Home » Uncategorized » “Inside Edition” is coming up to shoot a story

“Inside Edition” is coming up to shoot a story

Follow World Hum Map and Database Project on WordPress.com
Follow World Hum Map and Database Project on WordPress.com

Al Jazeera was important, as was Coast to Coast AM in some ways, along with BBC (four times), the Conversation (650,000 readers), and numbers of others, but this will be the biggest fish so far. For the first time, the Worldwide Hum will be discussed on a major evening American show in a serious, scientific, and credible way. Their viewership is over four million people per evening, and all it will take is for a single person in that group who has the connections and gravitas to finally push our project into a university or government laboratory. When that happens, this scientific riddle will soon be solved.

There’s a lot riding on this one. Wish me luck.


  1. Eileen M Bowie says:

    Wow, good luck! And, get ready for an avalanche of hearers and other special people. Eileen

  2. Lisa Allen says:

    Good luck, Glen! Do you know yet when it will be on TV?

  3. Lisa Allen says:

    Ok, thanks. If they tell you the exact date it will be on please let us know.

  4. Lisle Blyth says:

    Best of luck Glen. We should all post the Inside Edition interview to further increase awareness when it’s flighted. After a quiet holiday season (as always, the Hum is back with a vengence here in South Africa). While searching for my swimming ear plugs to get slight relief yesterday afternoon, for the first time – after nearly five years of this brutal noise – I wondered if life is worth living. It’s a global health and human-rights issue! Please speak for us firmly and with conviction; people are suffering. I strongly suspect that there is a huge amount of money being made by businesses tied to this thing, so it’s in their interests to keep the Hum off world health officials’ radar – contamination, noise pollution and public safety.

    • Jess J says:

      Hi Lisa… just to clarify, when you write “after a quiet holiday season” do you mean that the Hum quietens down for you at times? It was mostly quiet here from Dec. 20th thru the 25th.

      • Lisa Allen says:

        Jess, There was no hum sound at all on Christmas day, and the days that followed I barely heard it. It is still pretty quiet compared to how loud it was before Christmas. Late at night it is slightly louder but not bad at all. I can, however, hear the pulsing through my pillow when I go to sleep but even that isn’t as intense. I don’t understand what causes the hum to change in volume but I am very thankful for this break. Is it louder now where you are? Where do you live if you don’t mind my asking? I am in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.

      • Jess J says:

        For Lisa Allen: Sorry for the late reply. I’m on the southern coast of British Columbia. Yes, it has been quieter since Christmas time around the 10, 10:30 p.m. mark but still there, still loud in the morning normally quieter around 11 a.m. The exception of a quieter evening was the night of January 13th – the loudness was crazy from 10:20 to 11 p.m. but then calmed down a bit. The volume changes and the hour related to these changes are the key here. Do you notice this at all? When the volume is very loud and without background noise or covering them, I also can feel pressure on my ears and they pop, etc. This is why any talk of the source being external is absolutely absurd.


      • Lisa Allen says:

        Jess, Are you in the same area as Glen MacPherson? Doesn’t he live around there? I also feel that the idea of the hum being internal only is absurd. It is getting louder again. That pulsing sensation in my ear woke me up around 4 a.m. this morning, and it was loud when I got up. A few days ago I met with a woman who heard the hum a few years ago for two years. We’ve been texting but we finally met the other day. She went through all the same things I’m going through. She lives here in Myrtle Beach, too. But she has moved and doesn’t hear it anymore. She seems to think it is due to the electric company’s substation, and says there is one near my house too. The problem is I’ve heard it all over the area here, not just my house, and I’ve heard it all in several areas of Scotland. So I don’t know if that’s the answer. Do you think it could be a substation – is there one by you?

  5. saymber says:

    I wish you the very best with this! May be in the course of major research and study, some explanation will come to the loud whale/trumpet-like noises being recorded around the world that seems to be coming from above as well.

  6. Good luck. Do you know if it will be aired in the UK?

  7. Melissa says:

    Good luck Glen! And thank you. You’ve developed great momentum, and I’m so grateful to you.

