
| out of the patient
|
| How would one do this, assuming the patient isn't a sphere with
| uniform resistance and an evenly distributed charge density?
| DoreenMichele wrote:
| FWIW, nasal potential difference (NPD) is an existing medical
| test:
|
| https://cysticfibrosisnewstoday.com/cystic-fibrosis-
| diagnosi....
| jfengel wrote:
| Clamp a meter around the lead wire.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| Yeah, good point, that would do it. I was thinking of
| measuring current between the patient and the interface
| somehow. That would be a lot less trivial.
| perihelions wrote:
| You could plug two hot wires into the patient and measure
| their current imbalance: the difference is ground-loop
| leakage. That's how GFCI breakers work!
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| Seems close enough to an ECG that you might end up with a
| fairly noisy signal.
| nomel wrote:
| You would be attempting to measure very weak, probably DC,
| currents. Something that could clamp on wouldn't be
| sensitive enough.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| You can easily amplify the signals in question. This is a
| good first circuit problem for a kid.
| nomel wrote:
| No you can't easily amplify the signal from a current
| clamp. That's why they're never used for sensitive
| measurements.
|
| You wouldn't clamp something on, you would use a sense
| resistor.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| You can literally buy a Fluke meter good down to 4ma with
| 0.2% accuracy: https://a.co/d/d8MZFKC
| nomel wrote:
| 10mA is enough to lose control of your muscles. 4mA is
| incredibly insensitive [1] compared to a more direct
| measurement, with volts from electrons, rather than
| trying to measure their weak magnetic field, at a
| distance, as they zip by. With a sense resistor, you can
| use a bench top voltmeter [2] to measure nA.
|
| 1. 10fA resolution, over 400 billion times more
| sensitive: https://smt.at/en/products/electrometer-nv-
| meter/picoamperem...
|
| 2. > 1 million times more sensitive, with GO sense
| resistor:
| https://www.keysight.com/us/en/assets/7018-06774/data-
| sheets...
| heisenzombie wrote:
| The currents would be much less than 4mA.
|
| I'll try to estimate the most current we could expect.
| Some googling throws up that a human body has ~30pF of
| capacitance, and that static electricity can be up to
| 20kV in very dry conditions. That's 600 nanocoulombs of
| charge. If we guess that you're building that up once
| once every minute (what a terrible existence, getting a
| big shock 60 times an hour!), then the grounding strap
| would be carrying ~10nA continuously.
| kazinator wrote:
| Discharge through a tiny (fraction of an ohm) current-
| sensing resistor, measuring the voltage across it.
| agumonkey wrote:
| what's the smallest current the average dc meter can
| measure ?
| nomel wrote:
| With a current clamp? Hundreds of mA. Here's one for $600
| (just the clamp) that can do 5mA.
|
| You wouldn't use a clamp for something like this. You
| would use a sense resistor.
| [deleted]
| codefreeordie wrote:
| That's super weird and fascinating. I'm suddenly really curious
| if I would detect any change if I bought one of those grounded
| floor mats for my office.
| devb wrote:
| You'll have to make sure you buy conductive footwear.
| dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
| I'm not sure if you're kidding but if not, you most certainly
| would.
| skyyler wrote:
| What can one expect?
| airbreather wrote:
| What a load of shit, most people in the western world are
| "grounded" most of the time by virtue of being inside modern
| structures and directly grounded everytime the touch any non
| double insulated appliance, water tap, gas appliance etc.
|
| Plus if there was significant charge in your body, or structure
| you would feel it.
|
| Here is an experiment, your tongue is sensitive to less than a
| volt, touch you tongue to a water pipe, or your fridge or washing
| machine. Feel any sparks or tingles?
|
| If the answer is no then you were already very close to ground
| potential.
|
| If you are prone to accumulating static electricity then a pointy
| foil hat will help bleed it off more quickly (that's a joke, but
| it's not).
| dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
| I have two types of floor in my house: one conducts electricity
| relatively well, the other - not so much (wood). I walk
| barefoot most of the time when I'm inside in the summer. No
| difference at all except that wood feels warmer and therefore
| cosier, that's all.
| nikkwong wrote:
| Ok sure.. but. Let's say you eat tuna every day for two
| months. You're likely to build up a significant amount of
| mercury in your body to the point where it's causing
| oxidative stress and antagonizing most major organ systems in
| your body. Are you going to notice that? Maybe your body will
| over the period of two months start to require maybe 15 more
| minutes of sleep to help cope with the new level of cellular
| burden it's experiencing. Are you realistically likely to be
| able to point to this subjectively?
