Nick Pineault
Nick is known widely in the industry as the EMF Guy. He’s a researcher who’s done a lot of work digging up the science and helping us navigate the wild world of EMFs and health issues.
Listen to the episode on Spotify here or on your favorite podcast platform and check out the Urban Monk Academy here.
Podcast transcript:
Hidden EMF Hazards with Nick Pineault
[00:00:00] When it comes to EMFs, we’re in the wild, wild west. There’s a lot of stuff being said. There is an industry denying that this is ever an issue that this is even a thing. There’s people that are saying, you know, EMF cause all the problems that you’ve ever faced in your life. And then there’s people trying to sell you quantum chips that solve all your problems.
And so. I love Nick’s approach to this. He looks at what science is there. He looks at what science is suggesting and says, this is what we know. This is what we suspect, And this is probably what we should watch out for. so. I just love the measured approach. I think you’re going to enjoy this interview.
Pedram Shojai: Well, if it isn’t the EMF guy himself, it is good to see you. Good to see you as well. Man, you’ve been at this so long. You’re called the a MF guy, right? . It’s a
Nick Pineault: few
Pedram Shojai: years something. Yeah. You talk about something and it becomes your study, and suddenly in the industry, you’re the EMF [00:01:00] guy, right?
Like you’re, you’re EMF smurf, and you have spent. Fair amount of time, more than anyone I know really digging in on this subject. Um, and it’s a, it’s, it’s an interesting subject to say the very least. I I’m really excited to explore this with you. Cause there’s a lot of, to me, there’s a lot of magical fairy dust and unicorns that show up in this space, right?
And then there’s the good, sensible energy hygiene that we should probably all have. And then. Maybe some stuff that can help, right? Maybe some devices that can help. Um, and I’d love to dig some of that up, but, um, let’s start with how you got into this mess. How did you end up making EMF your field of study?
Nick Pineault: Yeah, it kind of, uh, it found me in a sense. Uh, I started really getting interested in. What’s in our food, what’s sprayed on our food, pesticides, glyphosate. And then I got in, uh, tap water, uh, how most tap water is tainted [00:02:00] with different things, but chlorine, chloramines, PCBs, this, that, and I, I freaked out and I was back in 2010, I really realized, my God, safety is, uh, I, we’re under the illusion of safety in many, uh, situations because I think that.
Anything that doesn’t, that is not proven to hurt us is still allowed to be there in small quantities until the science is strong enough to where it’s overwhelmingly clear that people are being damaged and then action is taken if industries are not Doing everything they can to stop that, right? So that’s, that’s kind of my background.
And I started developing, I guess, this, this interest in environmental toxins because, uh, yes, exercise is important and, uh, meditation and breath work and all of this, but if you’re exposed to a lot of toxins, In my mind, it makes everything more difficult, especially if some of [00:03:00] those toxins are proven to impair your hormones, like for example, the BPAs and BPBs and endocrine disruptors.
Well, EMFs is the same thing, except I found a topic that was still considered fringe. And when I dove into it deeper, I realized, my God, this is the opposite of fringe because you have hundreds of scientists that I’ve been trying to sound the alarm, but an industry and a pushback that is stronger than, um, I think the pushback that we’re seeing on, on pesticides and even how Monsanto is kind of fighting tooth and nail against regulation and against GMO labeling, I think that the pushback and lobbying I’ve seen in EMF is even worse.
And that makes it, even crazier to me because when I talk about it, a lot of people are still under the impression to this day that, oh, this is some corner of the internet fringe thing, EMFs. And no, we have a lot of science that shows very concerning indications that are [00:04:00] strong enough for scientists to say we should at the minimum start reducing exposure.
But what’s happening is the opposite. And this is really why I stuck on the topic is. instead of having most of the population agree that, okay, drinking more pesticides in water or on food is a bad idea. Instead, we’re in a situation where we know EMF is an environmental toxin. We know it impairs fertility.
We know it will increase long term cancer risks. We think, uh, or at least there are good indications. It’s very, very Uh, potentially dangerous to unborn fetuses and pregnancy and the formation of brain. And there are a lot of scientific concerns on many levels, but instead of reducing exposure because of these concerns, we’re increasing it through new cell phones and, and stronger wifi’s and more cell towers.
So that’s really why it’s kind of a frustrating topic where I’m screaming from the rooftop along with thousands and millions of activists. Uh, we’re [00:05:00] still, we’re not even at the, at the point where society is turning around and starting to reduce things. So, a lot of education needs to be made and in the meantime, unfortunately, it’s up to, uh, the average lay person that is interested in prevention.
And, and not waiting 40 years for the science to be done, uh, it’s, it’s up to them to protect themselves and start reducing exposure now. And this is kind of what I’ve been repeating for seven years now.
Pedram Shojai: Well, keep doing it. Um, problem is when you’re screaming from rooftops and the broadcast towers are beating you to the punch, you know, it’s also tough.
I mean, look, I love my cell phone. Um, this is an inconvenient truth to say the least, right? Is we have a lot of wonderful things. I mean, I’m not necessarily saying being addicted to Instagram and falling into the attention economy, but calling someone and saying, Hey, I’m outside, right? That’s [00:06:00] pretty cool.
Um, understanding what the weather is just by asking your phone. That’s pretty cool. Um, and so it’s easy to look away because of all the benefits that have come in and been ushered in with this. Um, but. The fact of the matter remains, we are now swimming in an electromagnetic radio wave microwave soup that is doing something, right?
And so I want to talk about the, the something, because, you know, there’s one thing to say this thing doesn’t exist. I mean, we obviously know it exists. I had, you know, Decade ago, there was a, you know, Verizon engineer who defected and left. It was at one of my workshops screaming about how they buried all the health studies, right?
I mean, this has been going on for a very long time. I’ve been hearing about it for a very long time. Um, but the solutions I’ve always seen have been, Oh, put this quantum chip on your phone and all, all, you know, all the [00:07:00] problems go away and you know, I. I have no choice but to call BS on that because the person who’s talking about quantum, um, you know, didn’t take anything beyond high school math, right?
Quantum is very serious science and I don’t know what you’re talking about, right? And I shouldn’t because I don’t have a PhD in math. Um, so. There’s been a lot of noise. I think there’s been a lot of like people selling shovels of the gold rush in this space, right? And so I think, I don’t think they’re helping you, right?