  8. Janet Menage says:

    Glen, until proven otherwise, I think the most likely hypothesis is Electrosensitivity. It affects the same percetage of the population as Hum-hearers (2-3%).It can cause auditory and sensory disturbance. It accounts for two people in the same bed hearing/feeling different things. It accounts for the difficulty/impossibility of making audio recordings of the Hum. It accounts for my ability to block the Hum by 90-100% by means of aluminium earplugs (noise-cancelling earphones switched off).
    The external auditory canal is a portal through which EMF can travel to the central nervous system, unobstructed by bone (calcium). Eyeball vibration can happen and this is another portal.
    One way to disprove this hypothesis would be to use an EMF meter at the same time that the Hum was being heard. If the EMF meter reads zero, the hypothesis is probably disproved.
    Best of luck with the show.

    • Lisa Allen says:

      Janet, I don’t know if this supports your theory or not, but in the 1980s when I was in a science museum in New York City, there was some kind of machine that measured electricity in your body. My boyfriend at the time did it and he was in the normal range. Then I tried it and the needle jumped all the way to the right, way out of range! I thought it was funny and weird at the time but that’s all. Now I wonder if that has anything to do with my ability to hear the hum.

    • I don’t concur, but until we have more solid evidence, I think it’s worthy of examination. Note: I think there is considerable evidence that EM does not directly cause the Hum, but as to the theory that certain types of EM exposure might cause damage that causes a subsequent Hum, I think that’s the more promising line of inquiry in the EM side of speculation. But, as I alluded to above, I am currently turning my attention to other theories.

  9. Janet Menage says:

    Electromagnetic radiation inducing sound in humans.

    • Janet –

      For me, your link is just to an abstract, with an offer to purchase the full pdf for $25. Have you seen the pdf?

      If others find the same paywall, the link here:


      may be more agreeable. Does this work for others?

      There is also a 1973 paper in Science by Frey and Messenger that gives better detail (but probably also paywalled without an institutional account). The power densities they used for a positive result in their experiments far far exceeded the RF levels you might implicate for the Hum.


      • George G. says:


        Free download.

      • Janet Menage says:

        Bernie, I believe auditory and sensory disturbance has been reported in people who are Electrosensitive due to existing EM radiation in the environment. Perhaps it also depends on whether the EM radiation is pulsed. I haven’t read the original pdf as it was a secondary reference in another article on http://www.ES-UK. I’ve ordered the Summary book in case there’s more information there.

      • Janet –

        For me, the link you provided just above appears to go nowhere. So I don’t know what you were pointing out. Please advise.

        Keep in mind that the Frey paper is from 1962. At a peak power density of 275 mW/cm2 (for example, that would be a 345 watts transmitter at a 10 cm distance !), it would have been astounding if there were NOT a neurological reaction. Do you not agree?

        Unfortunately, there appears to be nothing here that is remotely related to the Hum.


      • Janet Menage says:

        Exactly, Bernie, it’s an unproven hypothesis. I will try to explain my thinking.
        As far as I’m aware, Deming postulated EM radiation as one possible source of the Hum, hence the steel Deming box.
        If the EM hypothesis has not yet been disproved, you need a mechanism by which EM triggers an auditory (& sensory) response in the human nervous system.
        It is known that EM has many effects on the human nervous system. The amount of EM radiation (?pulsed) in the environment has increased exponentially since the 1960s, and technology companies are not keen to put us off by explaining the health risks (although California’s mobile phone guidelines are a start).
        My hypothesis is that Electrosensitivity may be a mechanism by which an overload of environmental EM radiation causes the Hum/vibration to be sensed by some people.
        “Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (ES) is an illness that is both highly controversial and little understood. The symptoms can vary a lot between sufferers, but will normally include some of the following: sleep disturbance, tiredness, depression, headaches, restlessness, irritability, concentration problems, forgetfulness, learning difficulties, frequent infections, blood pressure changes, limb and joint pains, numbness or tingling sensations, tinnitus, hearing loss, impaired balance, giddiness and eye problems. There have been reports of cardiovascular problems such as tachycardia, though these are relatively rare”.
        Internally generated tinnitus is usually high-pitched. My hypothesis would be that it need not necessarily be high-pitched and that it could be caused by external factors.
        Low, medium & high-pitched (frequency) tinnitus does exist:- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23141440
        As I say, this is an hypothesis which could explain phenomena such as, two people in the same bed hearing/feeling different things, & a prevalence in the population of 3%.
        I am electrosensitive, being intolerant of wi-fi (headache, brainfog, pressure in the ears), so my computer is cabled. I can feel the radiation coming from my mobile phone (like a warm tingling). Passing phone masts on the motorway causes the same wi-fi symptoms.
        http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/health/sensitivity.asp, states:-
        “Physicists at UC Berkeley [Jensen 2007] have produced the world’s smallest radio out of a single carbon nanotube that is 10,000 times thinner than a human hair. The nanotube absorbs the radio transmission and physically vibrates in response, like a tuning fork or the tiny hairlike structures inside the human ear. The multi-walled cylinders were better at picking up AM and FM transmissions and the single walled nanotubes were best for receiving the frequencies used in cell phones. It is interesting that the mechanism is by physical vibration of the nanotube in response to RF fields. This may give more pointers as to the bio-detection capability of the body, even at a cellular level and also may well invoke a bio-response”.
        I’m not trying to prove anything, it’s merely a theory to be disproved by anyone who can come up with relevant evidence.
        PS (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28723604 I don’t understand. Can anyone explain?)

