Search news: View news by countries View all news

News for USA

Page 1 of 125   Next›  Last»

War-Gaming Cell Phone Science Protects Neither Brains Nor Private Parts
USA	Created: 21 May 2013
In science news as in life, timing is everything. As soon as the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer expert review declaring cell phone radiation a "possible human carcinogen" -- just like lead, DDT, and jet fuel -- was drafted in 2011, the global multi-trillion dollar cell phone industry set up a quarter of a billion dollar defense fund to produce and promote science that would discredit the WHO. Whenever a report pops up questioning cell phone safety, a contrary report stands ready in the wings to cast doubt about its legitimacy. Case in point. The WHO published detailed documentation for its year-long 2011 expert review last month. Extending this work, Santosh Kesari, chief of neuro-oncology at the University of California, San Diego, two of Canada's top physician-epidemiologists, Antony B. Miller and Colin Soskolne, and I have just published a technical report concluding that more recent studies indicate that cell phone radiation constitutes a "probable human carcinogen." Now, let's look at what's being presented as "new science" from Taiwan and Sweden -- packaged for headline writers as proving that because there is no increase in brain cancer at this time, cell phones can be used with impunity. In fact, the effort to promote these skeptical reports is part of a longstanding practice of this industry that sees science as nothing but a matter of public relations. When first reports that cell phone radiation could damage DNA emerged from the laboratory of Henry Lai and N.P. Singh, a memo written by Motorola to their media advisors in 1994 announced the clear strategy that remains alive and well: war-game the science. Of course, the public remains confused. Despite its press hype, the poorly-worded Taiwanese report is being hyped to the media now because the WHO IARC publication has "reignited" interest in the health impacts of cell phones. A phantom that only exists as an online abstract that emerged April 14 through the scientific literature search engine PubMed, the full report can not be found on that journal's website as an epublication ahead of print. Entitled, "The incidence rate and mortality of malignant brain tumors after 10 years of intensive cell phone use in Taiwan," no information is provided about whether this study considered microwave radiation exposures to cordless phones or other wireless devices besides cell phones, which can provide two-thirds of all microwave radiation exposure daily. The online abstract ends with some highly unscientific language that sounds as though it was crafted for the PR section of Foxconn -- the Taiwanese producer of phones for Apple, Motorola, and Sony: "In conclusion, we do not detect any correlation between the morbidity/mortality of malignant brain tumors and cell phone use in Taiwan. We thus urge international agencies to publish only confirmatory reports with more applicable conclusions in public. This will help spare the public from unnecessary worries." Available as a full document, the online report of the Swedish Radiation Protection Authority (SRPA) provides a more substantial review of both laboratory and human studies but is hardly the reassuring declaration of safety the headlines imply. The report notes growing experimental evidence that cell phone radiation alters chemical responses of the brain and brain waves and also noted that one highly-sensitive individual could perceive electrical fields. Regarding the absence of a general increase in brain cancer at this time, the report cautions that vigilance is appropriate in light of these other indications and the long latency of brain cancer. One of those mocking cell phone dangers in Fortune magazine in March is Geoffrey Kabat, a scientist with no research or publications on the topic. He ignores two important facts: After exposure to a cancer-causing agent, brain cancer can take between 40 to 50 years to occur in the general population, and no environmental cancer-causing agent including tobacco produces a population-wide impact within a decade. As a former government leader of the U.S. effort to produce a safe cigarette, Kabat does have an impressive resume. As recently as 2002, the tobacco industry funded his work that regularly found no harm from passive smoke. Another who's consistently skeptical about brain cancer ties to cell phones is Anders Ahlbom, M.D., the former chairman of the SRPA expert group. Because he did not disclose his business ties to a telecom lobbying firm headed by his brother Gunnar, Ahlbom resigned from his Swedish post and was asked to withdraw from the IARC review group in 2011. In fact, brain cancer is hardly the only health matter of concern when it comes to cell phones and other devices. While important studies are carried out, we need to protect children from wireless routers, baby monitors, and numerous other sources of microwave radiation that can affect the brains and bodies of infants and toddlers, and we need to protect young men and women who wish to become parents of healthy children. Scientists and policy makers in tech-savvy nations like Israel and Finland are taking steps to protect the young brain and reproductive organs. Yet in the states, the iPhone plastic baby rattle case protects the phone's glass screen from cracking when dropped or nibbled on by teething inquisitive babies but does not protect the infant's young brain and rapidly growing body from the phone's pulsed digital microwave radiation. The WHO report notes that the bone marrow of a child's head absorbs 10 times more radiation than an adult, while those of infants and toddlers will absorb even more. The American Academy of Pediatrics cautions that children need more real face time than screen time, more laps than apps, and has written the FCC urging that fine print warnings that come with all smartphones to not keep phones in the pocket and avoid contact with the pregnant abdomen or those of teenagers should become standard medical advice. War games can make for fun when confined to computer screens, but when carried out on science, this places our health and that of our children and grandchildren at risk. For more information download and share our one page, two-sided doctors' pamphlet about the need to practice safe phone, written by Charlie Teo, one of the world's top neurosurgeons, and other experts in the field See Dr. Davis at the Institute for Functional Medicine National Conference in Houston, Texas May 28 - June1, 2013
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Huffington Post, Devra Davis, Ph.D., 21 May 2013