You’re saying EMFs are dangerous. You got to avoid them. Then there’s people trying to sell devices saying, don’t worry about it. You can keep your phone. You can keep all your crap. Just put this device on, you know, your, your hip. So I want to talk about kind of, you know, the, what do we know? What do we know EMFs are doing and what do we suspect EMFs are doing?
Nick Pineault: That’s, uh, it has to be the best question I’ve received in years, to be quite honest, because that’s exactly how I want to position things. Uh, there are a lot of uncertainties and what I’ll [00:08:00] say first is that the uncertainties about what EMF might be doing and we’re, we don’t know for sure. This is a more concerning area of science to all scientists is what we don’t know.
It’s more concerning than what we know. So what we know is EMF, radio frequency EMF. That’s a spectrum that is, that encompasses your cell phone, Wi Fi, Bluetooth, cell towers. Let’s kind of just name those. So we’re bathing in soup, but some exposures are closer to the body, right? So cell tower exposure is one thing where you’re always in it and it’s a, let’s say an ambient stressor.
That’s one type of exposure, but an exposure to your face would be quite intense compared to a tower. So what scientists are saying is, well, the indications we have on brain cancer Is just this one concern alone is pretty damning. And some people say, Oh, you know, the, uh, the research is mixed and this and that [00:09:00] it is.
However, it’s getting this link between using a cell phone and your risk. of developing a brain tumor later in life is increasing with time. There are better and better studies that are available. In, in 2011, we had the WHO with IR, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, that said it’s a class IIb carcinogen, but we lack the animal data.
The animal data appeared in 2018. And since then, you have the same epidemiologists that were participating in this meeting in 2011 that say, we have enough data. And that, that has been true for more than five years now. We have enough data to classify this as a class one carcinogen. To me, that’s very concerning because a class one carcinogen is asbestos and smoking.
So is radiofrequency the new smoking? Well, according to them, the data has already been there for years, but we don’t hear that in the media. So that’s just the brain cancer risk alone. And some people say, well, you know, they kind of minimize it. They say, well, the brain cancer, [00:10:00] it’s, it’s one in a million kind of thing.
Yes, it’s, it’s rare occurrences of cancer, but when you have a population of 8 billion and you pretty much at one point in the future, we’ll have 8 billion people using a phone. If you switch this percentage of brain cancer by a minuscule fraction, you have many, many, many, many deaths. And that has to be taken into consideration.
When you have an agent and everyone is exposed, the risk of getting it wrong is incredibly high. So therefore, more safety should be taken. And that’s the opposite of what we’re doing. So that’s one angle. When you get away from cancer, you have more uncertainty or you have areas of study that are underfunded.
So therefore we have, um, fewer points of data. For example, if you study Wi Fi, you have a few hundred studies in the history of mankind on Wi Fi, even if that’s been in technology we’ve been exposed to for 20 years. So, right. So it is completely lacking. If you search Bluetooth on [00:11:00] PubMed and health effects, you’re going to barely find anything.
So So again, the uncertainty is, well, we say, we say basically a lot of people are waiting for the data to come, but in the meantime, we’re using the technology, right? So that the science has not been made prior to the introduction, which could have found effects if it. We’re independent, of course, from, uh, corporate interests.
What we know as far as other health effects that might be possible, fertility issues. We know, for example, you have some of the top, uh, the world’s top neuroscientist, Dr. Andrew Huberman, that sooner, uh, in, uh, at the beginning of 2023 said, I reviewed the human and animal data around cell phone and then fertility risks.
or reduction in testosterone. He said, according to his read of the science, and he’s a guy that’s not easily convinced by things. He said, my review of the data is this. A lot of people are afraid of [00:12:00] BPA and, you know, endocrine disruptors, plastics, but he said the real data of quality is in cell phone in the pocket.
Do not keep it there. And, and yet I don’t see anything in the news. I don’t see stickers on your phone that say, you know, don’t put this in your pocket or put it in airplane mode. Or I don’t see manufacturers having, using the sensor of the phone that is now present, where if it touches your body, it’s off, right?
It could be simple changes. I don’t see any of that. In fact, the industry has been fighting over, uh, regulations or the attempt of activists to just have a basic warning, not to keep it too close to the body for extended periods of time at the point of sale. And they won over the, um, in the U. S. it’s kind of over the first amendment and, oh, you’re, you’re kind of making people scared of our devices, even though it’s not proven that it harms fertility.
So we’re stuck in a place where most users have it in the pocket 24 7. And where more and more [00:13:00] doctors that are studying fertility and EMF say, well, it’s probably hurting fertility and in a day and time in 2023 and 2024 and beyond where a lot of men and women struggle or with fertility issues. So is it because of phones or is it?
Part of all the factors that are disrupting fertility, well, it’s, it’s likely the second. Um, so I think that fertility is a huge angle and if it’s not fertility, it’s endocrine disruption. Many EMF scientists, uh, uh, said, uh, lately I read something in a study that said, uh, radiofrequency radiation. is a classic endocrine disruptor.
And I didn’t really think about it that way, but when people think about plastics and certain chemicals that disrupt your hormones, it’s kind of harder to believe that an invisible force could disrupt your hormone, but it’s pretty much. the same mechanism. Although it’s not absorbed by your body like a molecule, it [00:14:00] will create oxidative stress in the cell.
And just the cumulative exposure to these forces are making it so that our, our HPA axis and our different glands have a harder time regulating. The third thing I’ll mention is sleep. I haven’t found one sleep researcher in the world, and I hope to find this person because I’m going to promote their work.
Not one sleep researcher that is specifically looking at EMFs and sleep disruption. Instead what I found is different brain studies, um, there have been a few since the beginning of the 2000s that showed that putting a phone next to someone’s head for 30 minutes will cause an insomniac response, a sleep onset delay of about an hour.
And I think it was around a hundred participants. So we need more studies around that, but they already found effects. And it was back in 2008 that I saw an article in, uh, Scientific American about that, or I saw an article that was published [00:15:00] back in 28. So it’s frustrating because 15 years later, dysphoria of science has not evolved.
And. It’s pretty much so disregarded or discarded that the sleep studies are increasingly using EMFs to track sleep. How crazy is that? Well, it means that when you do a sleep study and you use Bluetooth sensors and everything, Wi Fi and everything, cellular network, you can distill down the potential to find effects.
So we don’t even have sleep studies in a completely EMF free environment versus a clean environment. What we have is doctors that I talk to that are just too busy to really wait on studies to save their patients. They’re just, you know, clinical reality. They tell their patients to turn off Wi Fi at night, to turn off cell phones.