      • Janet – good assembly of material. Thanks.

        It seems to me (?) that you are suggesting “electro-sensitivity” (ES) as a contributing factor to a susceptibility to “The Hum” while not necessarily being a “cause” in the sense of an EM signal driving, for example, a 56 Hz audio perception. Not at all impossible, but already indirect and very far from supported by evidence. The list of alleged symptoms sounds like those for a sugar-substitute or excessive video gaming, etc. Tough road.

        In contrast, the final reference (Frosch) you had questions about it completely different. Thanks for that.

        About a month ago Glen send me an earlier paper by Frosch from 2016:


        of which, the 2017 paper you linked (pdf version here):


        is a continuation.

        In both papers Frosch begins by accepting that “The Hum” IS an internally generated low-frequency tinnitus. He deals with research compiled from questionnaires, singling out three manifestations (diagnostics) of the phenomenon: (1) beating with external signals, (2) head rotation blocking, and (3) a multi-day pause following extensive air travel.

        Both papers read easily, although there are some issues of continuity, and I really do wonder how he managed to measure head rotations of 306 degrees/sec. I was hoping for some new details.
        Just below delineated by (*****) are my return comments to Glen by email:

        Wed 12/20/2017, 12:56 PM

        Thanks for the tip on the 2016 Frosch paper – I had not seen that. A lot to agree with, but a lot of unanswered questions as well.

        I agree that the three issues: beating, head rotations, and air travel are diagnostic for the Hum as you and I understand it.

        BEATING: He is not clear on what beating he is discussing. For myself, when I play a real audio tone of 65 Hz against my 64 Hz Hum I do NOT hear a 1 Hz amplitude variation as a FIRST ORDER beat. I do hear a SECOND ORDER beating (subjective beating), which is very helpful in pitch matching. It is a bit subtle, but not annoying like the amplitude beats, and thusly indicates no superposition of two real audio signals. That is, the Hum does not mix in the air with the external reference audio. The phenomenon of subjective beating is significantly different.

        [To hear subjective beating, as an example, start up two instances of the online function generator. For me, the two signals add in the soundcard. Set one to 220 Hz (“A”) and the other to 221 Hz and you will hear the expected 1 Hz amplitude beat. Then set the second generator to 330 Hz (a musical “fifth” or “E” above the “A”) and the result is a perfectly smooth consonance as expected.

        Now, without stopping the second tone, change its frequency to 330.5 Hz and press play. You will hear some “effect” (wavering) cycling at 1 Hz. MUCH more subtle (not annoying) but nonetheless a clear indication of an imperfect small integer tuning ratio. The impression of “wavering”, but constant amplitude in this example, is essentially what I get with one audio signal and the Hum.]

        So it is not clear what Frosch’s beating observations mean.

        HEAD ROTATION: It is not clear if his finding on HR is the same as my head-shake interruptions – I tend to think so. But he here (and in his previous 2013 paper) does not state how a head was rotated in the experiment! I don’t mind shaking my own head, but doubt that I could concentrate on hearing (or not hearing) the hum if a machine were doing it! He does not say anywhere how soon the Hum returns.

