When Joe Rogan talks, millions listen. And recently, he brought a conversation into the mainstream that elite performance circles have been quietly having for years.
On his podcast, Joe reacted to the San Francisco 49ers injury story—the pattern of severe, catastrophic injuries and the fact that their training facility sits right next to a major electrical substation.
His take? "Is that nuts… or could it be real?"
But then he went deeper. He started asking the questions that actually matter:
"EMF signals—we know they disrupt human beings, but to what extent? Is it minimal? Do you feel it? Does it have a long-term effect? Does it take forever until it actually compounds?"
These aren't conspiracy questions. They're systems biology questions.
And they deserve real answers.
Aires is uniquely established as an expert in the field, with millions invested in published, peer-reviewed research, numerous patents, dozens of endorsements from doctors and performance experts, partnerships with the UFC and the Minnesota Timberwolves, and a deep science-based origin.
So let's go through them—one by one—using what we actually know about how the body works.
Question 1: "We Know EMFs Disrupt Human Beings—But to What Extent?"
This is the right starting point, and Joe's instinct here is spot-on: EMFs do affect biological systems. That's not controversial in the scientific literature. The question is how, and how much.
Here's what matters: the body doesn't just react to its environment. It actively listens.
Every cell in your body maintains an electrical gradient across its membrane. Your nervous system fires based on ion movement—sodium, potassium, calcium, chloride. These aren't just minerals. They're charge carriers. They're how information moves.
Ion channels act like electrical gates, opening and closing in response to tiny voltage changes. This is how nerves fire, muscles contract, hormones release on schedule, and your heart maintains rhythm.
So when we ask whether electromagnetic environments matter, we're not asking a mystical question. We're asking a mechanical one.
Research has shown that electromagnetic field exposure can influence multiple biological signaling systems:
Brain activity and coherence: Studies using EEG have demonstrated that EMF exposure can alter brainwave patterns and neural synchronization. The brain doesn't get "damaged"—it reorganizes. But that reorganization comes with a coordination cost.
Autonomic regulation: Heart rate variability (HRV) research has shown that EMF exposure can shift autonomic balance, often toward sympathetic dominance. The system still works—just with less flexibility and narrower recovery bandwidth.
Cellular signaling: One well-documented mechanism is the activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs). Research by Dr. Martin Pall has demonstrated that electromagnetic fields can activate these channels, triggering downstream effects on cellular communication, muscle function, and tissue remodeling.
The extent? It's not about one massive hit. It's about constant, low-level signaling disruption that forces the body to spend more energy maintaining the same function.
In Joe's terms: Yes, EMFs disrupt biological signaling. The extent depends on field complexity, duration, and what the body is already dealing with.
Question 2: "Is It Minimal? Do You Feel It?"
This is where most people get confused—because the answer is both yes and no.
You probably don't feel it acutely. There's no burning sensation. No immediate pain. No dramatic collapse.
But here's what you might feel over time:
-
Mental fog or difficulty sustaining focus
-
Feeling "wired but tired"
-
Reduced resilience to stress
-
Longer recovery after training or exertion
-
A general sense that everything feels harder than it should
These aren't symptoms of damage. They're symptoms of compensation.
Most biological systems don't fail abruptly. They adapt, reroute, and compensate long before anything breaks. The body spends extra energy to preserve function under degrading conditions. It compensates. It reroutes. It stabilizes.
This isn't disease—it's the body working harder to maintain normal function in less-than-ideal conditions.
In Joe's terms: Is it minimal? Not if you're operating near your threshold. Do you feel it? Not directly—but you feel the cost of adapting to it.
Question 3: "Does It Have a Long-Term Effect? Does It Take Forever Until It Actually Compounds?"
Joe's hitting on something critical here: time matters.
Short-term exposure to most environmental stressors? The body handles it. That's what biological resilience is for.
But chronic exposure—constant, layered, variable electromagnetic conditions—creates a different scenario. It's not about one big exposure event. It's about the cumulative cost of adaptation over time.
Here's how it compounds:
Stage 1: Environmental variability increases → signaling timing becomes less stable → systems compensate → higher coordination cost for the same task.