And people start reporting better sleep. In large user communities, also biohacking, self quantification, a lot of people have [00:16:00] realized that I turn off my phone, I sleep better. And it’s, it’s, I think the mechanism’s already there. We know in those studies that I mentioned that it shifts brainwaves. It will shift you in a state that is non conclusive to those normal sleep stages that you should have.
So it is in that sense, uh, causing electromagnetic interference on that machine of yours. Your brain is supposed to go through stages and then you have a signal that is just, you know, disrupting it, making it more difficult. The thing is, we don’t know to what extent it’s doing it. We don’t know what would be to save those of having a cell phone next to your bed stand.
All we know is when we survey the population. You have a large fraction of adults and kids who sleep with their phone. And again, in the context that we have a large fraction of the population that is insomniac or that has self reported sleep troubles, right? [00:17:00] So if everyone was sleeping great, I wouldn’t be talking about it as a possible cause, but that’s not, that’s not what’s happening.
A lot of people are feeling bad. are not recuperating from their night of sleep. So again, the message is, is EMF radiation proven to disrupt sleep? Well, that’s kind of a complicated question, but if it’s only decreasing your sleep quality 5%, personally, as someone in optimize, uh, in interested in, in being optimized or healthy, or thriving and not just surviving.
Well, I would find that, okay, that’s kind of bothersome. I don’t want 5 percent less sleep. I want a hundred percent of my sleep. So the message is a message of prevention and a message of minimizing the risks. And that’s really where I think some of the messaging is lost online when things are said like, okay, EMF is responsible for every illness right?
And this kind of absolutism that leads to [00:18:00] people that have BS detectors on saying, okay, well, that’s, that’s kind of an extremist view. And of course, I think that if we look at modern diseases and some people relate it back to, um, some people say EMF is causing Alzheimer’s, is causing diabetes, cancer is this, and they start naming everything.
Basically. And I say, well, it might have a role in all of this, but of course, guys, I’ve read the data around environmental toxins in certain areas. It’s clear as they that it is impacting Alzheimer’s risk and this and that. So how can you discount? I think that some people are a bit myopic in their view.
They’re just EMFs, you know, and they’re not reading and outside. But I don’t come from this background. I come from a kind of wider angle here. So I think that The last thing I’ll mention, and then I’ll shut up for a second, but, uh, synergistic effects between other environmental toxins and EMFs, what we do, we do have indications in animal models and in vitro that [00:19:00] in certain situations, you have a certain amount of lead and a certain amount of EMFs and both exposures do not seem to make any difference in rats, for example, they can handle distress just fine.
When you put them together. Now you have a disruption to hormones or birth weight in the offspring or something that is measurable. So therefore we are, we have a big question mark, a kind of Pandora’s box about how more, much more problematic is it making. all our global exposures to all of these environmental toxins.
In other words, is it the environmental toxins or is it environmental toxins plus the EMLs that are just making everyone weaker or less able to handle these exposures? And that’s a question mark, uh, that is quite problematic because we know how problematic all the environmental toxins are in the first place.
So that’s, that’s pretty much the state of the science. intricacies here [00:20:00] and there and, but big question marks around so many health effects, including to the microbiome, including to other areas. I mean, there are so many angles on this, but I think these areas, brain, hormones, sleep, it’s the main stuff that in my mind matters the most.
And even if EMS were just impacting sleep, That, that’s enough to, to, to have a warning on the label because it’s a problem. It’s a public health, um, emergency in my, in my mind.
Pedram Shojai: We look at sleep. It seems that the overwhelming understanding is that, you know, you have central nervous system activation and the system needs to feel safe, right?
I’m going to go park my body in some corner and trust that a lion’s not going to eat it, right? So you have to feel safe. Um, in having. These frequencies bombarding our [00:21:00] bodies to a point where there’s measurable EEG. Differences in and of itself says something. Now what it says, we could argue to what blue in the face, but it’s saying that there is a reflection in the pond and our bodies are not reacting the same way.
And, and, you know, to your point, look, was it the three shots of tequila, the 12 beers, the nachos or the 3am del taco that made you feel like crap this morning? It was just a big night. Yeah. Right. And, and, and so people, you know, yes, endotoxemia and gut dysbiosis. Absolutely will lead to several of these things.
Uh, phthalates and bisphenol and the forever chemicals absolutely are contributing to all this. And so looking down a single vector and saying, well, I don’t see the data to substantiate that E. M. F. Stu, you know, all of this, I feel like is flawed thinking. Right. And it is keeping us in this toxic soup, if you will, [00:22:00] uh, with the exposure.
So, the question then becomes, okay, is it, is it just the device that I have? Can I turn this thing off and be safe? Is it the bubble of the Wi Fi in my house? Is it the, you know, 5G networks that are now everywhere? And now, you know, people are saying nowhere is safe. Like, you know, to what extent do I need To double back and clean up my environment.
Um, cause the airwaves are going through my house anyways.
Nick Pineault: Yeah, so that’s a good question. And many people react when they think about EMS. Let’s say they agree that there’s danger or they kind of say, well, if there were dangers, then even, even then it wouldn’t be worth it to do anything about it because we’re We’re all exposed, right?
So they kind of use this, uh, this kind of dismissive approach saying, well, you know, even if I turn off my wifi, there’s my 150 neighbors in Montreal’s that have a wifi and didn’t [00:23:00] only have a wifi, they have phones, they have Bluetooth alarm clocks, they have so many things. So how can it matter that I turn off mine?
Well, that’s misunderstanding just the, the fact that. Um, the, the signal density or, or strength will, will drop off with exponentially as you create distance. So you have certain devices that are closer to your body and therefore they will deliver more energy to your body. That energy will be absorbed and it’s, it’s not as linear as more power equals.
More bad things that are happening, but generally speaking, if you have exposures very close to your body, you can have more problems, namely the cancer. We don’t, we don’t have the extremely strong data to support the idea that, uh, let’s say a cell tower will cause cancer clusters. There are some indications of that, but again, the strongest indications is [00:24:00] cell phone on the head.
Cancer on head, cell phone somewhere else. Are you, are you kind of more likely to develop cancer of the groin area, testicular, ovarian, prostate cancer? Some researchers think yes, and they say, well, if it causes cancer, if we put it here, what happens if we put it in a pocket? And it’s still up in the air, but it’s plausible that it, that it does.
