The best numbers are those found standard in a home. IOW it
is not advisable to live in a region of 1 gauss. That, I
thought, was obvious from my posts. But how much lower must
magnetic (or electric) fields be to be safe? Well, you and
your neighbors are all not suddenly dying. Therefore the E-M
fields in your neighborhood are probably a good benchmark for
safety.

Some are so worried about magnetic fields as to say 3
milligauss is too high. Then danger is everywhere. Others
put those maximum acceptable limits higher. Bottom line:
currently household appliances appear to be acceptable limits
for safety. As I said before, you have a crude measuring
device. If fields in that location cause a monitor to shimmy,
then that *might* be levels too high. Indeed, that location
is higher than what most people experience. Therefore it is
advisable to limit time in that area. IOW don't put a bed
there.

Did I give a magic number? Of course not. There is no
magic number. Concepts must be tempered by the numbers.
Provided is a crude method to measure field exposure - to get
ballpark numbers. No conclusive evidence says low level
fields, as found in most locations, are destructive. AND
(returning to the original post) speculation about high
voltage transmission lines is not what we should be
discussing. Unfortunately, too many with a junk science
perspective foolishly worry about those high voltage wires.
If E-M fields are dangerous, then we should be more worrying
about household appliances, automobiles, electric stoves, and
wires inside the walls. BTW, there was a wide difference in
the fields from different cars.

Provided is a 'best guess' value. There is no magic
number. There are numbers to make only a subjective
evaluations. Without numbers, then we only have junk science
reasoning - not even a good subject evaluation. Is your house
dangerous? First, what are the numbers? Notice that Scout is
doing just that. He has a meter. He is first collecting
facts - the numbers.

Thom Stewart wrote:
w_tom,
Using your own advice, please tell us what kind of meter were you using
for your car dash test. Should we believe you when you don't specify
type of meter, what you were measuring, what the values were, under what
conditions were your testing done.
IOW you have ignored the very things you are condemning.

I stated ; "The jury was still out on effects"
You haven't really said anything of value other than your own slant on
your "Urban Myth"

Ole Thom