From the discussions above, I'm not at all persuaded that "the correlations" exist. No correlation = probably no causal link. No causal link makes consideration of theoretical mechanisms to explain a (probably) non-existent relationship speculative at best.
The geomagnetic field is large (obviously) but weak. A fridge magnet is about 100-200 times stronger.
Does moving towards or away from a fridge magnet significantly, or even detectably, affect our health? No.
(I realise there's already been discussion of static v. fluctuating fields- fridge magnets v. geomagnetic events- in earlier posts).
But most of us are close to fridge magnets, or hairdryers, or any number of electrical devices / sources of magnetism for longer durations in any given year (probably any given week) than the Earth experiences significantly raised solar activity in a year.
Fluctuations in the magnetic force we experience as we move toward, use, and move away from these sources are far greater than anything that geomagnetic storms (or the geomagnetic field) expose us to.
(Powerful magnets can pause or re-set implanted cardioverter-defibrillators when placed over them, and a large ring magnet can be found on many crash carts. Naturally-paced hearts are immune).
Earth's magnetic field is dynamic, as anyone who's used paper maps and compass over several years knows, and its shape
in space is affected by solar activity. However, rates of change at the Earth's surface are relatively slow- slow enough for the strength of the field across Earth to be mapped:
View attachment 66144
Map courtesy of NOAA/NCEI and CIRES, 2019. Field intensity units are in nanoteslas. Open in new tab to enlarge.
The field intensity does not correlate in any
useful way with morbidity, mortality or health outcomes
(e.g. you might find a greater per capita risk of hypothermia in the areas of highest intensity- east Antarctica, and in Siberia- than in the area of lowest intensity- over central South America. Or conversely, a greater risk of Zika virus in central South America than in Antarctica. So there's correlation, but it's not caused by the geomagnetic field).
If you moved from La Paz, Bolivia (field intensity between 23,000 and 24,000 nanotesla) to Hobart, Australia (approx. 62,000 nanotesla) and kept the same lifestyle, I doubt if your risk of MIs, CVAs (discussed in posts above) would increase.
During more intense solar activity, there is more intense auroral activity, roughly centred around the Earth's geomagnetic poles. But I'm going to predict that there isn't an upsurge in serious illness in southern Australia during the day or two that these events last, even though that's the closest inhabited region to the southern geomagnetic pole. (I'm guessing Australia keeps good health records, don't know the situation for Siberia, closest to the north geomagnetic pole).
However, the geomagnetic field is not a fluctuating field as such.
Geomagnetic storms affect large electricity distribution/ wire cable communications networks at ground level because the networks act as huge antennae; it's as if they receive (and conduct) an electromagnetic pulse.
Humans are not huge antennae.
During the Carrington Event of 1859, the largest geomagnetic event on historical record, some telegraph operators received shocks from their machines but there was no associated outbreak of ill-health.
Wikipedia, Carrington Event
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrington_Event
There must have been geomagnetic storms on the same scale or larger than the Carrington Event earlier in our history, but because solar observatories were scarce and there weren't miles of highly conductive cabling, no-one noticed.
Magnetic, crystalline and piezoelectric materials in the brain.
There appear to be very low traces of magnetite distributed in the brain, but no-one's ever suffered ill effects from having a head MRI scan from this material, whereas metal debris or implanted/ inserted/ ingested metals in the body can be dragged through tissue by the MRI field with unpleasant consequences. Presumably any magnetite particles are of very low mass and are firmly anchored to, or encapsulated in, non-ferrous structures/ deposits of proportionately much higher mass.
Kirschvink, Kobayashi-Kirschvink and Woodford, 1992 may have been the first to detect magnetite in the brain, see
"Magnetite biomineralization in the human brain",
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 89 (16) August 1992, paper available here
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC49775/.
Their abstract concludes,
External Quote:
Biogenic magnetite in the human brain may account for high-field saturation effects observed in the T1 and T2 values of magnetic resonance imaging and, perhaps, for a variety of biological effects of low-frequency magnetic fields.
Note the "perhaps", the non-specificity of "a variety of biological effects" and the year (1992); any evidence of significant effects of magnetic fields on humans in the past 32 years has been tenuous (other than evidence from the directed application of fluctuating fields of great intensity, as in transcranial magnetic stimulation).
MRI scanners have a field of approx. 3 tesla (not nano- or microtesla!), it's a static field, but
External Quote:
That would change, however, if the patient inside the scanner were to rapidly move his or her head back and forth. "Moving quickly induces a time-varying field, so by doing that you are inducing currents in different structures of your brain," says Legros. Those currents may lead to nausea, loss of balance, a metallic taste in your mouth, or in some cases, magnetophosphenes.