So I think the most dangerous exposures are those closer to your body. And the good. The good news is, I mean, it’s kind of bad news if you have a phone and you still want to use it, but again, you can use it more safely. So you have full control over what you put near your body. You can decide not to put it in your shirt pocket or pants pocket, or you can hit airplane mode before you put it in your, in your pocket like I do.
And if it’s not convenient, there are certain cases that can be used that are not perfect protection, but can deflect some of the radiation away. And, and that’s good. There are a lot [00:25:00] of bogus products in that product category in itself, but there are some good products out there that have, uh, let’s say in a specific context, when they’re used properly, they can do the trick.
So when it comes to close exposures. And a lot of people don’t like hearing that, but I personally have many concerns and most scientists also do that are studying the topic with Bluetooth, because you’re, you’re kind of replacing something that has, that is supported by data to probably damage you or, or leave you with greater brain cancer risk.
That is your phone. And now you replace it with something with barely any data, but that is emitting. a little bit closer to your brain. And every millimeter that you get closer to the brain, the exposure gets quite more intense. Uh, so in my mind, you probably get exposed to twice as much radiation if you put it, you know, inside the ear, but it’s kind of speculative because there are [00:26:00] barely any test reports on what these things are actually emitting.
So we’re really left with a question mark. Even neuroscientist Andrew Lieberman, again, he said, well, do I want this very close, very close to my brain or auditory nerves or this and that vagus nerve? I don’t know. I don’t, but a lot of people are starting to jump on these Bluetooth devices. Uh, it’s, as recording, we’re recording this is, uh, after the holidays period.
I bet that millions of people started getting on Bluetooth just for the first time because they kind of have their, these old deprecated things with wires. No, no, no, screw that. I’m going to have Bluetooth now. And a lot of people wear them for very extended periods of time. So that’s another level of intervention is can you minimize Bluetooth use?
I’m not completely against it. Don’t want to be extreme in the messaging, but the reality is if you’re in one place in your office. And you have Bluetooth on, I don’t, I don’t recommend that because it’s for extended periods of time [00:27:00] with a static job that you’re doing, you’re not moving. So maybe just use those, those headphones.
If you have a workout or you do a run and you find it convenient, even then I like recommending to minimize it. But I understand that it’s, it’s tough and it’s, it’s increasingly difficult to find the wired versions. So again, a frustration in my line of work is like, well, people are starting, it’s, it’s becoming increasingly harder to not go with more EMFs.
So that’s the reality. Let’s talk about Wi Fi for a second. Well, Wi Fi, most people have it at home. If, if they don’t have one Wi Fi repeater, they have another Wi Fi that is a booster in large homes and whatnot. But if it’s close to. your bedroom or close to your office, you are exposed to more radiation from this Wi Fi compared to your neighbors, for sure.
Especially if you’re in a home, if you’re in an apartment building, it’s also mostly true in most situations. So the [00:28:00] reality is turning it off when you don’t need it. Especially at night has benefits. How can you quantify these benefits? Right? It’s all cumulative exposures. So it’s all, it’s only following.
I was, uh, I was emailing back, back and forth with an engineer that said, Oh, Nick, how can you say that these exposures are dangerous and, uh, you don’t have the data and, and I don’t, but what scientists are saying is. Look, we have all these points of data. What we recommend is following the ALARA principle, just like in nuclear radiation and exposures to x rays, which is as low as reasonably achievable.
If you have an exposure that is needless, for example, Wi Fi is open during the night, but everyone is sleeping anyway. Why are you being exposed to this thing, right? There’s no need for it. So how the technology should be built in reality is there’s no one connected, it goes in sleep, and then the exposure is tremendously [00:29:00] lower.
That’s how it should be built. It’s not built that way. It’s always on, always maximum level that, uh, that basically has been set in the router. So for most people, they’re just exposed to so many levels of needless exposures. So eliminating them from your home, You will have benefits, even if you live in a city.
And yes, even if you’re exposed to a bunch of towers, a lot of people fear the towers. And I think sometimes there’s fear mongering on the internet about the towers. The towers are not good either. It’s just more difficult to talk about mitigation. How can you mitigate against a tower? Do you oppose against a tower?
Do you, what can you do? You cannot do much as far as law goes, at least in North America, so that you don’t, you cannot really oppose the installation of towers. And it’s an entirely complicated topic that is not even my, my personal, uh, interest. And there are activists way, a better place to talk about these, these realities of.
[00:30:00] How to oppose towers and things like that, but the reality is if you live in a city, you are exposed to multiple cell phone towers and on them you have multiple cellular, uh, antennas. So the reality is just how to perceive it is you’re in a more stressful environment, and it might be more difficult for you to thrive in this environment, just like if I tell you, well, if you live in a city, look at the air quality.
Uh, especially in the summer in Montreal, we’ve had some of the worst air quality in the world at one point because of forest fires. You’re just in it, right? What do you do? Do you stop breathing? Do you wear a mask 24 7? Well, people were kind of walking around and saying, well, I cough a bit and I hope that I’ll handle the exposure.
So it’s kind of, you’re kind of living in a stressful environment. Certain people have more sensitivity or are more affected than, than the next person though. So just like Um, certain people have, uh, become [00:31:00] hypersensitized to mold or even chemicals, multiple chemical sensitivity. Some people seem to unfortunately develop, develop electrical hypersensitivity.
So some people argue, is it a sensitivity? Is this just, could we just call it environmental damage? You know, because sensitivity kind of makes it sound like, Oh, others are fine. And then the poor sensitives have the effect. It’s not like that. But the reality is. At one point, you might become hypersensitized where you feel sick in a city.
And it’s so inconvenient and, um, inconvenient is kind of a very mild way to put it, but some people cannot live in a city anymore. And I, I talked to a lot of doctors that are in environmental medicine that treat these patients. It’s kind of a, a very dramatic. human rights situation where if you cannot live near cell towers, where do you live, right?
There’s not a lot of spaces left. So people [00:32:00] are pushed away from civilization and forced to isolate themselves. And these people create groups and are part of the activism. So I think it’s part of what made the message and more extreme because for these people destroy their life. to become desensitized.
And there are, there are ways to go back to a normal response and to more stress resilience. And that’s a whole nother topic. And I’m, I’m more, more focused on that angle with different doctors that I interviewed these days, but, uh, it’s not everyone that will develop this sensitivity, but regardless of your level of perceived sensitivity, everyone seems affected.
