Magnetism and its Effects on the Living System

In this blog, I’ve discussed several people who promote pseudoscience related to health effects of electric and magnetic fields, including Robert Becker and his book The Body Electric and Arthur Firstenberg and his book The Invisible Rainbow. Today I examine a pair of authors whose theories are, if anything, nuttier than Becker’s or Firstenberg’s: Albert Roy Davis and Walter Rawls. 

Are Electromagnetic Fields
Making Me Ill?

Here is what I write about these two in my book Are Electromagnetic Fields Making Me Ill?

Some of [Isaac Goiz] Duran’s ideas harken back to the bizarre notions of Albert Roy Davis and Walter Rawls, who believed that the north and south poles of magnets have dramatically different biological effects, even though the only difference between the poles is the direction of the field. For instance, they write that “when magnetic energy of the negative N [north] pole is applied to [a] cancer site, a remarkable reduction in the condition and also a marked arrest in further development of the cancer condition takes place… [whereas] when the S [south] pole of a magnet, this being the positive energy of a magnet, is applied to cancers they become more advanced and then develop, grow and spread at an accelerated rate.” Their ideas are not limited to explaining how magnetic fields interact with biological tissue, but require a complete revision of the electromagnetic theory expressed in Maxwell’s equations, which have formed the theoretical foundation for our understanding of electricity and magnetism for over 150 years, and are responsible for much of our modern technology. Indeed, Davis and Rawls immodestly declare that their readers “must be willing to leave behind them the outmoded, incorrect theories and concepts of magnetism [as formulated in Maxwell’s equations]” and insist that their view “offers a totally different picture than is now used in present textbooks and is used as law and theory in all related research.”

Do physicists really use an “outmoded and incorrect theory” to describe magnetism? Are Russ Hobbie and I teaching nonsense about biomagnetism in Intermediate Physics for Medicine and Biology? I don’t think so. 

Magnetism and its Effects
on the Living System

To give you a flavor of Davis and Rawls views, I obtained interlibrary loan a copy of their book Magnetism and its Effects on the Living System. The picture below (their page 22) show the traditional view of the magnetic field produced by the earth on the left (Davis and Rawls call it “the old”), and their revised view on the right (“the new”). The magnetic field near the equator is completely different in the two cases; in the traditional view the field is parallel to the earth’s surface, while in the revised view it is perpendicular to the surface. Davis and Rawls should have consulted the work of Alexander von Humboldt (1769–1859), who was one of the first to measure the dip angle of the earth’s magnetic field and map the magnetic equator. “The old” view is the correct view. 
 

Page 22 of Magnetism and its Effects on the Living System,
showing two hypotheses for the magnetic field of the earth.

In case you think that this is an unimportant detail that does not represent Davis and Rawls general theory, take a look at the picture they selected for their title page. 

Title page of Magnetism and its Effects on the Living System.

 

Davis and Rawls also believe that magnets can be used for pain relief. They write

The effects of applying N [north] pole magnetic energy to the nerves act to lower their sensitivity. This lowering of sensitivity allows us a certain control of a pain condition. When we transmit S [south] pole energies to the nerves they respond with a greater sensitivity to pain.

Yet, using magnets for pain has been proven to be ineffective. In my book Are Electromagnetic Fields Making Me Ill? I cite several clinical studies finding no effect. Magnetic fields do not provide pain relief, regardless of the polarity you use.

In addition, the authors claim that magnets can affect your brain.

In research experiments with small and advanced animals and man, in the case of willing subjects, we have found that the magnet’s NORTH POLE ONLY, when applied to the brain, can and will upgrade the senses of perception.

Again, no such effects have been found. Having an MRI does not influence how your brain works, regardless of if you lie in the bed feet-first or head-first. 

Why do I harp on people like Becker, Firstenberg, Davis, and Rawls? Am I beating a dead horse? After all, none of these authors are around now to defend themselves, and their views have been rejected by modern science. Why not let sleeping dogs lie? The main reason I bring them up is that people still cite these researchers and their books to advance their voodoo science ideas of how electric and magnetic fields influence the body. These views are both wrong and, at times, dangerous. They are not harmless eccentricities.

To be fair, I’ll give Davis and Rawls the final word: below I quote the last sentence of their book. Let me note that the book was written in 1974, over fifty years ago, and their hypotheses are all but forgotten, except by a few quacks.

Therefore, we hope this book will challenge the youth and the physicists of today, the scientific community as exploring scientists, to explore this new and exciting scientific probe, with a new outlook and new approach for a better world, the world of tomorrow. 

 

Listen to Walter Rawls describe his view of how magnetic fields affect the body. 
I disagree with what Rawls says, but you can watch the video and decide for yourself. 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gha_X7wApQc