A body voltage meter is better than a Trifeld meter
Body voltage meters are also known as skin voltage meters. They differ from electrostatic volt meters which measure static electric fields.
A body voltage meter measures AC electric fields. It is more useful than an AC electric meter. "AC Electric Meter — Direct measurement of ELF electric fields (not body voltage, thus not as useful)"
www.emfinfo.org/meter-instructions.html
"Body Voltage testing is the most accurate and useful method for measuring the ELF Electric Fields emitted from power lines, wiring, lights, appliances and other electrical sources." www.emfinfo.org/make-bv-meter.htm
"....Measure electric fields most reliably using what we call the "Body Voltage" method. This involves the use of a Volt meter and wires that ground you and the meter to the earth. This measures electric fields in milliVolts (mV). The Tri-Field and other hand held-meters also measure electric fields, but in Volts per meter, and I find this to not be as accurate or reliable as the body voltage method. I have placed the Tri-Field meter right over a lamp or extension cord and measured virtually zero, whereas that same cord would produce over 1,000 milliVolts using the body voltage method, considered an unsafe level for nighttime exposure when sleeping by my profession. For my purposes, it is not useful to use a hand-held electric field meter......measure down into the milliVolt range, which is where the harmful effects of electric fields manifest."
www.createhealthyhomes.com/emf_meters.php
Oram Miller further explained why not to buy a Trifield meter:
www.createhealthyhomes.com/emf_meters.phpStetzerizer-us
He recommended only using Trifeld's AC magnetic gauss meter as its electric field meter and RF meter are not accurate.
www.stetzerizer-us.com/trifield-meter-magnetic-field-meter.html
Lloyd Burrell recommended: "The Trifield100XE is designed to measure AC magnetic fields….it will measure DC fields but the readings are not sufficiently reliable for your purpose." http://www.electricsense.com
"Cons: Low accuracy: The accuracy of this meter is low: approximately +/- 20%. Additionally, this power frequency magnetic field meter is frequency-weighted unlike other gaussmeters, which may result in higher readings than actual. For a more accurate triaxial meter, Karl Riley recommends the Bell 4080 meter (or see 4180 below). For personal use with regards to health precautions, this frequency-weighted behavior is actually desirable, but for comparison against official standards, you may want a more accurate meter. There is supposedly a new Trifield version which is not frequency-weighted.
Insensitive RF and Electric field measurements: The RF field measurement can be deceiving because it is not sensitive enough for digital signals. It's measuring mW/cm2 whereas people can be sensitive down to the level of tens of μW/m2. The electric field measurement has also been said to be insensitive. You have to multiply the readings by 10."
http://emfwise.com/detection.php
"Please notice, how the Trifield (this is not the Ramsey Tri Field kit) demonstrates very poor sensitivity, and is therefore basically useless on the Microwave setting. In fact the Trifield does not Start detecting RF until 6 V/m, which is at the Top of the Acoustimeter's scale. The same is true of many cheap and simple 3-LED detectors that are priced under $100."
http://seahorsecorral.org/ehs1.html#features
"TriField 100XE — Unfortunately detects only relatively high levels of electric fields, thus not very useful.......Unfortunately detects only relatively high levels of RF, thus not very useful."
www.emfinfo.org/meter-instructions.html
www.norad4u.com/monitor/home-emr-meters/tri-field-100xe
From:
Posted Aug 29, 2015, 11:56 PM UTC · edited