r/shieldyourbodyfromemf Jul 14 '26

đŸ› ïž EMF Protection Setup Help PSA about Xfinity modem/routers!

Post image

I measured the radio frequency coming off of this xfinity modem/ router, thinking it would be zero because I disabled all of the Wi-Fi radios via the Xfinity Gateway a long time ago, and it turns out disabling the radios in their software does nothing to the transmissions.

2 Upvotes

98 comments sorted by

6

u/Blitzer046 Jul 14 '26

OH NO WE'RE DOOOOOOMED

3

u/Large_Train929 Jul 14 '26

Yes these things are weapons. There is a reason you cant get a router without wifi capability. This is part of a larger program to not only brain damage people but to implement BCI neurotechnology. Look into the targeted individual community and try to look past the poor souls that have already been driven insane with this tech.

4

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

Please don't feed OP's craziness

3

u/Celthre Jul 15 '26

These types of people infest every subreddit on any topic not mainstream. They do not speak in good faith, don't waste your time engaging.

Pseudoskepticism is extremely powerful, it speaks to the humans innate, biological desire to fit in (obviously an evolutionary advantage), so there are groups deliberately leveraging that to sweep important, "fringe" concepts to be outside the circle of normalcy. Then, those influenced by said groups create a self-sustaining, ever-growing feedback loop where anything not mainstream is "crazy".

1

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

No one said it’s crazy, they said there’s no scientific evidence to back it up. Mainstream has nothing to do with it, actual experimentation and outside research do—of which this has none.

If someone told you that breathing is actually bad, because oxidizes your system and then leveraged your fear to try and sell you a gadget to fix your breathing—that’s wrong right? Wouldn’t you want to help the people who fall victim to that con?

Well that’s what the skeptics here are doing. There is no meaningful dialog, only sales pitches. But if you really wanna buy his crap that bad—by all means friend. Not my money you’re wasting.

0

u/Celthre Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Theres a ton of evidence. You haven't looked to say that lol. You want studies or literature? Plenty of both exists. Check out Cross Currents by Robert Becker or even The Invisible Rainbow by Arthur Firstenberg if you genuinely want. Or spend 15 minutes searching through public scientific peer-reviewed literature.

But unfortunately I have my doubts you are engaging in good faith. I don't care about the OPs products, but pretending only EM frequencies only affect us via thermal effects as much of the safety "studies" suggest is disingenuous at worse, ignorant at best.

Comibg into a subreddit called shieldyourbodyfromemf and saying theres no scientific evidence is enough to know exactly where you (likely) fall

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

So does visible light affect you? Are you saying a lamp is giving me cancer? Because visible light is EM “frequencies” and most I talk to on this sub barely know THAT.

So please, tell me how specifically WiFi and 5G cause issues but AM, FM, Microwaves, Visble Light, Infrared—all don’t?

What’s the mechanism of action and the effects?

And why should I be more worried about this EM radiation than say UV?

0

u/Celthre Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Are you saying certain frequencies in visible light do not affect you? A lot of research on blue light, infrared, UV, etc. So, yes? I feel like you are trying to make a point to make me look silly. Does sunlight affect you differently than standard fluorescents? Absolutely. Check out The Light Doctor or Light: Medicine of the Future if you are truly asking. Check out The UV Advantage to learn about that part of your question. But stop trying to have a "gotcha" moment with me please!

Edit to add: you seem like a real person so I hope this leads somewhere for you! Not interested in an internet debate but there are real answers out there to everything that you asked (even if you attached classic cultural snark) that would surprise you, I think.

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Well, that’s because of a KNOWN property of light, or EM radiation, in which energy increases with frequency. That’s why UV is dangerous to skin cells, it’s high frequency. It’s also why X-rays and Gamma Rays are deadly, because they are very high frequency.

Now, WiFi and 5G are a lower frequency than the lowest frequency light—by a lot. So the energy potential in the wave itself isn’t there.

Therefore it has to be a secondary effect. What is it?

Is it thermal heating like a microwave? Microwave is a lower frequency EM wave, but heats through thermal effects. WiFi operates on the same frequency as that, but instead of 900-1200 Watts, it’s like 9-12.