So this is really, when it comes to mitigation, again, it’s just think about close to the body. in your vicinity. And then the towers, there are advanced things you can do to block even your bedroom from the towers and things like that. But that’s not what I lead in because for most people, that’s not a something that is easy to do, [00:33:00] realistic.
It is cost prohibitive. And there are so many more things they could do for free. Like Clicking a button on their phone before hit, before hitting a sack. Right? So just doing this and making sure that in your bedroom you don’t have these active devices, I, I’m not, I don’t have to sell you anything. You don’t even have to, to, to buy anything from me in order to turn off your phone or wifi at night.
Right. So this is what I like about it. It is. possible to do it right now, test it. And, and then in case I’m wrong, and there’s no health effect, well, you haven’t spent a lot of time and money in these mitigation strategies, right? It’s, it’s kind of small things, but I think that since the science is moving in the direction of proving harm from EMS, I think that most people that are preventive preventatively lowering their EMF exposure will be happy in the future to kind of say, okay, well, you know, uh, we didn’t know much back then, but I’m happy I didn’t expose myself more.
Pedram Shojai: Seems like, [00:34:00] seems like a rational move. We look at functional medicine. We look at loss of tolerance. We look at loss of oral tolerance. We look at loss of gut tolerance and you know, the system. is designed to withstand a lot of blows. Um, after years and years of say, eating gluten or, you know, taking glyphosate into your system, then we start to have a loss of tolerance, we start to see a breakdown of systems, then we start to see disease and pathology and inflammation and all these things.
And in my experience, patients who end up having these sensitivities have just They’ve, they’ve lost too many layers of their defense and they can’t take any more punches. Um, and they’re back on their heels now for our listeners. I want to emphasize something cause I’ve seen the, I’ve seen the really bad side of this.
I’ve seen people who are just shell shocked and, you know, sucking their thumb in a corner and just can’t function anymore. I promise you, you [00:35:00] don’t want to go there. So. It’s probably worth having some digital hygiene on the front end to understand that, you know, the, the, again, the interventions Nick’s talking about, we’re not talking about putting ray shielding or Faraday caging your bedroom.
He’s talking about turning off your damn phone. That seems like an easy one. We have a unify router that we bought. That just has an app and I just kind of slide, you know, depending on, you know, when we argue about what time to, you know, stop watching shows, right? Um, and so 9 30 dark done. It’s brainless and I am sleeping better.
Now here’s the chicken and egg, um, issue that you brought up, but I want to, I want to just kind of spend a minute on this because I knew it was working because I was tracking my sleep data with my Apple watch, my aura ring. Which are both Bluetooth enabled and both EMFs and [00:36:00] both. I don’t like wearing gadgets on my body at night.
It just doesn’t feel right. I just, I’m sensitive to energy. Um, I could just, it feels icky, right? But in my experience, the data showed that this guy was sleeping better. When the Wi Fi went off, what is your take on all these gadgets that we’re being now told to wear because of the quantified self and all this, you know, the biohacking community really loves its gadgets.
Um, and we’re just layering more and more on, um, and they have intrinsically. Electro, electromagnetic frequencies, Bluetooth, radio frequency, what, right? So I just want to hear your take on that.
Nick Pineault: Yeah, I think the O ring is brilliant in the sense that on an EMF standpoint, very early in their creation, they decided to give the opportunity to, for users to put it on airplane mode all the time.
Uh, except just. for a few minutes in the morning when you put it on the charger. So this ring is not, it’s always on airplane [00:37:00] mode for me. I use the Aura. So I guess I’m, I’m sold or biased towards the company, but I don’t see a lot of wearables doing the same. And that’s, um, that’s a shame because it’s just a design flaw in my mind that we have to connect.
the, the, the ring and the phone every couple of seconds or every minute to dump the data. You can just dump it once per day. Uh, it depends on how you use it, I guess, if you want to verify your stress in real time, but isn’t that a stressful thing to do? Kind of, Oh, I’m monitoring my stress every minute. So that’s just another angle, I guess, on the problem is kind of becoming neurotic about it.
But a lot of wearables. use Bluetooth and generally speaking I’m against it because it’s extended periods of time and I’m not too concerned about people having middle finger cancer but you know you sleep like this you have it very close to your body and uh I’m I’m it just makes me overall uneasy, just like with Bluetooth exposure, uh, on near, near the brain.
And I think it’s a little bit less concerning if you [00:38:00] have it on the wrist, but again, you know, we have technologies such as UV blood irradiation or certain, you know, red light that you shine, uh, near, near your, your, your veins here. So what does it do if you replace this with a watch and Bluetooth and you’re kind of pulsating Bluetooth in your, um, in your blood every couple of minutes where, when the cycle goes on, I don’t know what it does.
Um, it’s probably not something that is beneficial to your body. So there’s, and just on a, on a personal standpoint, I see that a lot of people get rashes and, and kind of irritation from Bluetooth watches. And we don’t know if that’s. Sometimes the materials, sometimes it might be just, you know, topical thing because of humidity, but there are good indications that EMS might cause a sort of histaminic reaction.
People with mast cell activation syndrome have been talking about it, and the fact that, uh, your, your skin cells seem to react and, and kind of [00:39:00] bring those, those agents like histamine, like closer. to where the exposure is as if you have a sort of allergic reaction that you would get when you’re exposed to something topical that is like from a plant or even when you eat certain foods and people get, you know, skin rashes if they have a, if they are a strong, uh, strongly allergic or intolerant to something.
So just for For those reasons, I’m not a fan initially of using those. Short term, it’s okay. And even if you use something that is sleep quantification, maybe you’re better off using it a few nights and getting your baseline and then using it sparingly. But I’m not a fan of just adding so many, I mean, there are entire beds that are smart now.
You have sensors on the bed, you have electricity running through your bed. I think As far as I’m concerned, my end goal is, you know, Alara principle, EMF minimization. It’s kind of moving in the wrong direction. It could move in the right [00:40:00] direction, right? We could have a wired bed with Ethernet and not Bluetooth.
It’s more tedious. You could have a shielded technologies where the electricity that is running in your bed is by no way transferred to your body. Even at, right, we’re talking about a few volts, it’s not giving you an electric shock. But in building biology, which is, uh, let’s say, um, something that has been developed just for healthy buildings, but they have an EMF component to this discipline.
In building biology, you try to minimize body voltage, how much electricity is coursing through your body during the night. We’re talking about man made electricity, because in nature you have zero volts. So if you have one volt, two volts, it’s, it’s, it’s under your level of perception, but is it the natural thing to have electricity coursing through your body at night?
No. And there are good indications that if you don’t have this electricity, you sleep better. And it kind of goes against. Using beds that are con [00:41:00] connected in, in the wall outlet. But there are ways to design these things without the electrical fields. But in, um, let’s say, considering that the manufacturers don’t even know that EMF is a problem in the first place, it’s not likely you’ll find such a, such a product.
So that’s kinda where we’re stuck here. Um, so I’m not a big fan of just, you know, transforming your, your entire bedroom in a, in an EMF sleep lab.
Pedram Shojai: Yeah, I appreciate that. I, you know, I prefer no tech in the bedroom. Um, it’s always my best sleep. It’s always has been. Um, question about these. You like them? I still, I’m, I’m old school like this.
I will only use this little gadget at the gym once in a while. And I tell you, if I’m there long enough, I’m starting to get a weird headache. I don’t like it. I don’t like the way it makes me feel, but somebody told me that these are basically just piping in the wire into the device that has [00:42:00] electricity and piping the electrical current right into your ear and your brain anyways.
Just want to know if that’s true, accurate, what you’ve heard about that.
Nick Pineault: It’s kind of a mixed bag of different internet things, I would say, where Some tests have shown that, let’s say if you talk on a phone and you have a wired headset, yes, you can have some of the radio frequency that is kind of, um, transferred through the wire.
However, the reality is this wire is very small. So the quantity of energy that could go up the ear is quite small. I think that Some people that are quite electrosensitive have found that using those could be problematic, but maybe they’re also problematic just because they still use a phone and they’re electrosensitive.
It’s like saying, you know, I still live in a moldy home, but I know I’m extremely sensitive to mold. So for some people, they just need to stop. But I still have electrosensitive to these days that tell me, Oh yeah, I still use a phone from time to time. And [00:43:00] I cannot blame them because it’s very difficult to.
do things a different way and kind of forego technology altogether. But I’ll say that I think for most people, the wired, uh, headsets are tremendously better than Bluetooth. So I wouldn’t, I don’t even go there normally these days. I barely talk about that because it’s such a small issue. Uh, and, and what I’ll say is it kind of brings me to A few things that, that I regret, uh, putting in my book in 2017, like for example, how many, how much EMF is emitted by your blender kind of thing, right?
Oh, 400 milligauss, which is considered extreme in building biology. And, but does it matter? It’s kind of what I forgot to include in the book is, well, how much time are you spending Right next hugging your blender, right? Well, it’s a Vitamix. So first it’s too loud and I move away in another room. So in reality, it’s meaningless.
How much EMF is being emitted by your [00:44:00] toaster? I see that online still to this day. So it’s kind of silly. It’s, I think it falls in fear mongering or at least very. Misplaced kind of activism saying, Oh, I’ll measure everything in my home. No, measure the things where you spend a lot of time, right? So again, going back to the devices you have close to your body, or I could measure what’s being emitted by my laptop if I work on it all day, every day.
Now you’re talking because we’re talking about. You know, 30 to 50 to 80 hours, God forbid, of laptop exposure per week for a lot of people, what’s emitted if you’re in your living room and you have a bunch of different things around, lying around your feet for extended hours, uh, while you’re, um, watching your favorite show, that’s something because there’s a lot of hours it’s cumulative.
So again, just. I think a lot of people are focused on the wrong things and the small exposures, and they don’t matter that much, except if you’ve tackled all the rest, right? So just [00:45:00] having a clear order of priority is kind of, I think it’s the equivalent of freaking out because, oh my God, you know. I ate gluten once, uh, at this fast food joint and now I’m damaged for life.
Kind of having an all or nothing mentality. Well, it’s not that one fast food meal is going to be the difference, if 364 days a year I eat very pristine foods. Like, does it really matter? No. So, focusing on What are you exposed? What is a habit for you? And what are you exposed to day in, day out, throughout the year?
Pedram Shojai: So when I think about vitality, I oftentimes think of almost like a balance sheet, you got your assets and your liabilities. And so the liabilities are, you know, the buzzing, beeping devices, the gadgets, you know, putting Bluetooth into your head. And so we’ve been talking about cutting the liabilities, right?
Like cutting the things that cut you out. Um. But let’s go to the asset column [00:46:00] real quick. I mean, I’m personally, I get up in the morning, I’m doing qigong barefoot, I’ll go out when it’s not snowing and put my feet out on the grass or, you know, on the rocks and just allow my body to earth. So what strategies have you found to be effective for people to help clear and mitigate some of this damage.
Nick Pineault: Yeah. There’s not a lot of studies on this. Uh, unfortunately I’d say it’s, it’s a lot of anecdotes, a lot of, uh, clinical observations from doctors that treat electrosensitives. What seems to be working for electrosensitives is reconnecting to nature. And that’s gonna, uh, some people will say, well, that’s woo woo.
No, no. I’m talking about, for example, earthing, grounding, there’s Increasing, increasingly good science on this, on the fact that if you’re connected to the Earth, you have electrons going up your body and it’s kind of, it seems that it has a very calming effect. Uh, some researchers have described it as an antioxidant [00:47:00] effect, which is, uh, kind of beautiful in a way because you, connect to the earth and it kind of brings you back to homeostasis.
And, and anecdotally speaking, you have a lot of electrosensitives that swear by it. They go barefoot on the grass. In natural bodies of water, you have an even stronger effect, like a lake or even better in the sea. in a saline environment, it’s even more powerful. And then sun exposure and exposure to natural frequencies seem to bring people back to a better homeostasis.
There are a lot of reasons, uh, we could get into the biology a little bit, but overall it helps you, I think, over time, build your resilience back. And yes, it’s vitamin D and it’s, uh, you know, the, the healing effect of. red light and the, the, let’s say the energizing effect of blue light and this, and we can kind of micro, you know, [00:48:00] silo all of these things.
And even just looking at what are we exposed to when it comes to sunshine. And then you can talk about the UV researchers, the infrared researchers, the red light research. And I mean, no one is kind of taking care of all of this. And I think that overall, if you look at. What, uh, guys, uh, in neuroscience are saying these days, the scientists are kind of going back to these practices that are waking up in the morning, going outside, getting sunshine for your circadian rhythm.
