Learn About EMFs

Although the mainstream media does not publicize it, there have been several attempts by official agencies to alert the public of the risk associated with children using mobile phones.

The Stewart Commision recommended to the Mobile Phone Industry that they cease marketing cell phones to kids.

“If there are currently unrecognized adverse health effects from the use of mobile phones, children may be more vulnerable because of their developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues of the head, and alonger lifetime of exposure. In line with our precautionary approach, we believe that the widespread use of mobile phones by children for non-essential calls should be discouraged. We also recommend that the mobile phone industry should refrain from promoting the use of mobile phones by children.”(1)

Norbert Hankin, a radio wave researcher and environmental scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, communi cated his concern over children using cell phones in a correspondance with Dr. George Carlo.

“I suggest that another area of concern that should not be overlooked due to the potential impact on the quality of life of future adults (currently children) is the possible impact of wireless telecommunications technology and products on the learning ability of children.

“The growing use of wireless comunications by children and by schools, will result in prolonged (possibly several hours a day) , long term exposure (12 or more years of exposure in classrooms connected to computer networks by wireless telecommunications) of developing children to low-intensity pulse modulated radiofrequency (RF) radiation.

“Recent studies…have demonstrated that subtle effects on brain functions can be produced by low intensity pulse modulated radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Some research involving rodents has shown adverse effects on short-term and long-term memeory. The concern is that if such effects may occur in young children, then even slight impairment of learning ability over years of education may negatively affect the quality of life that could be achieved by these individuals, when adults.” (2)

It is clear that wireless communication poses a serious health risk for children and that the public is being purposefully kept in the dark.

Footnotes:

(1) “Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age” by Dr. George Carlo pg 218

(2) Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age” by Dr. George Carlo pg 218-219

© Learn About EMFS 2008

Disney has spent a great deal of marketing money to get kids to use cell phones. Disney characters along with “Family Plans” have been carefully geared towards children between the ages of 7-12, although some marketing campaigns have reached into the 5 and under age group. Cell Phone baby toys are a big hit.Marketing to kids is nothing new in a corporate controlled landscape that views children as an untouched goldmine whose purchasing power resides in their uncanny ability to whine until mom or dad buys them what they want. Corporations understand that the way to separate adults from their money is to get to the kids.

Cell Phone companies and Disney have been hard at work doing just this. The only problem is, not only are you out some hard earned cash on your kid’s cell phone and cell phone plan, you might actually be contributing to harming your child. Most parent’s would never do such a thing, but most parents have no idea that buying their child a cell phone is putting their child’s health in danger.

Cell Phones emit microwave radiation that emanates from the antenna. This highly controversial microwave radiation has been the subject of countless studies over the past decade, studies which are trying to discern whether or not this radiation is hazardous to our health.

Studies are good, but sometimes real life is a better barometer. It is know common knowledge that during the Cold War, the Soviets beamed low level microwave frequencies at the US Embassy in Moscow, forcing two successive ambassadors to resign after having developed leukemia.

Microwave radiation from cell phones penetrates the skull and is absorbed by the brain and the eyes, the eyes being particularly vulnerable to radiation as they are ‘organs of light’. Studies have shown that the radiation emitted by cell phones penetrates deeper into the heads of children than adults.

The book “Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age” by Dr. George Carlo illustrates this through recounting a study done by Dr. Om Ghandi at the University of Utah. This study found that the differences in the rates of penetration into the heads of five year old children, ten year old children and adults were astounding. Ghandi’s study compared the absorption rate of radiation in the three age groups.

The study found that the radiation absorption rate inside the brain(in mW/kg) were 7.84 in an adult, 19.77 in a ten year old child and 33.12 in a five year old child.

Radiation absorption rates in the fluid of the eye were 3.3 in an adult, 18.38 in a ten year old child and 40.18 in a five year old child.

Radiation absorption rates in the lens of the eye were 1.34 in an adult, 6.93 in a ten year old child, 15.6 in a five year old child.

Radiation absorption rates in the connective tissue of the eye were 1.77 in an adult, 9.8 in a ten year old child, 19.69 in a five year old. (1)

Genetic damage as well as DNA damage and cancer are the potential health risks associated with this level of radiation absorption.

Disney says yes, but parents need to say no.

Footnotes:

(1) Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards of the Wireless Age by Dr. George Carlo, pg 216

© Learn About EMFs 2008

Microscope photographs of lenses. Right frame shows Control lens with no damage. Bottom frame demonstrates the effect of microwave radiation on bovine lens sutures. In the absence of microwave radiation, the bubbles are generated by temperature increase to 39.5 8C during 4 h; see left frame.

-source www.isracast.com 7/25/05

by Iddo Genuth, Tomer Yaffe

In a recent scientific study conducted by a team of researchers from the Technion, a possible link between microwave radiation, similar to the type found in cellular phones, and different kinds of damage to the visual system was found. At least one kind of damage seems to accumulate over time and not heal, challenging the common view and leading the researchers to the assertion that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation. The researchers also emphasized that existing exposure guidelines for microwave radiation might have to change.

Microscope photographs of lenses incubated in organ culture conditions for 12 days. Right frame shows Control lens with no damage. Bottom frame demonstrates the effect of microwave radiation on bovine lens sutures for a total exposure of 192 cycles (1.1GHz, 2.22mW).Each cycle lasts 50min followed by 10 min pause. In the absence of microwave radiation, the bubbles are generated by temperature increase to 39.5 8C during 4 h; see left frame.

The effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation have long been a subject for debate among scientists. The technological developments of the last twenty years such as cell and cordless phones, wireless communications, monitors and even high voltage lines have all been studied as potential risk factors for cancer and other diseases. Less known to the public, but still a matter of some extensive research, is the study of the effect of microwave radiation on the visual system and especially on the lens of the eye. The basic motivation for this research came after World War II when it was suspected that radar operators suffered a greater risk of developing cataracts (a condition characterized by clouding in the natural lens of the eye). Although these particular suspicions were eventually shown to be debatable, they were the trigger for the first guidelines for exposure to electromagnetic radiation. Moreover, the eye as our natural radiation detector is the obvious choice for investigating the effects of electromagnetic radiation upon the human body.

In more recent studies on animals the effects of microwave radiation as a risk factor for cataracts have been established and have helped determine the guidelines put forth by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in 1998. A common measure for microwave radiation is the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) which is the average power density absorbed in a given volume per average weight density (Watt/Kg). This is the standard used by cell phone companies, among others, to measure levels of radiation. When microwave energy impinges upon body tissue, part of it is absorbed and converted to heat due to ionic conduction. This heat manifests itself as a temperature increase inside the tissue. Past studies in animals have shown that even a slight increase in temperature close to the lens (as low as 3 degrees Celsius) can increase the risk of developing a cataract. With a low enough SAR the local temperature in the lens might never increase to that level. A less common measure is called Specific Energy Absorption (SA), and is defined as the energy density absorbed in the tissue divided by its weight density. While SAR is the measure of the rate microwave radiation is absorbed by a tissue, SA is the measure of the total energy absorbed. This difference played a significant role in a recently published study on the effects of microwave radiation on the visual system.

In the study conducted by researchers in the Rappaport Faculty of Medicine at the Technion, and published in the journal Bioelectromagnetics, a new link has been found between microwave radiation and the development of cataracts. Eye lenses of one-year-old male calves obtained from a slaughterhouse were exposed to microwave radiation - one eye from each pair used for control. Each exposure session lasted about two weeks. Both control and exposed lens were kept in an incubator at a constant temperature. During this period each exposed lens had experienced up to 2mW of 1.1GHz radiation virtually around the clock, and each hour it was exposed for a 50 minute session followed by a 10 minute break. During one of these breaks, every 24 hours, it was tested optically and compared to the control lens. During the short (5 minutes) optical test, the lens was not exposed to radiation, but when exposed, its average temperature was maintained constant in an incubator.

The experiment yielded a number of interesting results:

1. Exposing the lens for a prolonged time to microwave radiation (in the frequency and intensity described above) caused macroscopic damage affecting the optical quality of the lens. This damage increased as the experiment and irradiation continued and reached a maximum level after a number of days. When the exposure stopped the optical damage began to heal gradually. Interestingly enough, a similar maximum level was observed when the irradiation intensity was reduced to one-half the original, except that it took twice the time.

2. On the microscopic level a different kind of damage occurred. Tiny “bubbles” were created on the surface of the lens. The bubbles were formed by irradiation with microwave and were not the result of a heat created throughout the lens. The researchers have speculated that the mechanism responsible for the creation of the bubbles is microscopic friction between particular cells exposed to electromagnetic radiation. Contrary to the macroscopic damage, the microscopic damage did not show any signs of healing and continued to accumulate during the course of the experiment.
<

Good quality lens as demonstrated by the optical scanner. All rays passing Through the lens have similar focal length. The thick dashed line connects the points of the back vertex Distance for each ray passing through the lens. The thick solid line shows the relative intensity of each beam. Exposed lens, showing considerable variability in the focal length of the beams passing through the lens.

Although the researchers are cautious about interpreting the results of the experiment and its possible implications to public health, it seems that prolonged exposure to microwave radiation similar to that used by cellular phones can lead to both macroscopic and microscopic damage to the lens and that at least part of this damage seems to accumulate over time and does not seem to heal. Professor Levi Schchter, who worked on the research, told IsraCast that attention should be paid not only to the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) but also to the total energy absorbed by the tissue (SA), which is not currently under supervision by the appropriate regulative authorities. Implying that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation.

-source www.radiationtalk.com

A new study released by the Reproductive Research Centre at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio suggests an alarming increase in infertility amongst men who frequently use cell phones. In each of the four criteria singled out in the study - sperm count, motility, viability and appearance - those who used cell phones more than four hours per day fared the worst in each category.

The study, led by Professor Ashok Agarwal, divided over 360 men into three categories: those who never used a cell phone, those who used a cell phone less than two hours per day and the final group of men, who used their cell phones at least four hours each day.

Dramatically Reduced Sperm Count

The test group of men who used their cell phones most often suffered an alarming 25% decrease in their overall sperm count when compared to the group of men who never used a cell phone at all. Of equal concern was the fact that the frequent cell phone users displayed a 1/3 decrease in their sperm’s ability to swim.

The appearance of the sperm also suffered, dropping by 50%. Less than 1/5 of the frequent cell phone user’s sperm looked normal under the microscope.

Alarming Link Between Cell Phone Use and Fertility Problems

The study points to a possible explanation for the 29% plummet in the sperm counts of British men over the past decade. It cannot be ignored or passed off as coincidence that while the use of cell phones has soared in the past ten years, male fertility in industrialized countries has suffered.

Animal studies have shown that sperm-making cells in the testes are particularly vulnerable to low-level radiation from exposure to cell phones, which was previously thought to be harmless. Non-ionizing cell phones radiation overheats cells, affecting their growth and normal development.

Cell phone use has also been proven to cause damage to the blood vessels in the brain, even over short periods of use. This is also a cause for concern as many reproductive hormones are produced in the brain.

What is the Solution?

Men, especially those of child-bearing age, are encouraged to take steps to reduce their exposure to cell phone radiation as much as possible.

Never carry a cell phone on the belt or in a pocket near the groin, where it can raise the temperature in this sensitive area high enough to cause permanent cell damage.

Cell phones should only be used when needed and then only for as long as is necessary. Several manufacturers now offer cell phone attachments designed to dramatically reduce the amount of radiation released during use.

With almost a billion people now using cell phones worldwide, the low-level radiation emitted by each device may not be as harmless as once thought when combined with the millions of other phones, towers and wireless networks in any given area. Aside from taking measures to protect oneself personally, consumers are encouraged to lobby for further studies into this potentially harmful science.

-source www.physorg.com 1/11/08

Young Japanese people are evolving a new lifestyle for the 21st century based on the cellphones that few are now able to live without.

While about one-third of Japanese primary school students aged 7-12 years old use cellphones, by the time they get to high school that figure has shot up to 96 percent, according to a government survey released last month.

They are using their phones to read books, listen to music, chat with friends and surf the Internet — an average of 124 minutes a day for high school girls and 92 minutes for boys.

While the wired world they now inhabit holds enormous advantages for learning and communicating, it also brings a downside, say experts who point to a rise in cyberbullying and a growing inability among teenagers to deal with other people face to face.

“Kids say what’s most important to them, next to their own lives, is their cellphone,” said Masashi Yasukawa, head of the private National Web Counselling Council.

“They are moving their thumbs while eating or watching television,” he said.

The passion in 20-year-old Ayumi Chiba’s voice backs up this assertion.

“My life is impossible without it,” she says of her cellphone. “I used to pretend I was sick and leave school early when I forgot to take it with me.”

Hideki Nakagawa, a sociology professor at Nihon University in Tokyo, said cellphones have become “an obsession” for youngsters.

“They feel insecure without cellphones, just the way sales people do without their name cards,” he said.

As the multi-faceted cellphone takes centre stage in teen life, it plays a number of roles — including a weapon that children can wield against each other with no thought for the consequences.

Yasukawa recalls the case of a 15-year-old girl who regularly received messages telling her: “Die,” “You’re a nuisance” and “You smell”.

They turned out to have been sent by a friend in whom she had confided and who told her not to take the messages too seriously.

“The girl who was doing the bullying confessed it made her feel good to see the unease spreading on her friend’s face,” Yasukawa said.

“Some children send nasty messages to a ‘friend’ while in her company, pretending to be looking at her profile page on the cellphone.

“It’s a very scary world,” he said. “Parents don’t know there’s a very scary world behind cellphone screens.”

As they reveal personal information about themselves, children can become prey for fraudsters and paedophiles, as only about one percent have blocks on potentially harmful material.

But on protected sites such as school bulletin boards that do block adults, bullies are free to anonymously post comments without any teacher oversight or intervention.

“Bully-to-bullied relations can be easily reversed with a targeted kid pointing the finger at somebody else for some trivial thing,” Yasukawa said, adding that this potentially created “a survival game among children”.

Japan’s largest mobile carrier NTT DoCoMo Inc. in December launched a line of cellphones for small children, with software ranging from picture books to school scheduling pads aimed at helping them to learn.

The cellphones will eventually become their main means of communication.

Education professor Tetsuro Saito said a survey of 1,600 middle school students aged around 14 found about 60 percent carried cellphones and nearly half used them to send 20 or more emails a day.

Most middle school cellphone users rarely used their phone to talk, the survey found. Saito, of Kawamura Gakuen Women’s University near Tokyo, said children seemed to want the security of communicating with someone, without the bother of dealing with a real person.

“Communication ability is bound to decline as cellphones and other devices are now getting between people,” he said.

Tomomi, 18, who would not give her full name, said: “I send some 20 emails a day. There are people I don’t talk with — even if I see them at school, I just exchange mail with them. I guess we’re connected only by a machine.”

Saito’s survey found that students can also use their cellphones as an emotional crutch, and the more problems they have at home, the more dependent they seem to become on their phones.

More than 60 percent of students who said they do not enjoy being with their families send 20 or more emails a day, compared with 35 percent of those happy with their families.

And even if cellphones can bring solace, it can come at a terrible cost.

Kanae Yokoyama, 36, is facing trial for beating and spraining the neck of her 15-year-old daughter after catching her secretly using her cellphone in November.

The girl had been prohibited from using her phone as the bill had hit 120,000 yen (1,060 dollars) in October, mostly wracked up by downloading music and playing games, according to local police.

They said the mother had a history of abusing her daughter.

“Considering she was often absent from school, the mobile phone may have been her sole ‘friend’ to spend her days with,” a police official said.

    LAS VEGAS (AP) — A handy new holster from Taser International Inc. holds not only your stun gun but a music player too.

    Taser’s latest foray into consumer products was introduced Monday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. The holster costs $72.99 on the company’s Web site and includes a 1-gigabyte MP3 player.

    The company, which also sells its electronic weapons to law enforcement agencies and the military, has been stepping up its consumer product offerings with Tasers in new colors like “red-hot” and “fashion pink.”

    The latest Taser — in a leopard print and costing $379.99 — “provides a personal protection option for women who want fashion with a bite,” said Chief Executive Rick Smith.

An electroshock weapon is an incapacitant weapon used for subduing a person by administering electric shock aimed at disrupting superficial functions. One type is a conductive energy device (CED), an electroshock gun popularly known by the brand name “Taser”, which fires projectiles that administer the shock through a thin, flexible wire.

Electroshock weapon technology uses a temporary high-voltage low-current electrical discharge to override the body’s muscle-triggering mechanisms. The recipient feels pain, and can be momentarily paralyzed while an electric current is being applied. It is reported that applying electroshock devices to more sensitive parts of the body is even more painful.

The Maximum Effective Areas for stun gun usage are upper shoulder, below the rib cage, and the upper hip. The relatively low electric current must be pushed by high voltage to overcome the electrical resistance of the human body. The resulting ’shock’ is caused by muscles twitching uncontrollably, appearing as muscle spasms. Experts generally agree that the ‘margin’ of safety in this case is highly-dependent on the overall health of the person subjected to the shock. -Wikipedia

As one blogger pointed out, you need the MP3 to drown out the sounds of the person screaming who you just tasered.

-excerpts from an Australian Senate Discussion Paper 10/2007

Both human and animal circadian rhythms are driven by the day/night cycle and are synchronized with natural geomagnetic electromagnetic fields. The major control gland over this natural cycle is the pineal gland which secretes the neurohormone melatonin. During the day, light falling on the eye’s retina produces signals which are biochemically amplified to stimulate the pineal gland to reduce its melatonin output. At night the absence of light with sleep stimulates the pineal gland to produce melatonin.

The circadian production of melatonin is thought to control important processes in the eyes, including restoration of rods (for night vision) at the end of the night, and renewal of cones (for colour vision) at the end of the day. One theory on how man made EMF’s may affect the pineal gland is that the pineal gland may ’sense’ EMF’s as light and therefore reduce melatonin production. A possible cause for such an effect is from insoluble granular material contained within the pineal gland.

Research by Dr. Sidney Lang, an expert on piezoelectricity, which is the production of electric fields by pressure on crystalline structures, has shown that the pineal gland has piezoelectrical activity. Dr Lang hypothesizes that this activity is a function of this granular material and if so it may be responding to narrow wave lenghts.

Once melatonin is produced, its ability to pass through the cell membrane allows it to pass directly into the blood stream. Once in the blood melatonin has access to every cell in the body where it passes through the cell membrane to the cell nucleus, which has receptors for it. A few cell membranes also have receptors for melatonin, which may control the 24 hour circadian rhythm of the endocrine system.

In the cell nucleus, melatonin plays a role in regulating gene expression. The ability of melatonin to enter all cells is also essential for one of the other important functions of melatonin, which is to act as a scavenger of highly toxic oxygen-based free radicals. The production of these free radicals is a consequence of the utilization of oxygen by all organisms. About 1 - 2% of inspired oxygen ends up as toxic free radicals which can damage macromolecules such as DNA, proteins and lipids. This damage is referred to as oxidative stress.

Because of its ability to eliminate free radicals, melatonin is probably the most efficient natural cell protection and oncostatic agent in our bodies. At night, melatonin production floods our bodies, eliminating the build up of free radicals that are being produced, allowing the DNA synthesis and cell division to occur with a far lower chance of damage and hence producing more healthy cells. Melatonin also dampens the release of estrogen, prolonged exposure to which may increase the risk of breast cancer.

by Janet Raloff , www.sciencenewsonline.com 1/10/98

Melatonin, a hormone produced by the brain during periods of darkness is an important natural suppressor of breast cancer cell growth, both in test tubes and in animals. Because EMFs can depress or shut down melatonin secretion in animals, they may play a role in fostering the growth of malignancies in people.

Toxicologist Wolfgang Löscher of the School of Veterinary Medicine in Hanover, Germany, has exposed groups of up to 120 female rats to melatonin-suppressing EMFs of between 100 and 1,000 mG. An equal number of rats received a negligible background exposure of roughly 1 mG; these rats produced melatonin normally. Löscher injected into each rat a chemical that causes mammary cancer, then observed the rats for 3 months.

Compared to the unexposed rats, those in the 100-mG field developed about 10 percent more tumors, animals exposed to 500 mG got 25 percent more, and rats receiving 1,000 mG developed 50 percent more. Tumors also grew as much as twice the size under the influence of EMFs.

To understand why, Löscher has focused on the immune system’s T cells, a class of white blood cells whose role is to attack and destroy tumors and foreign substances. T cells from animals raised for 3 months in 500- or 1,000-mG fields proved only half as likely as those from unexposed rats to proliferate when exposed to a foreign substance.

“This indicates that EMFs indeed suppress the immune system’s response to ongoing processes such as tumor growth,” Löscher says.

by Julianne McKinney,
Electronic Surveillance Project

Although Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) is referred to as radiation, it does not cause
ionization and should not be confused with radiation from
radioactive sources. In general, RFR is associated with
electromagnetic waves with frequencies ranging from
approximately 10 kilohertz (kHz) to 300 gigahertz (GHz).
Electromagnetic waves with higher frequencies than radio waves
are, in ascending order of frequency, infrared waves, visible
light, ultraviolet waves, X-rays, and gamma rays.
   Electromagnetic waves propagate energy in "packets" called
photons. The energy of a photon is directly proportional to the
frequency of the radiation. When the photon energies equal or
exceed the binding energies of electrons to atoms, the radiation
is capable of ionizing atoms and breaking electron bonds in
biomolecules, thereby disrupting biochemical processes and
causing genetic and other damage in biological organisms.
Ultraviolet waves, X-rays, and gamma rays, are ionizing. However,
the photon energies associated with the highest radio frequencies
are several orders of magnitude lower than the weakest chemical
bonds and they cannot ionize atoms or disrupt chemical bonding.
   Thus, RFR is nonionizing and does not create the same effect
as radiation generated by radioactive sources. Its primary effect
in biological organisms is to agitate molecules, that is,
generate heat. At intensities that fall within present exposure
standards, the rate of heat generation is negligible or is within
the thermoregulatory capabilities of mammals and birds.
   There have been reports of some cases of accidental
occupational exposure to RFR intensities that exceed present
safety limits. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has found that levels of field intensities in the FM and
TV-broadcast bands exceed present exposure limits at certain
sites that are accessible to the general public. Because of these
few cases, some members of the public may perceive that there is
a high risk associated with RFR regardless of intensity or
frequency. Public concerns are centered on the potential for
effects on humans due to both long- and short-term exposure to
RFR at GWEN frequencies and exposure levels. These concerns may
include the potential for shock hazards, birth defects, and
cancer.

-excerpt from “The Zapping of America” by Paul Brodeur, 1977, pg. 90.

That microwave radiation might have genetic effects had first
been discovered back in 1959 by Dr. John H. Heller at the New
England Institute for Medical Research, in Ridgefield Conn., who
observed gross chromosomal abnormalities in garlic-root tips that
had been irradiated with microwaves at power levels far below
those necessary to produce heat...in August 1975, members of
Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council, OTP, &
DoD met to review the findings of research pertaining to the
genetic, hereditary, growth, and developmental  effects of
microwave and radio-frequency radiation, they learned that in
eight out of fifteen projects low-level radiation had produced
effects and changes in the test animals or genetic material."