        While the angular velocity of 306 degrees/second is noted, this is apparently head to shoulders and thus would hopefully be limited to a half-second before deceleration (and reveals?) would be necessary. Does he discount acceleration?

        AIR TRAVEL: I take the air-travel issue as highly significant and take it to indicate involvement of the middle ear due to pressure changes. He takes it to be the third pillar of his diagnosis. Unlike beating and head shaking however, it is not a test easily or quickly done/repeated. He does not say how many of his subjects had this opportunity, let alone experienced (or did not) this TLH. He says all three conditions occurred in only 7%.


        (1) It would be interesting to have feedback (perhaps you have tried) from Frosch. For example, his summary of his work as a head-post on your site and his willingness to answer questions.
        (2) His point about head-rotation and semicircular canals is worth considering. (That is, vibrations in the canals as a source.) It makes sense that something associated with fluid motion would be interrupted by a head-shake. On the other hand, people getting off planes are annoyed by middle-ear problems, not issues of imbalance. Either (inner-ear or semicircular canals) indicate an internal source for the Hum).


      • Janet Menage says:

        Bernie, I think we need to get away from the idea that the Hum is EITHER ‘External’ OR ‘Internal’, since it has probably never been recorded (says Glen), and Addenbrookes Hospital in the UK in the 1990s established that it had an external source.
        So, we need to postulate a connection between an ‘unrecordable’ external source and an internal, biological reaction to that source.
        eg: EM radiation -> Electrosensitive individual -> Low Frequency Tinnitus.
        Head-shaking, aeroplane travel, etc. may disrupt the internal reaction to the external trigger.
        Electrosensitivity is defined as a biological reaction to EM radiation (the syndrome of symptoms is well-established).
        There is evidence for a link between Electrosensitivity and tinnitus/sensory disturbance.
        There is scientific evidence that tinnitus can be low frequency. Interestingly, I found a tinnitus forum where sufferers seemed to be describing the Hum! – https://www.tinnitustalk.com/threads/very-loud-low-frequency-sound-in-my-left-ear-only-at-night-anyone-experienced-this.11888/
        (Not sure what you meant by “sugar-substitute or video games”?).
        As part of my research, I’d like to hear from any other Hum hearers who may be sensitive to wi-fi, phone masts, laptops, mobile phones etc.

      • Thanks Janet.

        (1) You said: “….and Addenbrookes Hospital in the UK in the 1990s established that it had an external source.”
        Do you have a source for this statement? Badly needed.

        (2) You also said: “Head-shaking, aeroplane travel, etc. may disrupt the internal reaction to the external trigger.”

        This would involve the SUPPOSITION of transducers/demodulators and compatible switching mechanisms not in evidence. A chain of already unlikely events (a “Just So” story). This I have discussed (see Fig. 4 for a brief version):


        (3) You also said with regard to ES “. . . . (the syndrome of symptoms is well-established). . . .”

        Really? It looks to me like a litany of numerous vague and prosaic indications. You yourself (Jan 15 at 5:15 AM) said about ES: “The symptoms can vary a lot between sufferers, but will normally include some of the following: sleep disturbance, tiredness, depression, headaches, restlessness, irritability, concentration problems, forgetfulness, learning difficulties, frequent infections, blood pressure changes, limb and joint pains, numbness or tingling sensations, tinnitus, hearing loss, impaired balance, giddiness and eye problems.”

        You forgot athletes foot! What good is this? That’s why I joked about sugar substitutes and video gaming. (Alas, through personal experience, I should have added “old age”!)


      • Janet Menage says:

        Bernie, have a look at what the Swedish government are doing with regard to providing practical assistance for victims of electrosensitivity.
        There’s plenty of good quality research out there if you care to look.

      • Janet –

        You said: “….and Addenbrookes Hospital in the UK in the 1990s established that it had an external source.”

        I do not find you have provided a source here. Why would you make such a statement? We need to see this addressed.


      • Janet Menage says:

        David Baguley, Head of Addenbrookes Hospital audiology department is reported to have excluded tinnitus as a cause of the Hum, stating that in 1/3 of the cases a simple external explanation can be found. In 2/3rds of cases there’s no obvious external source, but the Hum sufferer (he believes) has become focussed on some kind of innocuous external noise which the brain then enhances in some way. ‘Treatment’ is based on CBT to help the patient focus on it less and be less anxious about it.