|
| All of these actions we take as part of our lifestyle have a
| profound effect on our physiology on the macro level; but
| we're not likely to notice any single factor's contribution
| in isolation.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| mercury is a bad example since it is lifetime-accumulative
| .. my reaction to this discussion is that not enough regard
| is held for odd or extreme living conditions, but that the
| subject is actually as most critics say.. contact with
| water, water bodies and cool earth in some way are
| trivially common for a vast majority of people.. Now,
| working with computers specifically adds a source .. but
| doesnt change the above..
| nikkwong wrote:
| Mercury does accumulate in the body but I was more
| pointing out that serum mercury levels can fluctuate
| greatly in a relatively short period. My mom eats a ton
| of that tuna from costco and had blood levels far above
| the reference range; which dropped into the reference
| range 4 months after consumption cessation. She saunas
| and exercises; so that may have something to do with it.
| I agree mercury is a bad example for the reason because
| the actual levels of mercury burden an individual carries
| can be nuanced (serum + housed into organs etc). I'm not
| sure I follow your final sentence.
| manmal wrote:
| Mercury just settles down inside cells (the parts that
| are not eliminated), where it's hard to detect without
| using a chelator. Serum levels are not a good indicator
| in the long term.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| Do you ever shower or bathe? Do you touch the faucet handle
| when doing so? Congrats - you just grounded yourself. Reset
| right back to neutral.
|
| If you want to test this go shuffle across carpet in your
| socks for a hot minute and then touch the faucet.
| nikkwong wrote:
| No argument from me; but I think the debate around this
| research is focused on what the biological effects are
| when one undergoes a prolonged period of grounding; i.e.
| for 8 hours during sleep, or several hours during the
| day, rather than for momentary periods.
| nomel wrote:
| All of my modern furniture, flooring, and clothing is plastic.
| They all result in massive static buildup. I've lived in dry
| places where you would get a significant zap every time you
| touched a faucet. If you work with electronics, you'll know
| that ground straps aren't optional, in dry climates. Your
| perspective may be limited to a humid climate.
| kazinator wrote:
| Static buildup is all on the outside of a body, because the
| body is conductive and the charges repel each other. The
| static buildup doesn't affect chemical reactions in your
| cells; e.g. with electrons that occupy positions, hindering
| electron movement.
|
| I think that's the essence of what this pseudo-scientific
| nonsense is trying to assert, which is false.
| nomel wrote:
| > I think that's the essence of what this pseudo-scientific
| nonsense is trying to assert, which is false.
|
| I agree, but it's important to fight pseudoscience with
| actual facts.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| cush wrote:
| Tell all that to my elevator button. It shocks me every other
| day in my brand new modern building.
| orzig wrote:
| Anecdata to counteract the file drawer effect:
|
| I read a little bit about grounding, shrugged my shoulders, and
| spent a week exercising barefoot in the backyard (I had
| previously done the same exercises with shoes on). No noticeable
| impact.
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| Were you doing low impact exercises?
|
| Something like burpees should have caused some indentation to
| the ground!
| throwayyy479087 wrote:
| I am truly shocked by this. What an amazing and nearly-
| unbelievable outcome!
| amluto wrote:
| > Our main hypothesis is that connecting the body to the Earth
| enables free electrons from the Earth's surface to spread over
| and into the body, where they can have antioxidant effects.
| Specifically, we suggest that mobile electrons create an
| antioxidant microenvironment around the injury repair field
|
| The Earth has special electrons. Yeah right.
|
| What I _would_ believe is that, in a dry climate, one regularly
| picks up some static charge that dissipates through tiny
| discharges (shocks) when touching something sufficiently large at
| a different potential, e.g. anything grounded. Grounding oneself
| will change that to a more continuous very very tiny current and
| one moves around and accumulates charges. Maybe this has an
| effect?
| cush wrote:
| > The Earth has special electrons
|
| Nowhere in the article is this stated. Walking barefoot on soil
| would ground the body, as opposed to being in shoes. That's it.
| It's not woo woo. Either your body is grounded or it isn't. Any
| electrician knows this.
|
| The article is stating that your body regularly may be carrying
| some charge (again talk to anyone who works on computers), and
| (according to their studies) yes it has an effect on your
| health.