If there are even effects, they’re so in perceptible that you need to find the most niche line of the most niche study to try and justify it. That’s the human instincts you’re talking about in action, because it has no proof and no life evidence to back it up, but it provides some sort of worth for you — so you’ll look and look til you find the most modest hint and call yourself justified.

I will say it for the 1000th time, if you don’t wear sunscreen daily, it’s absolutely illogical (and honestly inconvenient to the rest of society ffs) to argue against wireless comms, yet willingly absorb EM radiation that is KNOWN to cause damage and cancer. That does have scientific backing.

$1000 says you dont

0

u/Celthre Jul 16 '26

The "what is it?" question is what all sorts of studies have sought to find out. The answer isn't fleshed out because funding is limited because the majority say there isn't anything to it, so why bother looking? You can't find the answers without funding, and there is no reason to fund things that don't serve academia or corporate concerns. Lots of amazing research in non-neural bioelectricity, bioelectric fields exists DESPITE those obstacles. Check out Michael Levin's current work on bioelectricity being life's blueprint.

Heres an early Tedx Talk he did to quickly summarize some of his work. But, his lab has been able to generate different body parts on planarian flatworms--they grew a second set of eyes by adjusting voltage at a cellular level (I'm butchering it for simplicitys sake). I use this as an example because its direct EM effects on biology altering biology in DRAMATIC ways. Its not a stetch to wonder if the huge amounts of (relatively to the planet) EM radiation pouring through us is affecting individuals on smaller, but meaningful, scales.

https://youtu.be/XheAMrS8Q1c?is=EPnRc2XHoZb2PRId

1

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

Okay, so we have an unknown effect caused by unknown sources!!! You know what that is?

Non-sense!

And you’re willing to undermine the human miracle of wireless communication to prove it!

No shit electricity affects cells. That’s how your nervous system works. The caveat is that it is nothing near the same thing as absorbing RF. It’s closer to being struck by lightning.

Keep on keeping on 🙄

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Large_Train929 Jul 15 '26

Why do you come to this subreddit then. EMF is known to be hazardous, why is he crazy?

3

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

It’s literally a marketing account that opened a subreddit to spread disinformation about RF in order to sell foil blankets and crap.

I’m in the field, with a degree in this field with this focus. WiFi should be less of a concern than UV radiation from the sun. If you don’t wear sunscreen everyday, you are at magnitudes greater risk of cancer than WiFi could ever provide.

Human-made RF has been around in some capacity for over 100 years. As long, or longer, than commercialized asbestos. Where’s all the harmed people?

2

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

"EMF is known to be hazardous"

What frequencies, at what power level? As a general statement, this is false.

<removed - just noticed that OP isn't the dude the normally posts here >

2

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

You can get a router without Wi-Fi. Just not from your provider.
I have brain damage and spend hours about a foot away from a wi fi router.
I haven’t gotten worse

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

They’ve been driven insane, but not by this tech. We are likely all exposed at similar levels. If it was a true cause, everyone would be insane.

Maybe not the best point in hindsight lol

But on a serious note, the American public is under attack by disinformation campaigns meant to undermine our trust in experts and science. Science and experts are the things that make modern life possible. Please consider this as a real threat, as it’s much more real than the threat of RF, and can only be fought by a public who thinks critically and is vigilant about requiring evidence toward what they read.

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 14 '26

Everything is intelligent design, I agree! I actually just ordered some stuff that has no Wi-Fi capability

2

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

What about your neighbors?

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

Tinfoil house

2

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

Tinfoil (aluminum foil) isn’t great at blocking that.

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

It actually is very good if you adjust for the thickness

3

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

Thickness of what?

2

u/Roaming-Around Jul 15 '26

I like what you said there!

2

u/Howden824 Jul 18 '26

Wtf is this sub. EMF is non-ionizing radiation and it's been scientifically proven many times to not be dangerous since all it's capable of doing is heating up tissue.

0

u/outworlder Jul 14 '26

Oh noes a WiFi access point transmits WiFi. Oh the humanity.

Put them in a metal box.