    • Peter Haartsen says:

      Janet, thank you for opening this line of further thinking. This read demands real attention, but it offers me, and I guess all of us, the opportunity to get a better idea of what hearing the hum is all about.

  10. Melissa2 says:

    Hoping we will find a way to stop it. Before it stops us.

    • George G. says:


      Hum’s been trying to stop me for 42 years.

      It cannot, it’s just a big useless toothless tiger.

      Don’t fear it, laugh at at, and you will soon learn it’s not the boss—

      You are!

  11. ladymozart says:

    Wishing you and the project all of the luck or whatever it takes to raise it to the next level of awareness and research. Thank you for all that you have done and continue to do.


    great! wishing you luck! I truly hope some answers come out of this – I’ve been a sufferer for 5+years now – living in Toronto Canada thanks!!!

  13. Eva Fishman says:

    You’re right, Glen, this is a big opportunity. I’m confident in your ability to articulate how the HUM has impacted those of us who experience (and suffer from) it.
    I hope the interviewers are every bit as competent and ask the right questions, and don’t try to create an atmosphere of skepticism, or dilute/blow-off the scientific evidence gathered so far, based on scientific methodology etc.
    I can’t wait to watch the program: I can DVR it, but would it also be possible to put a link in here so it can be forwarded to others?

  14. George G. says:

    Regarding pubmed/2872360
    I have glanced at it and feel it’s well worth studying further.
    Good find.
    Hope to get back to you as soon as fully understand the reports.

  15. Harvey Wolfson says:

    I have rejected the hypothesis of electrosensitivity, as I haven’t seen any credible evidence for its existence. Indeed, and to the contrary, it’s my view (although admittedly, I haven’t reviewed a lot of research) that electrosensitivity is in the same category as homeopathy and much naturopathic medicine, in that it is pseudoscience. Because I am skeptical by nature and I am also a hum hearer, I tend to think that there is an objective internal cause. Perhaps it is based on some sort of internal sensitivity, but I am reluctant to accept that there is something within me that is “abnormal”. I realize that I am rambling and going in veritable circles, but I really have nothing more to offer. Glen, I really hope that the cause of this phenomenon will be discovered soon. Best of luck in your quest. Let us know when the Inside Edition show will be broadcast.

  16. George G. says:

    Janet & Bernie,

    Please follow me to the thread “Let’s review:——.”


  17. Gail Hewitt says:

    Please let us know when. My husband (ex-NASA spaceprogram employee) has listened to this program for the last ten years. Somebody has to know more than we have heard about here. Good luck. I would sure like to hear this one!

  18. Nancy Hollo says:

    I heard the Inside Edition report tonight. They sandwiched you in with the loud roaring and booming sounds heard around the world, showed a few clips of meteorites exploding and finished with giddy giggling. A pox on the media! But at least they did stress the words “Worldwide Hum Map” which I was able to Google and find you.

    • They shot six hours of footage in three different locations, and I managed to get about 90 seconds of semi-relevant coverage. But this is the nature of popular media. The very fact that 90 seconds of serious science made it on the air is something of a victory in my view. Thanks for writing.

      • Eva Fishman says:

        Sigh, hate to say it, but the skepticism in my last comment was borne out. I didn’t get to see the broadcast, but Inside Edition is a little too “Hollywood” for me, we need “60 Minutes”. I’ll try to find it on the web. I might be too critical, but 90 seconds out of years of research doesn’t seem like much of an ROI, let’s hope it piqued the interest of other respected journalists.

  19. Eva Fishman says:

    RE: Jess’s comment of today (1/29/17) –

    You listed a few examples of when and how loud etc. the HUM has been the last month, relating it to time of day, but the last statement you make, that the HUM being an external source is “absurd” seems contradictory.

    I firmly believe the source is external, there is evidence to support that, and it triggers a response in some individuals who, for whatever reason that hasn’t been identified yet, perceive the HUM. If you are able to block it out with earplugs doesn’t that support it as being external? I also have tinnitus, and if I use earplugs, it intensifies the tinnitus, because the cause is internal.
    I’m not talking about masking it with a “white noise” sound machine, which is different than blocking it, and is what I use at night when it’s present – and if the HUM intensifies during the night or comes back with a vengeance, it startles me (and my dog) awake.