| swader999 wrote:
| This is why I sleep on my stomach.
| raymondh wrote:
| I use copper cookware and I feel great.
| [deleted]
| pbasista wrote:
| This is pseudoscience at large. This article itself cites ~60
| other articles on the same subject. Unbelievable.
|
| If any of what they claim about "grounding" was true, the doctors
| would notice it a long time ago and they would be wiring patients
| to ground potential for decades already.
|
| This article is likely a deliberate attempt to trick and confuse
| people who are prone to believe almost any misinformation. Such
| people might believe that Covid vaccines contain chips or that
| Trump won the 2020 election or that there were no Moon landings
| or that the Earth is flat or that Putin is actually entitled to
| attack "nazis" in Ukraine.
|
| Unfortunately, the same people are prone to believe all these
| lies. And, also unfortunately, they are unlikely to believe any
| sane information which disproves them.
|
| It is in my opinion a dangerous state. Consider that there is a
| massive group of people who are completely brainwashed by these
| misinformation campaigns. They are easily manipulated by those
| who spread misinformation because in their eyes those people are
| the only ones who have an opinion that is compatible with their
| understanding of the world. Even when it is completely nuts,
| against any logic and against any science.
| datavirtue wrote:
| To what end?
| nikkwong wrote:
| > If any of what they claim about "grounding" was true, the
| doctors would notice it a long time ago and they would be
| wiring patients to ground potential for decades already.
|
| I'm not sure if this is how medicine works. There are many
| practices that 'should be obvious' as health promoting but
| weren't put into place clinically until recently. For example,
| bright, early morning sunlight for alleviating depression and
| anxiety; or using infrared light for reducing local
| inflammation and reducing pain.
|
| We've been able to use electromagnetism to our advantage for
| hundreds of years, but only within the last decade or so these
| two use cases which look incredibly obvious in retrospect have
| become common place. So I don't think doctors are always 'quick
| to notice'. However, I think most of your latter points are
| correct.
| pbasista wrote:
| > I'm not sure
|
| What I am saying is that medicine is a science and as such
| uses the scientific method. The people involved in it can
| develop vaccines, perform neurosurgery, etc. They do not need
| a bunch of misinformation spreaders to tell them that there
| is this great "life hack" that everyone has been missing all
| these years.
|
| If there was e.g. a considerable disproportion in the healing
| time of the same kind of wounds in patients from hospitals A
| and B, the doctors and other scientists would look into it,
| even decades ago. If "grounding" of hospital beds was to be
| the root cause, they would have noticed it and investigated
| it.
|
| Yet, no such "discovery" was ever made.
| pazimzadeh wrote:
| Alternatively, contact with soil could stimulate immune sensors
| like TLR's which would influence the inflammatory cascade.
|
| But anyway, this theory could easily be tested by designing a
| special mouse cage which is grounded, and looking for differences
| in inflammation using standard models.
| evmar wrote:
| I didn't have any particular expectation when I opened up this
| link, but because I was curious about the authors I clicked on
| one and found they had also published one titled:
|
| "Evidence for a connection between coronavirus disease-19 and
| exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless communications
| including 5G"
|
| Which I guess in some sense might also possibly be true, but I
| gotta say it's a pretty bad opening sign.
| pbasista wrote:
| > in some sense might also possibly be true
|
| The article you cited mentions "evidence". If there was indeed
| "evidence", we would know it for a fact.
|
| These articles merely try to attract facts-ignoring audience to
| which they can then spread misinformation that cannot easily be
| disproved. While these people are busy theorizing about the
| plausibility of the suggested idea, they are easily
| manipulated. The reason is that they would only be trusting the
| misinformation spreaders because only their opinions would be
| compatible with their understanding of the world.
|
| It is, unfortunately, as simple as that. Create misinformation
| that cannot possibly be disproved. Spread it out. Watch as
| people waste years coming with crazy constructions of
| hypothetical worlds where whatever you claim might potentially
| be true. Profit off of their stupidity by having huge influence
| on their opinions. Rinse and repeat.
|
| This is how Putin's propaganda works. And this is also how
| Trump's lies work.
| datavirtue wrote:
| Hmmm...not sure if it's grounding related but the biggest relief
| from my back pain comes when I lie directly on the ground
| (grass/soil).
|
| Nothing else even comes close.
| eurasiantiger wrote:
| Back pain is often a psychosomatic symptom of prolonged,
| inescapable stress.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-29 23:02 UTC)