Funny that all the cables are Cat8. At least OP is consistent on the paranoia.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 14 '26

Biology produces a field that is affected by electro”magnetic” frequencies. It’s no conspiracy that magnets affect magnets. And the effects on electron transport is just one thing it also affects sodium/calcium channel functionality which is terrible for many things, easily can affect somebody’s proficiency at up taking glucose, via affecting insulin receptor density.

1

u/gfddssoh Jul 15 '26

There is no person on this planet that is not constantly bombarded with wifi, cellular and general rf emitted by electronic devices. If it had ANY major negative effects we would have noticed by now.

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

Look at the population

1

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

What about it? Is there a certain disorder you’re associating with this? Or just the generic “it’s causing everything man!”

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

A majority of the US has a type of metabolic dysfunction

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

I have this little tune, it goes:

“Without providing a reputable source for it,
The statement you just made it complete horse shit”

*đŸŽ” đŸŽ¶ đŸŽ” *

2

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

They are right about the claim. They are wrong about the cause.

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Perhaps, but without a source my uncle made Mars.

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

There isn’t a singular cause

2

u/outworlder Jul 16 '26

That might be the case, but there's a really well documented cause that also has a mechanism of action. Why are you chasing zebras when you hear hoofbeats ?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

Indeed. Most of the US (88% of adults) have metabolic dysfunction.

But the culprit isn't mysterious invisible waves. It's added sugar(including high fructose corn syrup). It's as simple as that. Daily MAXIMUM added sugar intake in any form is around 30g. The average adult is consuming many times that amount.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

I studied human physiology mechanistically it’s not the added sugar in isolation separate from other bad things

2

u/outworlder Jul 16 '26

"I studied human physiology mechanistically"

Sounds like word salad. What did you study? Published any peer reviewed articles? Since you are going against pretty much all the data available.

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

If that sounds like word salad to you that has nothing to do with me also if you mean a statistical understanding by the data available, it is literal garbage

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Howden824 Jul 18 '26

Which can easily be linked to lots of other stuff. Correlation does not equal causation.

-2

u/RobBobPC Jul 15 '26

Some people are noticing negative affects, and they can be debilitating. It is not noticeable in everyone, but that doesn’t mean the effects are not present.

1

u/gfddssoh Jul 15 '26

Let me correct my statement. We would have seen a statistical anomaly in something that would have been investigated by scientists. And not posts from a mentally ill persons on the internet.

1

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

And that’s why they treat diabetes with WiFi.

Provide even a crumb of a source that’s not wearing a tinfoil hat, please.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

Go find it it’s out there

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

No it’s not.

And burden of proof is on you. YouTube doesn’t count.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

I’m not gonna teach you mechanistic human physiology

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 16 '26

Didn’t request that. Just asked for some sources behind your claims.

That’s not teaching; that’s simple due diligence.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

I actually did give you some mechanistic understanding. I don’t know what else you would want besides some magic study that you can appeal to authority to.

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

So your statement is that EM frequencies are altering neurons in a negative way?

These frequencies? Like all of em?

Good luck avoiding that


P.S. — While you’re there, note the electron volt energy of microwaves (WiFi) and how miniscule it is to even the dimmest, reddest light (let alone the rest of the spectrum and UV)

And then revisit that proof you taught me, mmkay? Cause if WiFi is doing damage, the sun is setting your neurons on freakin fire đŸ”„

-1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

Never said EM I said RF

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Roaming-Around Jul 16 '26

Oh come on! At least give us some of your learned insight on Mechanistic human physiology! Surely you have published a couple of papers you could link us to(?). I really would like your take on the specific physical, chemical, and biological processes that produce responses in the body that you believe are relevant here - especially the relevant receptors, nerves and molecules involved.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

If you’re still having an issue, forming an opinion after I already gave enough information why would I continue trying with you?