    I recently saw a science video that mentioned electromagnetic vibrations that start in outer space but do reach the earth. EM has been discussed ad nauseum in this forum, there is no definitive evidence either yeah or nay. I think the HUM has more than one cause, a “perfect storm” of elements, atmospheric conditions, geological factors etc. and has a lot of moving parts, so trying to identify “the one thing” causing it is like trying to herd snakes.

    Also, it still isn’t clear why there are “hot spots” in the house where it is loud enough to wake the dead (I want the HUM at my funeral…), yet not perceivable outside. If internal it would be consistent in tone, volume, intensity, and present regardless of whether we are inside or out. I’ve discussed this before in comments from long ago! Whether I’m stressed, sick, tired, etc. doesn’t determine IF I hear the HUM, but those factors influence my ability to COPE with it.


    • Jess J says:

      Eva, I made an error. I meant to write that talk of the source being “internal” is absurd. Yes, in my opinion, the source is EXTERNAL. Sorry about the confusion.

      Earplugs do not work for me, btw. But as I pointed out in my earlier comment, I can hear the changes in volume at certain times of the day/night – so it really couldn’t be more obvious that the source is external. I have heard the hum outdoors if everything else is really quiet. Of course it will be much louder indoors as the sound resonates within the walls. I’ve also noticed (when it’s roaring) it’s louder CLOSER to walls than in the middle of the room.


      • Eva Fishman says:

        I wondered about that!
        When the HUM is present, some rooms are louder than others, and places in rooms are louder than other spots within a room. At this moment as I’m writing, it is absent, but yesterday it was awful.

        What is needed is an artificial ear that has the components of a human ear – place it in a “HUM zone”, then monitor it to see if it responds as the human “hearer” does – I.e., do the cilia move, does the tympanic membrane vibrate, is there evidence of it being affected by EM or other phenomena, etc. Very sci-fi, I know, but I’m using a Kindle to communicate, unheard of 15 years ago…

        Other countries are taking this seriously, the US is operating in the dark ages (we’re all probably on a CIA watch list – kidding! I think…).


  20. While there are myriad strange and unexplained sounds in this world, and each such sound has its own list of symptoms (and suspect causes), there are of course “clusters” of self-similar phenomena which may nonetheless contrast with other isolated cases or other clusters. We assume that most people self-reporting are sincere, even if sometimes they are scientifically wanting of just incompletely recounting.

    One major cluster is what we call “The Hum”. The “hearers” or “Hummers” within this cluster likely easily recognize the most common half-dozen or so symptoms, and immediately spot one or more outliers if such are included in a conscientious report. To suggest that an observation is inconsistent with a mainstream version of “the Hum” is NOT at all suggesting a personal failing! Who wants the Hum! (Rather it is likely good news that a remedy may be at hand in that case.) Neither should an individual insists that any of his/her personal observations that are at variance with the mainstream Hummer checklist means that the vast majority of such Hum hearers are misguided.

    To some extent, likely we are all dogmatic, but let us also be aware of the apples/oranges issues.

    • Harvey Wolfson says:

      Great comment, Bernie. I had a similar reaction, but forced myself to refrain from saying anything. I 100% agree that while many of our experiences are similar, some appear to be idiosyncratic. What we call “the Hum” may ultimately explain this dichotomy, but at this point we should strive to respect each other’s experiences and evidence-based hypotheses.

    • Peter Haartsen says:

      Bernie, I guess these clusters of self-similar phenomena are a kind of phenomena that have had a decisive impact on natural, political, and social history in general. The real problem with this container-word kind of linguistic cluttering of phenomenally separate experiences is that the root of one individually identifiable experience becomes part of a theory which subjects the individual experience (and expression of it) to be scrutinized by one mind with “decisive oversight”. It would – in terms of critical theory – dispossess the experiencer of their power to express their most intimate experience of alienating phenomena.

      This is really serious business, and I thank you for raising this issue.
      We all really need this common, unambiguous ground to be able and allowed to give expression to personal experience, as well as to understand that there may be limits to our individual powers of interpretation of these experiences.