They’re realizing that the practices that have been written in texts dating back thousands of years. Oh, well, in fact, the science is kind of getting there now saying, well, we’re disconnected from the natural cycles and not in a sense, just in the spiritual sense or new agey, but in the physical sense, we are creatures that are connected to this planet and its cycles through light, right?
So, yeah. true magnetism. Um, and I think it makes sense to [00:49:00] reconnect with those. So how I see it now is, uh, very, in a, in a very simplistic manner is we, we are in a very chaotic environment when it comes to frequencies. If you go to nature, you kind of go back to information that is clean. So it makes you better able to handle this chaos.
It kind of retunes you. Uh, and I think that, um, you know, there’s no, I haven’t seen almost any science on that, but I think it’s, there are other reasons outside EMS, of course, to get your sunshine and to do earthing, grounding. So it’s one of the mitigation strategies that I’ll, uh, that I’ll mention. And I know you wanted to talk about the, the quantum things.
And I, I kind of. Glanced over it, but do you want me to to address that now?
Pedram Shojai: Sure. I have a couple questions about, actually, let’s come back to quantum real quick because, you know, while you’re on this, I just, I want to emphasize delta sleep is [00:50:00] below four hertz, right? Four cycles per second. Theta, daydreaming, creativity, four to eight hertz.
Alpha, where we kind of pop in the clutch meditation 9 to 13 Hertz and then conscious awareness where we’re kind of thinking and functioning at our, um, you know, kind of work selves is 14 to 30. That’s beta after that. It’s, you know, high beta is in there. And then we go to gamma, which is a whole different deal.
But we’re talking about, you know, 12 15 cycles per second. Um, Schumann resonance 7. 23. Candle about 10 Hertz. We’re talking about very, very low Hertz frequencies that you’re alluding to in nature, right? The soup that we evolved in. And then we start talking about 5G, that’s gigahertz, right? And so these are orders of magnitude higher than any of the frequency [00:51:00] patterns we’ve ever been accustomed to biologically, neurologically, physiologically.
And. My take on this, again, this is Pedram’s opinion is no one’s funding the studies, surprise, surprise, because you know, the industries have zero incentive to fund these studies, but it just. stands to reason that the frequencies we evolved in and the frequencies we are now bathing in are orders of magnitude apart.
And you wonder why everyone’s flipping agitated, falling apart, and they’re losing resilience, right? And so just in and of itself, to me, it’s a mitigation. I don’t need to wait for 100 new studies to come out because no one’s funding them. I would rather soften the blow. And, you know, look, we’re on technology right now, like it’s unavoidable for most people that function in the world, but how to mitigate really becomes much more of my emphasis in my life for my [00:52:00] family, um, just for that reason alone.
And now, yes, I would love to talk about the quantum devices because I think there’s a lot of, a lot of stuff out there, right? And a lot of stuff, a lot of stuff people are hawking at people.
Nick Pineault: Yeah, and people saw me just open the red light. I wanted to make a point before moving on to the quantum stuff. I. I personally don’t fully agree with the assessment.
A lot of people are kind of stuck. Well, you know, in nature we have low Hertz and then, um, well, that’s not exactly accurate because think about it. Visible light starts in the hundreds of gigahertz. In frequency, but we talk about it in wavelength in nanometers, right? So, but that’s the same thing. That’s so the visible spectrum starts in the hundreds of gigahertz, but what makes it natural is that it has certain properties we have, for example, the, the, and what makes the unnatural unnatural, the man made frequencies [00:53:00] unnatural is certain properties that are modified.
It’s like, uh, it’s like as if our frequencies have been processed. Right? Processed foods has certain fats that are oxidized, certain toxins that have been treated by the processing. So imagine that the wifi has a pulsation. So it’s, it kind of sounds like a rifle. If you have one of those machines that can measure EMS, it’s 10 Hertz.
So it’s pulsed at 10 Hertz. Then you have modulation patterns where it goes high and low and high and low in nature. None of the natural sources of exposures, even visible light, none of them use these signal characteristics. So I think it’s even beyond the frequencies that, yes, are quite unnatural because we use random frequencies that are optimized for connectivity and certainly not for health or for their compatibility with biological systems.
On top of that, you have a lot of foreign characteristics that are completely. [00:54:00] new to biology. And there’s a lot of, uh, science to support this idea that the more pulsation you use, the more chaotic the modulation patterns are, and the more you add these, uh, new characteristics to EMF signals, the more biological effects you find.
So. it’s, it’s, it’s more than just the frequency. However, it’s true that if you go up in frequency and you have a lot of untested frequency, it’s nothing good. Right. But I think it just makes people, uh, because some people say again, as a, as a fair argument, they say, well, Nick, I use red light at night or, uh, to heal my elbow.
And how come I’m exposed to these hundreds of gigahertz and I’m still fine? Well, this red light is. emitted in a spectrum that has been studied. And then you also use it for a certain time, right? There’s, there’s good studies about the amount of light that you want to get if you use it therapeutically.
But when it comes to EMFs that are random exposures, [00:55:00] we’re not exposed in a way that is therapeutic. We’re exposed in a way that is unabated 24 seven. with machines that have been optimized for connectivity and not therapeutics. So it’s a different, I just wanted to make that clear. When it comes to quantum, look, chips, pendants, um, pyramids, you’re going to find a lot of technologies out there.
To this day, I haven’t found a magic bullet or else I would have. You know, moved on to another topic and maybe started talking about the pyrite or this and that, and it will be fine. I would be just moving on to another topic. I have not found one magic thing you can install on your phone that makes it safe.
Some manufacturers will tell you that it makes them safe. Well, no scientist is endorsing these things. Some doctors have found that some of these things actually have value. So I have to be fair with them. Uh, the value is some electro sensitives seem to respond. Certain devices you install on [00:56:00] your phone or, um, certain devices, but if I, I consider them not EMF protection, I consider them maybe EMF resilience or certain things that are therapeutics for your bioelectrical reality or integrity, if you will.
And that’s kind of a new product category that sometimes the science is very scarce and in, in the midst of finding products in that product category. You’ll find a lot of snake oil on Amazon. I mean, I don’t want to bash on Amazon this surely, but if you type EMF protection on Amazon, you’ll find claims that are extraordinary.
I mean, it’s, it’s the craziest. You don’t even know who the inventor is. The site studies that are non existent. It’s, there’s a lot of fraud. So you’ll spend a lot of money in the wrong direction. What I would say is. On any topic, if the science has been, has been done in, um, in a fashion that is relatively independent from pushing [00:57:00] products, um, like in red light, you’ll find Michael Amblin and this guy and that guy, what do they recommend?
What do we know is a safe dose and what, like in therapeutics, you can find what they would recommend. Well, what do EMF scientists recommend as far, do they recommend the pyramids and appendix? None of them recommend any of this stuff. So that’s telling you that, okay, well, either they don’t know or, well, the reality is none of it, none of it is a panacea.
To this day, I’m not endorsing a single of these brands, but I have mentioned in the past and recommended some products for electrosensitives, but even then, in many situations, I don’t agree with their marketing. I have, I have a huge problem with how these things are marketed. Sometimes they are marketed and they will tell you, you put a chip on your phone and now I guarantee you, I guarantee you, you’re going to be fine in the future because your phone is safe.
Well, you know, my answer just as [00:58:00] a very down to earth guy is, well, will the liability, if I still get cancer from my phone, Regardless of the fact that I had the chip on it, uh, will you pay for, yeah, like, will the liability fall on the manufacturer of this chip? Or on the cell phone manufacturer? I mean, it’s gonna be, it’s gonna be hell in the future for these companies, I think.
So I think it’s a very dangerous thing to guarantee safety when I don’t, I don’t think they have that. And I think that people who say that are Either ignorant or, uh, very good, uh, unethical marketers.
Pedram Shojai: Well, there’s never been a shortage of unethical marketers in the world that we live in. And that’s true.
And this subject has a lot of, uh, fear, right? Because it’s everywhere and it’s very easy to panic. It’s very easy to want a simple solution. It’d be a, it’s a lot more convenient for me to put some [00:59:00] quantum pendant. on my cell phone than to remember to put it on airplane mode and not use my Bluetooth headsets and all those things.
So, you know, I, I wish it was easier. I wish it was easier. One last question. Um, we, in medicine, we have polypharmacy, right? You might have something for your thyroid, something for your blood sugar, something for your heart. And independently, these drugs do what they’re supposed to do on a single vector. Um, But then you start taking them together, and you start to see unintended consequences.
You start to see these compounded side effects. And when you’d mentioned the kind of modulated frequencies and how everyone’s kind of messing with their own, you know, custom blends, if you will, um, in this EMF realm, how much are we seeing this, this distorted sound? It’s just, it’s just a very weird this is a very weird.
Okay, EMF radio frequency soup creating, um, a new thing, right? You’re walking into a room with so many emitting [01:00:00] devices that the body doesn’t know what to do.
Nick Pineault: Well, it’s, it’s really, I think, a big question mark. We don’t know. Exactly. And, and, and it’s really big as a question, how can we even study all these exposures and their effects on a population?
Uh, some things we can study like a phone in the pocket. And we can see, is there a group of people with no phone in the pocket? Or can we ask 100 participants not to put their phone in the pocket for an extended period of time? But that’s one of the arguments, uh, against, uh, the idea that our technology is perfectly safe is, well, who’s testing those in a real world setting where you’re exposed to an average of 23 wireless devices per household in North America?
Well, no one. That’s, that’s the thing. Devices are tested in isolation, and even if they have rat studies, there’s going to be [01:01:00] one emitter in the cage with the rats at a certain frequency and certain power. And so what happens if you have multiple emitters at different frequencies? I think that overall, what we can, if we, if we think about it in a systems way of thinking, If you add more and more and more frequencies and more and more noise at different frequencies, and the body is constantly trying to read the environment and stay in homeostasis, survive, right?
I think that if you add more and more sources, more and more chaos, we can probably conclude, well, it’s probably causing more problems. So that’s why there are still benefits. I find it. Marvelous that people can feel the effect in many situation of turning off their Wi Fi router, even though you can detect 300 of them on your laptop when you look at the Wi Fi list.
How is that possible? [01:02:00] Well, it shows you that it was creating effect and then Bizarrely, we’re still, I don’t know, I don’t know exactly how, how that’s possible. I guess the, the wifi closer to your body has more effect, but it shows you that there’s, the body is able to tune out probably most other wifi routers because people are not dropping dead and most people are still sleeping in this environment, at least they’re getting some sleep, right?
So, um. Even researchers who did the brain studies were very surprised that they found a fact. They said, my God, you know, a cell phone is not that powerful. And that’s kind of the argument that a lot of skeptics bring me. You know, a cell phone is so, it’s like two watts, not even two watts. It’s, it’s very minute exposures compared to even what I’m getting from sunshine in the morning.
It’s, it’s kind of ridiculous. So how can the body even detect this little, little, little exposure. Well, that’s probably [01:03:00] because it’s little and yet it sounds to the body like a lot of noise. And, and, um, that’s why it makes sense to minimize. How much noise there is in your environment, especially at night.
And that’s really, that’s really how we need to think about it. I think holistically, if you will, just turn off sources. If you cannot turn off sources, can you reduce your time of use? If you cannot reduce your time of use, can you distance yourself from those devices and then focus on where you’re spending a lot of time?
Can you clean up these areas? And then in certain situations, don’t worry about it. Right? Sometimes you go, you go to vacation for a week and you’re exposed to this and that. If you’re, if you’re thriving so far, it’s not your vacation is going to kill you. Right? Even you go to Italy and you gorge on, on pizza and wine and this and that.
Well, that’s part of your vacation, but back [01:04:00] home though, in your regular life, in your everyday strategy to stay healthy, then you can think about, okay, well, how do I, uh, bet improve things? Right? So it’s, it’s really, um, it really depends on your level of sensitivity and how you feel, uh, those exposures are impacting you.
But for most people, they should. Not worry about the things that are occasional and just focus on what’s habitual. And that’s really, I cannot stress it enough. I think, I think I myself got lost at the beginning in trying to make sense of EMFs. Like, Oh my God, my blender, right? The it’s, it’s completely stupid in the end.
It’s just. What are you exposed to on a constant basis? And try to mitigate that and focus on that and the rest, tune them out, right? You don’t have to think about your neighbor’s wifi. Everyone tells me about it, but you don’t have to think about it for focus on yours. And then we can talk about the next steps.
Pedram Shojai: I really appreciate that [01:05:00] perspective. Um, build your vitality, build your resilience. Um, you know, take away all the cuts you can, uh, but don’t freak out. Um, and set yourself up for positive. Environment and success. Nick, uh, love the work that you’re doing. Big fan of your work. Thank you so much for your contribution here.
Nick Pineault: Thanks so much for having me. It was a pleasure.
www.theurbanmonk.com