Stage 2: Compensation becomes ongoing → more energy spent on regulation → less margin for recovery, repair, and resilience.
Stage 3: The body is still functioning, but efficiency has dropped. You're working harder to feel normal. Recovery takes longer. Tissue remodeling becomes less precise.
Research on oxidative stress and EMF exposure has shown that chronic exposure can increase reactive oxygen species (ROS) production—which directly impacts cellular recovery and repair processes. In sports terms, you don't just get tired. You get vulnerable.
Similarly, a 2013 study published in Molecular Vision found that ELF-EMF exposure suppressed type I collagen synthesis in fibroblasts—the cells responsible for building and maintaining connective tissue. Soft tissue resilience isn't only about collagen amount. It's about collagen organization and remodeling behavior.
When remodeling patterns are disrupted, tissue can become less resilient under elite load. And in the NFL, elite load isn't optional—it's the baseline.
In Joe's terms: Yes, it compounds. Not because of "damage accumulation," but because the cost of compensation adds up until the margin for error disappears.
Question 4: "To What Extent Does LED Lights [Affect You]?"
Joe mentions LEDs specifically, and it's a good example of how modern environments are layered.
The issue isn't one device or one type of field. It's the fact that we now live inside dense, overlapping, time-varying electromagnetic environments generated by:
-
Power infrastructure (ELF fields from substations, transformers, distribution lines)
-
Wireless systems (cellular, WiFi, Bluetooth)
-
Consumer electronics (LED lights, screens, appliances)
-
Embedded tech (smart devices, sensors, industrial systems)
All of these operate simultaneously. These fields don't exist in isolation. They interfere. They overlap. They create constantly shifting patterns in the space the body occupies.
Biology doesn't experience this as a number on a meter. It experiences it as conditions.
And here's the critical part most people miss: the real physics problem isn't field strength. It's field complexity.
Most EMF meters measure amplitude—power, strength. But strength is not the primary variable biology cares about. Signal clarity is.
Think of it like audio quality: a loud, distorted speaker is worse than a quiet, clear one. Raw power doesn't determine function—clarity does. The same applies to electromagnetic fields.
In Joe's terms: LEDs contribute to the layered electromagnetic environment. Not because they're uniquely dangerous, but because they add to the overall complexity biology has to navigate.
The 49ers Question: "What If They're Getting Weakened by the Electricity?"
This is where Joe connects the dots: "What if they're getting weakened by the electricity… and then the injuries happen?"
That's actually a reasonable hypothesis. Here's why:
Elite athletes operate close to threshold. Training load is high. Recovery windows are tight. Inflammation is constant. Tissue repair demands are massive. Margins are thin.
Now add a constant, layered electromagnetic environment that increases the coordination cost for every biological system. Research has shown that EMF exposure affects mitochondrial function, with the electron transport chain being directly targeted, leading to dysfunction and ROS overproduction. Brain organization, autonomic regulation, cellular signaling, mitochondrial efficiency, tissue remodeling—all working slightly harder to maintain baseline.
The question isn't: "Can EMFs directly tear an ACL?"
The question is: "Could a complex electromagnetic environment add just enough recovery strain—over time—that tissue becomes less resilient under elite load?"
And when you're talking about ligaments, tendons, and connective tissue that are already being pushed to their mechanical limits week after week? That small shift in tissue quality could be the difference between holding up and breaking down.
This isn't speculation. It's systems biology applied to elite performance.
The body doesn't collapse. It compensates—until it can't do so quietly anymore.
What Joe's Really Asking: "How Do We Know If This Is Real?"
Joe asks the data question: "They're looking at the data from this one training facility… and people are starting to gather it up and say, 'Hey, this is not normal.'"
He's right. Researcher Peter Cowan laid out a detailed statistical analysis comparing the 49ers' injury patterns to other teams using metrics like Adjusted Games Lost (AGL). The pattern is statistically abnormal.
But here's the thing: you don't need catastrophic injuries to know something's off.
The earliest signs of environmental stress show up in measurable biological responses long before anyone gets hurt:
-
EEG (brain activity): Changes in neural coherence and synchronization
-
HRV (autonomic function): Narrowed variability and altered recovery capacity
-
Blood flow dynamics: Research has shown that EMF exposure can influence red blood cell behavior, affecting microcirculation efficiency
-
Mitochondrial function: Higher energy cost to maintain the same electrical gradients
These aren't symptoms of disease. They're indicators that the system is working harder than it should.
Elite performance teams are already measuring these variables. Not because they're paranoid about EMFs, but because when performance is your job, you don't ignore variables just because they're invisible.
Why This Conversation Matters (And Why Aires Has Been Part of It)
Joe asking "Is this nuts or could it be real?" is actually a good sign. It means the mainstream is starting to notice something elite performance has already accepted:
Recovery isn't just what you do. It's what your environment demands while you do it.
At Aires, we've been working on this exact problem for decades—long before it had a headline.
The premise has always been simple: modern electromagnetic environments influence biological signaling efficiency. And if you can reduce interference and improve signal organization—what we call environmental clarity—the body doesn't have to work as hard to feel normal.
Aires doesn't intervene in biology. It doesn't stimulate or suppress the body. It works at the level of the environment—specifically the invisible electromagnetic environment—reducing interference and improving signal organization.
We've done live demonstrations and physiological testing with peak performers including UFC fighter Maycee Barber, Tim Welch (coach of UFC champion Sean O'Malley), and RJ Barrett (Canada Basketball / NBA). Using tools like EEG brain activity and HRV measurement, we've been able to observe real-time physiological response as electromagnetic conditions change.
We've even performed demonstrations inside the UFC Performance Institute (UFC PI)—the UFC's world-class training, recovery, and sports science facility.
Dr. Duncan French, Senior Vice President of the UFC Performance Institute, said:
"When I first saw how Aires Tech mitigates the negative effects of EMF on human brain activity, I was blown-away... seeing EEG recordings of brain waves and how Aires Tech can restore optimal brain function, I was convinced of its health benefits."
That's not internet hype. That's performance science meeting environmental design.
The Minnesota Timberwolves' Target Center became the first Aires Certified major sports arena, integrating Aires technology throughout key high-traffic zones and WiFi connection points. The logic mirrors the 49ers conversation: when signal density increases, the environment becomes a variable.
The Real Answer to Joe's Question
Maybe the Mission Substation ends up being the key variable for the 49ers. Maybe it doesn't.
But the bigger shift is already happening.
We're moving from "Is EMF dangerous?" to "How do we design modern environments so biological signaling stays clear and efficient?"
That's not fear. That's the next layer of performance science.
And it's a conversation Aires has been helping lead—long before it made headlines.
References
Aires Tech. (2026). The 49ers injury mystery isn't just bad luck: The substation, the science, and the environmental variable everyone is questioning. Aires Tech Blog. https://airestech.com/blogs/most-recent/49ers-substation-injury-theory
Cowan, P. A. (2026). Could chronic EMF exposure from a substation be causing 49ers injuries? Substack. https://peteranthonycowan.substack.com/p/could-chronic-emf-exposure-from-a
Lv, B., Su, C., Yang, L., Xie, Y., & Wu, T. (2014). Whole brain EEG synchronization likelihood modulated by long term evolution electromagnetic fields exposure. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2014, 986-9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25570126/
Misek, J., Belyaev, I., Jakusova, V., Tonhajzerova, I., Barabas, J., & Jakus, J. (2018). Heart rate variability affected by radiofrequency electromagnetic field in adolescent students. Bioelectromagnetics, 39(4), 277-288. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29469164/
Pall, M. L. (2013). Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, 17(8), 958–965. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23802593/
Panagopoulos, D. J., Yakymenko, I., De Iuliis, G. N., & Chrousos, G. P. (2025). A comprehensive mechanism of biological and health effects of anthropogenic extremely low frequency and wireless communication electromagnetic fields. Frontiers in Public Health, 13, 1585441. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1585441/full
Wang, J., Cui, J., & Zhu, H. (2013). Suppression of type I collagen in human scleral fibroblasts treated with extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields. Molecular Vision, 19, 885–893. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3626379/
Yakymenko, I., et al. (2016). Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 35(2), 186–202. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26151230/