      We just have this one certainty: We really need each other on this forum to speak up and appreciate all voices. Let’s hope that we all may live to experience: no more hum.

  21. Eva Fishman says:

    Hi Bernie –

    Not sure what you’re trying to say – perhaps that not all hearers are in the middle of the Bell Curve? To me, that is “normal”, and doesn’t discount the experience of the outlier groups or those in the middle, it represents the variability of human perception and experience. All the papers, theses, etc. that I’ve read (or tried to read – not all of them are well-articulated) posted in the forum, postulate contradictory theories, and the human tendency is to pick out the parts from each tract that support our own “theory” and experience, and dismiss the rest. How many of the authors are hearers?

    Having said that, for the purposes of scientific study and problem solving, concentrating or focusing on the “symptoms”, experiences, and perceptions reported by the majority of hearers will yield data that may help determine the cause. What is needed is for hearers to document in detail (and consistently) the what, where, when, weather conditions, time of day, volume, ambient noise, season, changes noted in pitch and/or rhythm, etc. etc. – and have it all catalogued, collated, and spread-sheeted by a computer program, then poured over for common elements, threads of connection (or lack thereof) etc.

    Documentation would need to include personal information about gender, age, kind of home (house, apartment, community, etc.), health conditions, medications used, and so forth, to determine if there are factors that separate out hearers from non-hearers. Might be interesting to see if there are twins or other multiples where one is a hearer and the other is not. In other words, I’m beginning to think there are 2 distinct issues that need study.

    Who will do this, and how? That is the million-dollar question (or more, perhaps 2 million). Glen has done a Herculean job without funds, just think what could be done with financial support…

    P.S. Perhaps we’re over-thinking the whole thing….?

    • Hi Eva and all –

      Oh – there is NO bell curve here. For an analogy, a few folks feeling miserable might have food poisoning (bad donuts – perhaps) while a much larger cluster have the current flu bug (and never ate donuts). People who have the flu have a set of symptoms, some perhaps similar to the donut folks, but are not somehow on the tail of a distribution of those who ate bad donuts.

      True Hum Hearers (a “cluster” of perhaps, very roughly, half of the people who hear A HUM, and comment here) likely know pretty much who they are, and are in some way quite conscious of the associated “syndrome”, and envious of the other half who will eventually find a pump left running or something of that sort and be done with it.

      What do I consider the “checklist” for he Hum? Here is what I posted about a month ago, slightly revised:


      (1) SURELY IT’S A TRUCK. It’s quiet in your house, appliances off, no TV, perhaps late at night, and you hear a rumble somewhere in the distance – surely a utility truck idling during a repair. Perhaps you ignore it the first night. Eventually you walk about your home, but never get closer or further from it, or find anything buzzing. Eventually you look up/down the block. Strangely you probably find you barely hear it outside. You have tried VERY hard to find the source of the sound (perhaps even over an extended area), but not found a thing.

      (2) YOU ARE ALONE! You ask someone else in your home what they think the humming is? Typically, they hear nothing. You know the Hum is real but others suppose your imagination is in play. Very few people hear it (perhaps 2%). So, if nearly everyone at home hears the hum, it is probably a real sound, NOT the 2% Hum (simple probability). Look harder for a motor, a vibrating supply pipe, a neighbor’s air conditioner, even a loose panel on a power transformer.

      (3) DOES NOT BLOCK LIKE ORDINARY SOUNDS: Pillows, earplug and the like do not work. But distractions such as a bathroom fan left running may MASK the Hum.

      (4) SHAKE IT AWAY. Now do the following test: When it’s quiet and the Hum is “booming” shake your head vigorously (as you might in refusing to eat a third jelly donut offered!). If you can shake for say, five seconds, did the Hum stop during the shake? Hard to tell? And anyway, if it went away, it came back ALMOST immediately. That’s the point, you know it went away because you hear it come back. Shake a half-dozen times. Do you reliably hear it come back (ramp back up) after a half-second? It’s a lot like shooing away a pesky gnat, you think he’s gone but is in your face again in a half second. If you can stall it for a fraction of a second, reliably, you pass this test. It’s a diagnostic tool – not a remedy.