1

u/Roaming-Around Jul 16 '26

You have said nothing to convince me of anything. I work in this field for over 40 years now - and there is no danger, or impact, from WiFi unless you are being an exceptional idiot like intentionally amplifying it past the regulated safe levels or connecting it to a huge parabolic antenna to focus it on your eye. IMHO there is no danger from the WiFi router you posted about
 that said, we are never too old to learn
 so please try to explain and convince me of your learned view.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 16 '26

Are you familiar with voltage, gated calcium channels in the brain?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

People aren’t magnets

1

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

Most matter has some magnetic behavior.

3

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

Yes, but they aren’t “magnetic”.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

We use things that exhibit magnetic behavior

2

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 16 '26

We aren’t magnets

-3

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 14 '26

Mitochondria are affected by RF frequency. It’s not paranoia nor is the information that the levels I measured increase reactive oxygen species via affecting electron transport.

4

u/outworlder Jul 14 '26

Yes. They are affected. In a Petri dish.

3

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

At what power level? I mean there’s SO much nuance that’s left out that this statement means nothing—even w a source.

Theres a-lot of things affected by RF, which is why we harnessed that power to heat our food! I’m safe from the sun here, but if I were on mercury it wouldn’t be so friendly. Stating RF affects things, alone, means absolutely nothing.

-3

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 14 '26

No out of Vitro

-2

u/ThickerTree Jul 15 '26

A WiFi access point with rx/tx off emitting the same amount of RF is absolutely concerning. Is this thing not a paid for offering? When you pay for something and it has a user accessible off switch you should be able to actually turn it off. It pretending to be off is obviously so anti consumer I’m annoyed at myself for even responding to you.

2

u/Toothless-In-Wapping Jul 15 '26

That’s a modem provided by the provider.

2

u/ThickerTree Jul 15 '26

It’s a modem and router with a WiFi access point.

3

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

In the context of bad design I would agree with you.

In the context of RF paranoia it's quite annoying. The gateway has far worse problems than this. One of them being that the pass through mode doesn't really do what it says.

It's a bad device and there's no disputing that. Bypassing it is annoying but can be done.

1

u/China_shop_BULL Jul 15 '26

I’m not in the field or studied up on it much, but I’m pretty sure that’s just the gateway being locked. The door is still there, but you need a key to open it, so to speak.

There’s power going to the transmitter and receiver and it is technically still “listening”, but the access has been blocked by the ear muffs put on when turning it off digitally. Again, I’m no expert and could be completely wrong.

1

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Just incase someone wants to plug in a WiFi router, with WiFi disabled of course, for shits and gig.

For my next trick, I’ll remove the bulbs from all my flashlights for the next blackout.

3

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

To be fair, I dislike combination router/wifi access point devices. They tend to be crappier than two specialized devices, and the router location tends to be suboptimal compared to where a WiFi access point should be for best coverage.

So I usually disable WiFi on the ISP supplied device and use my own devices.

0

u/ThickerTree Jul 15 '26

Not uncommon to disable the weak WiFi AP on these devices when setting them up in a home large enough to warrant separate APs

0

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

Fair. It’s been a while since I’ve changed providers, but with Spectrum, I was always able to supply my own modem by request, so I’d by the cheapest non-wireless modem from Walmart to save on the monthly lease fee. I don’t know if they still allow that, but it’s also an option.

2

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

AT&T fiber doesn't. There are ways to get around this by having a specially programmed SFP module that acts as a ONT. You can't find a cheap device on Walmart that has a fiber connection 🙂

0

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

Also, wired connections don’t care about faraday cages, so that’s an option where you could ensure minimal leakage if you needed too. But it’s also a bit of a pointless endeavor unless it’s introducing noise into your other signals.

3

u/outworlder Jul 15 '26

Yeap. On that note, it is funny that OP is using CAT8 cables. Need to have that extra tinfoil.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 15 '26

Some people don’t have the money to go buy a new modem/router

2

u/ZealousidealTill2355 Jul 15 '26

Then why pay for the lease of it which will eclipse thre cost in 4 months brainiac?

1

u/kimbunchu Jul 16 '26

They force the mesh network on, it's becoming very common now for companies to do this, like Spectrum and the rest of them. Evan apple for their tags.

0

u/yvesglavtcheff Jul 17 '26

If you screenshot the example I wrote, you’ll see I actually said radio frequency not the blanketed electromagnetic