6,486 Studies Reviewed. 85.2% of Original Studies Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.
Shield Your Body
Brain & Nervous System

Physiologically patterned weak magnetic fields applied over left frontal lobe increase acceptance of false statements as true.

Bioeffects Seen

Ross ML, Koren SA, Persinger MA. · 2008

View Original Abstract
Share:

Burst-firing and 25 Hz pulsed magnetic fields applied over the left prefrontal region led participants to accept about twice as many false statements as true.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

Researchers tested whether a weak magnetic field pulsed over the left prefrontal brain region at the moment of accepting or refuting a statement could increase the likelihood of later accepting a false statement as true. Fifty men and women were each exposed to one of four magnetic field conditions, or a sham field, over the left prefrontal region above the eyebrow. Groups that received the burst-firing or 25 Hz pulsed fields during the refutation process accepted about twice the number of false statements as true compared to those in the 50 Hz or sham-field conditions. The treatments did not significantly affect the numbers of true statements accepted as false.

Why This Matters

Participants were shown statements about definitions of words for a "foreign language" and told whether each was "true" or "false". Three of the magnetic field patterns had intensities between 1 and 10 microT and were each presented for 1 second during the refutation process. A fourth condition was a variable approximately 7 to 10 Hz field at 10 nT present continuously during the entire experiment. The researchers suggest that an appropriately pulsed magnetic field during the refutation process can increase the probability a person will accept a false statement as true.

Exposure Details

Magnetic Field
0.001 to 0.01 mT
Source/Device
25 Hz, 50 Hz
Exposure Duration
20 ms on - 20 ms off, for 1 s & 10 ms on - 10 ms off, for 1 s

Exposure Context

This study used 0.001 to 0.01 mT for magnetic fields:

Building Biology guidelines are practitioner-based limits from real-world assessments. BioInitiative Report recommendations are based on peer-reviewed science. Check Your Exposure to compare your own measurements.

Where This Falls on the Concern Scale

Study Exposure Level in ContextStudy Exposure Level in ContextThis study: 0.001 to 0.01 mTExtreme Concern - 5 mGFCC Limit - 2,000 mGEffects observed in the Extreme Concern range (Building Biology)FCC limit is 200 times higher than this level
A logarithmic frequency spectrum from 10 Hz to 100 GHz showing where this study's 25 Hz - 50 Hz exposure sits relative to common EMF sources.Where This Frequency Sits on the EMF SpectrumELFVLFLF / MFHF / VHFUHFSHFmm10 Hz100 GHzThis study: 25 Hz - 50 HzCell phones~1 GHzWiFi2.4 GHz5G mm28 GHzLogarithmic scale

Study Details

To test whether a weak magnetic field pulsed over the left prefrontal brain region at the moment of accepting or refuting a statement could increase the likelihood of later accepting a false statement as true.

Fifty men and women were exposed to only one of four experimentally generated magnetic fields over t...

When the statements were presented again, the groups who had received the burst-firing (“limbic”) or...

Cite This Study
Ross ML, Koren SA, Persinger MA. (2008). Physiologically patterned weak magnetic fields applied over left frontal lobe increase acceptance of false statements as true. Electromagn Biol Med. 27(4):365-371, 2008.
Show BibTeX
@article{ml_2008_physiologically_patterned_weak_magnetic_290,
  author = {Ross ML and Koren SA and Persinger MA.},
  title = {Physiologically patterned weak magnetic fields applied over left frontal lobe increase acceptance of false statements as true.},
  year = {2008},
  doi = {10.1080/15368370802493545},
  url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15368370802493545},
}
DOI: 10.1080/15368370802493545

Cited By (12 papers)

Quick Questions About This Study

Groups exposed to the burst-firing or 25 Hz pulsed magnetic fields accepted about twice the number of false statements as true compared to those in the 50 Hz or sham-field conditions.
The treatments did not significantly affect the numbers of true statements accepted as false.
The field was applied over the left prefrontal region, described as above the eyebrow.
The 25 Hz, 50 Hz, and burst-firing patterns had intensities between 1 and 10 microT.
Fifty men and women participated, each exposed to only one of the four field conditions or a sham field.