(But not heart attack, stroke, or conversion to suicidal terrorist, see earlier posts),
sourced from "What Magnetic Fields Do to Your Brain and Body", Erica Tennenhouse, May 2018 for
Discover magazine website, quoting Alexandre Legros, medical biophysicist at the Lawson Health Research Institute and Western University, Ontario.
It's not known if magnetite in the body has any physiological role, if it might have had a physiological role in our distant ancestors, or if it might be deleterious. It is not really known if it is taken up from the environment or produced in vivo (there's iron in blood, of course).
More significant magnetite deposits in some other organisms might have a role in navigation.
One recent paper claims that there is a significant relationship between geomagnetic disturbances and "vagrancy" (creatures ending up at unexpected places) during the autumn migrations of some bird species:
"Geomagnetic disturbance associated with increased vagrancy in migratory landbirds", Tonelli, Youngflesh and Tingley, 2023,
Scientific Reports 13, paper accessible here
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-26586-0#Fig1
-although the proportion of birds that go vagrant is
very low.
Strangely the researchers report a negative relationship between observed solar activity and bird vagrancy,
External Quote:
This was contrary to our hypothesis that solar activity would cause disorientation and increase vagrancy, and was surprising given the positive correlation between solar activity and geomagnetic disturbance
External Quote:
Results from this interaction model provide strong evidence for a negative interaction during fall migration, suggesting that during periods of high solar activity, birds are less sensitive to the effect of geomagnetic disturbance
(Tonelli, Youngflesh and Tingley, ibid., my emphasis.)
which might imply either (1) solar activity and the chosen instances of geomagnetic disturbance do not in fact correlate, or (2) the found correlation between bird vagrancy and geomagnetic disturbance is incorrect, or weaker than the authors conclude or (3, unlikely) the authors have overlooked the time lag between observed solar activity and geomagnetic disturbance.
External Quote:
Our results suggest that the combination of high solar activity and geomagnetic disturbance leads to either a pause in migration or a switch to other cues during fall migration—either would ultimately mitigate the misorientation effect of simultaneously high geomagnetic disturbance.
(Ibid.)
-But how would birds sense increased solar activity
except by geomagnetic effects? They probably can't see sunspots or solar flares. It must be questionable if altering their navigation strategy from a magnetic-field guided approach during increased solar activity (which they probably can't sense), only to change back again when the solar activity subsides, but its geomagnetic effects kick in (which they might be able to detect) makes any evolutionary sense.
Humans do not appear to have any innate sense of where north or south are, although there are
visual clues in many environments which we might not be consciously aware of. It seems unlikely that we are more spatially disorientated during geomagnetic disturbances.
External Quote:
Researchers have conducted a number of experiments to determine whether humans have a magnetic compass sense, but these have been inconclusive. Expert opinion is fairly unanimous that there are no convincing indications of such a sense in humans. On the other hand, there is good evidence that many insects, birds and reptiles have such a sense, although it remains unclear under which conditions they make use of it.
Psychology Professor C. Randy Gallistel at UCLA, in
"Do humans have some kind of homing instinct, possibly involving navigation by magnetism like certain birds do?",
Scientific American 21 October 1998,
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-humans-have-some-kind/
Maher, Ahmed et al. proposed that magnetite in the brain is an industrial pollutant, absorbed from the environment via the olfactory bulb,
"Magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the human brain",
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 113 (39) September 2016, abstract accessed here
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27601646/
Examining 37 post-mortem brains, the authors describe higher concentrations towards the front of the brain which they believe supports their hypothesis.
It is noted that magnetite nanoparticles are very commonly encountered (and presumably inhaled);
External Quote:
Our magnetic measurements of roadside airborne PM [in Lancaster, United Kingdom (
28)] indicate magnetite particle numbers equivalent to ∼2.01 × 108 m−3 of roadside air, for ∼50-nm-sized magnetite particles, for an ambient PM10 concentration of ∼40 µg⋅m−3 (compared, for example, with the annual mean PM10 for Mexico City of between ∼30 and 70 µg⋅m−3).
External Quote:
In addition to occupational settings [including, for example, exposure to printer toner powders (
36)], higher concentrations of magnetite pollution nanoparticles are likely to arise in the indoor environment from open fires (
25) or poorly sealed stoves used for cooking and/or heating, and in the outdoor environment from vehicle (especially diesel) and/or industrial PM sources.
Barbara A. Maher, lead author above, has gone on to discuss the possibility of cerebral magnetite (and other iron-rich particles) being a risk for neurodegenerative diseases:
"Airborne Magnetite- and Iron-Rich Pollution Nanoparticles: Potential Neurotoxicants and Environmental Risk Factors for Neurodegenerative Disease, Including Alzheimer's Disease",
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease 21 (2), 2019, abstract available here
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31381513/
If you scroll down on either of the last 2 links, you'll find that there's quite a bit of research investigating concerns about ferrous metal nanoparticles in the brain and heart. Don't lose too much sleep over it, we already know that environments polluted with heavy metals are bad for your health, and it's practically impossible to assess how much magnetite/ other iron there is in a living brain or heart at the mo., so it's not a diagnostic indicator.
Gilder, Wack, Kaub et al. (2018) mapped the distribution of magnetite across 7 post-mortem brains, described in
"Distribution of magnetic remanence carriers in the human brain",
Scientific Reports 8,
paper accessible here
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-29766-z
As far as I understand it, it seems a well-conducted study. There's considered discussion of possible confounding variables which might contribute to both type 1 and type 2 experimental error. The small sample size is acknowledged.
The researchers were aware of the 2016 Maher et al. paper, but reach different conclusions: There appears to be more magnetite in the cerebellum and brainstem (particularly, it seems, the medulla oblongata) than in the cortex, which might be evidence for physiological, not environmental origins.
View attachment 66214
External Quote:
Contour maps using the Ferret (
http://www.ferret.noaa.gov/Ferret) color scale of the median, mass normalized, saturation isothermal remanent magnetization (SIRM) values using the cut-off method. (
a) Horizontal view from dorsal (above) of the cerebral cortex only. (
b) Mid-sagittal view of the entire brain including cerebral cortex, cerebellum and brain stem.
-Fig. 4, Gilder et al., ibid.
If magnetite in the brain affects its immediate cellular environment in the short term (as opposed to longer term chemo-physical neurotoxic effects as proposed by Maher and others) and is affected by fluctuating magnetic fields, we're in trouble.
The medulla oblongata is responsible for respiratory drive, influences heart rate according to systemic demands, and mediates blood pressure (amongst other things). You'd want it to perform consistently.
Fortunately, there is no evidence whatsoever of the medulla being affected in any way whatsoever by geomagnetic events.
Maybe nausea produced by rapidly moving the head in an MRI scanner may be connected to the bulbar reflexes which are governed by the medulla oblongata but (1) I'm speculating, (2) that's in a field of approx. 3 tesla, (3) as pathology it's trivial and entirely transient, and (4) the vestibular apparatus is probably a better candidate.
We do not experience wildly fluctuating heart rate and blood pressure, or respiratory arrest, as a result of geomagnetic storms. Not so much as a brief bulbar symptom. It would be noticed.
Now,
the pineal gland.
Gilder et al. (ibid):
External Quote:
The median SIRM magnetizations for the olfactory bulb, pineal gland and choroid plexus were over an order of magnitude higher than those for the cerebral cortex (Fig.
2).
External Quote:
Our measurements of the olfactory bulb showed they were over an order of magnitude more magnetic on average than the cerebral cortex (Fig.
2). However, the pineal gland and choroid plexus that are topographically situated far from the olfactory bulb and have no direct connection to it, were just as magnetic...
Taken from Gilder et al.'s Fig. 2,
External Quote:
Histograms of the mass normalized saturation isothermal magnetizations (SIRM) separating the specimens by anatomy
(see paper for more information, e.g. explanation of cut-off, and charts for cerebral cortex, cerebellum and brainstem)
View attachment 66219
It is difficult to know how representative this is due to the small number of subject donors (7; remember 2 x olfactory bulbs per person). There are different numbers of specimens from each anatomical area (e.g. the histogram at right shows results for 5 pineal glands, 4 samples of choroid plexus, 6 olfactory bulbs), I haven't done the maths but at a glance the average magnetization of the pineal gland and olfactory bulb samples are very approximately equal, choroid plexus
maybe slightly less.
What isn't mentioned is that the choroid plexus and the pineal gland are both well-known for developing calcification, often clearly visible on head CTs.
External Quote:
Normal intracranial calcifications can be defined as all age-related physiologic and neurodegenerative calcifications that are unaccompanied by any evidence of disease and have no demonstrable pathological cause.
pineal gland:
-seen in 2/3 of the adult population and increases with age
-calcification over 1 cm in diameter or in patients under nine years of age may be suggestive of a neoplasm
habenula [not relevant here]
choroid plexus:
-a very common finding, usually in the atrial portions of the lateral ventricles (choroid glomus)
-calcification in the third or fourth ventricle or in patients less than nine years of age is uncommon
[list continues].
"Normal intracranial calcifications", Radiopaedia.org website, last revised by Yaïr Glick, 29 November 2023 (minor editing to format),
https://radiopaedia.org/articles/normal-intracranial-calcifications
The choroid plexus and pineal gland were known as locations of physiological mineralization, at the visible level, long before microscopic traces of magnetite were found.
External Quote:
The choroid plexus is also a major source of
transferrin secretion that plays a part in
iron homeostasis in the brain
(Wikipedia, Choroid plexus,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choroid_plexus)
External Quote:
Unlike most of the mammalian brain, the pineal gland is not isolated from the body by the
blood–brain barrier system;
[12] it has profuse blood flow, second only [proportional to mass; John J.] to the
kidney,
(Wikipedia, Pineal gland,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineal_gland),
so perhaps we should not be
too surprised if it turns out that the pineal gland and choroid plexus, each frequently associated with calcium-based mineralisation, manage to produce a (vastly smaller) amount of iron-based minerals with the iron available.
(I don't want to seem too glib about this; any process of production, and any identified function or health implications of magnetite in these structures, would be potentially important finds.)
The pineal gland has been of interest to
purveyors of Woo students of the neglected sciences for centuries, probably because it's roughly in the middle of the brain.
With great generosity they left finding out what it's composed of, how it develops and what it actually does to others.
The gland produces melatonin, which plays a role in regulating our sleep patterns in conjunction with external light levels. The melatonin
might have a role in new bone deposition, and maybe to some extent in other physiological roles. Perhaps most importantly in humans, the pineal gland appears to inhibit functions of the pituitary gland throughout childhood, delaying puberty. Children with a damaged pineal may undergo "precocious puberty" (horrible outdated term) with developmental, social and educational consequences.
The pineal gland is not "light sensitive" any more than the visual cortex is; if it's ever exposed to light you're either in surgery or on your way to a better place (and I don't mean New Zealand). It doesn't play any direct role in cognition (language, memory, problem solving, perception); its influence on our circadian rhythms might affect alertness at some times to some degree but much,
much less than the reticular activating system does.
You can live a productive life without the pineal gland,
External Quote:
Can a person live without a pineal gland?
Yes, you can live without your pineal gland. However, your body may have a difficult time with sleeping patterns and other physiologic functions related to the circadian rhythm without a pineal gland due to a lack of melatonin.
(Cleveland Clinic webpage "Pineal Gland", last reviewed 22/06/2022
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/body/23334-pineal-gland, see also Wikipedia, "Pinealectomy",
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinealectomy)
so it probably isn't the seat of your soul, or responsible for significant behaviours (post-adolescence anyway), or our perception of reality. Nor is it the locus for interaction between the immaterial spirit/ mind and the physical body (take that, Descartes!)
I found one reasonably well-written blog which attempts to make the case for magnetite in the pineal gland being affected by outside forces, such as magnetic fields. It also suggests that induced piezoelectric effects in crystals in the pineal gland might have some effect on us.
"Piezoelectricity in the Pineal Gland",
https://abnormalways.com/physics/piezoelectricity/piezoelectricity-in-the-pineal-gland/
"Magnetic Crystals? In your brain?" (mainly about magnetite)
https://abnormalways.com/crystals/magnetic-crystals-in-your-brain/
...from the
Abnormal Ways blog. The author gives her name as Abby, and has a BA in physics.
At a quick read-through the articles superficially make sense and have a "conventional" popular science journalism feel to them.
But facts are used haphazardly, as partial truths to support unsupportable hypotheses, e.g., some materials show piezoelectric effects (true), such materials demonstrate reverse piezoelectric effects- they can demonstrate structural deformation if a sufficient electric field is applied (true)- therefore structures made from materials which can demonstrate piezoelectric effects can have their properties altered to an extent that necessarily impacts on their normal function by electric (or magnetic) fields that are commonly encountered (sometimes but rarely true).
External Quote:
The pineal gland has a unique arrangement of piezoelectric crystals.
-Abby,
Abnormal Ways. No evidence for this is cited. Gilder, Wack, Kaub et al. (2018), see above, found differences in anatomical distribution but no indications of arrangement per se, no organised or pre-determined structure.
Abby quotes a New York Times 1992 article,
External Quote:
Epidemiological studies over the last decade have suggested a possible but inconclusive link between diseases like brain cancer and childhood leukemia and electromagnetic fields from power lines and certain household appliances
...which from 2024's vantage point looks like a very weak source for such a scary claim.
External Quote:
The crystals in the pineal gland are at least calcite, vaterite, aragonite, and hydroxyapatite. [3] These crystals are piezoelectric under certain conditions
Abnormal Ways, ibid.
Calcite, vaterite, and aragonite are all types of calcium carbonate (the main ingredient in chalk, or limescale).
Calcification of the pineal gland (and the choroid plexus) has been known about for decades. At present the consensus appears to be that calcification in the pineal gland and some other brain areas is (1) present, at the visible scale, in a significant percentage of people (2) increases with age (3) doesn't appear to serve any useful purpose (4) is unlikely to be harmful, or indicate anything that is (see "Normal intracranial calcifications" above).
Crystals of calcium carbonate can demonstrate piezoelectric effects, but if you hold a stick of chalk during a geomagnetic storm, or watch the limescale in your kettle, I doubt much happens. I'll predict even if you used an ammeter, you wouldn't detect any change even with a
really big chalk stick.
Hydroxyapatite is the largest mineral component of human bone (50% by volume, 70% by weight according to Wikipedia, "Hydroxyapatite",
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyapatite).
I've known senior folk claim they could feel oncoming cold weather or storms in their bones, but not geomagnetic events.
There is no evidence that any cerebral materials exhibit significant direct (not inverse) piezoelectric effect in vivo.
The pressures needed to exert sufficient mechanical strain might be problematic (intracranial pressure rise of >30mm Hg above normal can be dangerous, >40 or so fatal, remembering atmospheric pressure at sea level is 760 mm Hg).
We ingest sucrose (table sugar) which has piezoelectric properties. It doesn't do weird stuff during geomagnetic storms, or if you pour it into an electric-powered food blender. In fact,
External Quote:
Most materials exhibit at least weak piezoelectric responses. Trivial examples include
sucrose (table sugar),
DNA...
(Wikipedia, "Piezoelectricity",
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity, my emphasis.)
Luckily geomagnetic events do not appear to alter our DNA. Because of its central-ish location, presumably DNA in pineal gland cells is less susceptible to external electro-magnetic influences than the DNA in almost any other cerebral structure.
The
Abnormal Ways articles have other problems;
External Quote:
In conclusion, octo-hexahedral magnetite in the brain is likely functional and aids in memory...
from
Abnormal Ways, "Magnetic Crystals? In your brain?", ibid.
but the cited supporting papers are, ahem, questionable, e.g. Abby's reference 9,
"Is magnetite a universal memory molecule?", Fredrik C. Størmer, Medical Hypotheses 83 (5), November 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987714003120;
first line of abstract:
External Quote:
Human stem cells possess memory, and consequently all living human cells must have a memory system.
First line of conclusion,
External Quote:
Memory is present in human stem cells and therefore all human cells must have a memory system.
And these gems,
External Quote:
Due to the rapid speed and accuracy of our brain, memory and its functions must be governed by
quantum mechanics.
External Quote:
I am not aware of any reports suggesting a general memory storage mechanism for living organisms.
The author is apparently unaware of biopsychology, cognitive science and connectionist models of memory.
On her "About" page,
Abnormal Ways' Abby posts this:
External Quote:
Through the initial research and disclosure conducted through this entity (Abnormal Ways), I will construct a method for creating one's own healing frequencies ACCURATELY, MEASURABLY, and with NO ARTIFACTS for infusion into fluids (liquid, gas) and the body. The frequencies will be so specific that they can be represented as cross-sections from one's own imagination seat.
It's a site that makes pseudo-scientific claims, throws in a bit of fear-mongering sometimes at odds with its apparent narrative (sort of, "Crystals are great! They might give you dementia!") but with the promise of a totally safe feelgood remedy.
Overall, I don't think there's any evidence that the materials discussed above (magnetite nanoparticles, calcium carbonate, hydroxyapatite) alter the functioning of the pineal gland in the presence of fluctuating magnetic fields of the magnitude that we are likely to encounter, and it's highly improbable that the weak intensity of geomagnetic storm effects experienced at the Earth's surface impinge on the pineal gland (or any part of the brain, or other organ) at all.
Many of us here will have lived through several "recognised" geomagnetic storms, and unless we were unlucky enough to be in an area with an electricity outage, or were perhaps radio operators, astronomers or a few other select trades, would have known nothing about it.
.
).