      (5) Try to match the pitch of the Hum. Give it a good try, humming the pitch yourself if you can (although a fine singing voice is not required, try this with nobody home!). If you find you have to “buzz” your throat to get even nearly in tune, this is typical. Typical pitches are 30 to 100 Hz – in the lowest two octaves of the piano. Eventually try an online tone generator. If it’s say, 56 Hz or 64 Hz, that about what we expect. If it’s exactly 60 Hz (US/Canada) or 50 Hz (rest of world) you might want to look more at power equipment. If its 440 Hz, look for an orchestra tuning on your lawn – the point of the joke here being that the Hum is octaves below 440 Hz. If it is pitched well above the orchestra it is not the Hum, but likely ordinary tinnitus (ringing in the ear).

      (6) IT’S NOT ALWAYS THERE? Well, the Hum probably is there waiting 24/7/365. Fortunately, you ignore it (distracted) or it is masked out (overwhelmed) by even relatively low-level environmental noise (street traffic, weather, office noise, TV, conversation, birds). But is it ever NOT there when you have determined it is quiet enough and you actively try to hear it? If it’s really the Hum, probably it is still there.

      (7) While it seems to be always there, demanding or on demand, it may seem to vary night to night, or even on intervals of a second or two, but not exactly periodically, but randomly. That is, it may “surge” which is why it sounds even more like a truck.

      (8) If you do travel, particularly for journeys of hours, particularly by air or over mountains, was this travel followed by several days without the Hum in circumstances where you normally experienced it?

      This is a test for the traditional Hum. Feel free to disagree. If you agree with most of the items, do you have additions or comments? If you disagree with most of these, or even just one or two, that probably just means you are not a traditional Hummer, and others here envy your more favorable position.


  22. George G. says:

    For me that wraps it up Bernie,

    I guess I am a “traditional Hummer,”

    To Eva,

    I have been meaning to ask, how does your dog tell you when it hears the Hum?

    I am not being silly, tell me the symptoms it displays.

    My wife’s dog (13 year old Jack Russel) becomes frantic hours before an electrical storm. He pants frantically, tongue becomes purple, trembles and shakes and paces erratically.

    I have equipment that can pick up lightning discharging 3000 kilometres away, but he outperforms my gear by several hours every time.

    Your dog’s behaviour regarding the Hum may help my research. Thanks.

    By the way, good to hear from you again.

  23. Lisa Allen says:


    I agree with almost all of the items on your list with the exception of it sounding like an idling truck. I know that is how most people describe it, but I would call it a rumbling sound, or like a loud bass from a car stereo parked down the street. That’s when there seems to be a beat or pulse to it. When it’s in a continual drone mode, I don’t even know how to describe it. It sounds like a build up of underground pressure that is straining and about to burst. Also, the head shake thing doesn’t work for me. As soon as I stop shaking my head, it is still there. Lastly, there have been times I haven’t heard it. On Christmas day I didn’t hear it all all. Maybe it was there and below my ability to hear it, but it was quiet to me.

    • Hi Lisa – thanks. You said:

      “ . . . Also, the head shake thing doesn’t work for me. As soon as I stop shaking my head, it is still there. . . . “

      And I had said:

      “. . . If you can shake for say, five seconds, did the Hum stop during the shake? Hard to tell? And anyway, if it went away, it came back ALMOST immediately. That’s the point, you know it went away because you hear it come back. Shake a half-dozen times. Do you reliably hear it come back (ramp back up) after a half-second?. . . “

      Did the Hum go away during the shake – if you can tell? Perhaps try the vigorous exhale Glen prefers instead of the shaking. These interruptions are subtle but reliable.

      [ To perhaps be more clear, shake five seconds, stop and listen for the ramp back. Repeat this five-second trial perhaps a half dozen times. Soon enough, perhaps, you become convinced timing of the RETURNS, relative to the STOPS, is not a coincidence.]

      The character of your hum description seems within bounds. Christmas – no a clue!


  24. Lisa Allen says:

    Hi Bernie – Actually, yes, the hum goes away when shaking my head but as soon as I stop it’s there again. So I guess the head shake thing is on my list, too.

  25. Lisa – Outstanding, and typical of your usual efforts

  26. Lisa Allen says:

    Thanks, Bernie. Thanks for all that you do and contribute here, too (far more than me!)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: