>>112615281) "EHS" goes all the way back to the 1950's in the USSR and Eastern Europe. It's not new.
2) Everyone is sensitive. (Read below)
3) Animals and cells in culture respond objectively to irradiation. They have no beliefs with which to have a nocebo.
4) Most of the studies you have in mind were poorly conducted.
Copied from the text you should have already at least skimmed before participating.
MICROWAVE SICKNESS AND "CLASSICAL" EFFECTS
[m][Symposium, Warsaw] 1973 - Biologic Effects and Health Hazards of Microwave Radiation
Page 22: Gordon - MAIN DIRECTIONS AND RESULTS OF RESEARCH CONDUCTED IN THE USSR ON THE BIOLOGIC EFFECTS OF MICROWAVES
Korbel 1967 - Effects of low intensity UHF radio fields as a function of frequency
https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03327872Korbel 1971 - Aftereffects of low intensity UHF radiation
https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03336001 EHS
Some earlier popular coverage by Time magazine.
https://microwavenews.com/news-center/man-who-was-allergic-radio-waves The issue with term electrohypersensitivity is that while a given condition may be due to an increased sensitivity, it may also be due to a gradual exhaustion then failure of adaptive and compensatory mechanisms, as Soviet researchers found. There are separate, overlapping, causal lines which can be separated into three primary components:
-Inherent sensitivity of the system to an action upon it (transduction)
-Biological amplification (response, "processing")
-Biological adaptation and damping (homeostasis)