Turning Off IPhone Critical to Pilots Citing Interference. iPhones on Planes Blamed for Navigation Disruption
USA	Created: 18 May 2013
The regional airliner was climbing past 9,000 feet when its compasses went haywire, leading pilots several miles off course until a flight attendant persuaded a passenger in row 9 to switch off an Apple Inc. (AAPL) iPhone. “The timing of the cellphone being turned off coincided with the moment where our heading problem was solved,” the unidentified co-pilot told NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System about the 2011 incident. The plane landed safely. Public figures from U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill to actor Alec Baldwin have bristled at what they say are excessive rules restricting use of tablets, smartphones, laptops and other devices during flights. More than a decade of pilot reports and scientific studies tell a different story. Government and airline reporting systems have logged dozens of cases in which passenger electronics were suspected of interfering with navigation, radios and other aviation equipment. The FAA in January appointed an advisory committee from the airline and technology industries to recommend whether or how to broaden electronics use in planes. The agency will consider the committee’s recommendations, which are expected in July, it said in a statement. Laboratory tests have shown some devices broadcast radio waves powerful enough to interfere with airline equipment, according to NASA, aircraft manufacturer Boeing Co. (BA) and the U.K.’s Civil Aviation Authority. Airlines Split Even Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL), which argued for relaxed rules, told the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration its pilots and mechanics reported 27 suspected incidents of passenger electronics causing aircraft malfunctions from 2010 to 2012. Atlanta-based Delta said it couldn’t verify there was interference in any of those cases. The airline industry has been divided. Delta said in its filing that it welcomes more electronics use because that’s what its passengers wanted. United Continental Holdings Inc. said it preferred no changes because they’d be difficult for flight attendants to enforce. CTIA-The Wireless Association, a Washington trade group representing mobile companies, andAmazon.com Inc. (AMZN), the Seattle online retailer that sells the Kindle e-reader, urged the U.S. FAA last year to allow wider use of devices. Personal electronics don’t cause interference, CTIA said in a blog post last year. 10,000 Feet Passengers’ use of technology and wireless services “is growing by leaps and bounds” and should be expanded as long as it is safe, the Consumer Electronics Association, an Arlington, Virginia-based trade group, said in its filing to the FAA last year. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski agreed in a Dec. 6 letter to the FAA. Broader use of on-board electronics would help providers of approved aircraft Wi-Fi services by letting passengers use them longer. Gogo Inc. (GOGO), based in Itasca, Illinois, says it has 82 percent of that market in North America, and Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) on May 9 won permission from the FCC to proceed with a planned air-to-ground broadband service for Wi-Fi equipped planes. The FAA prohibits use of electronics while a plane is below 10,000 feet, with the exception of portable recording devices, hearing aids, heart pacemakers and electric shavers. Once a flight gets above that altitude, devices can be used in “airplane mode,” which blocks their ability to broadcast radio signals, according to the FAA. There’s an exception for devices that aircraft manufacturers or an airline demonstrates are safe, such as laptops that connect to approved Wi-Fi networks. Inflight Wi-Fi The potential risks from personal electronic devices are increasing as the U.S. aviation system transitions to satellite-based navigation, according to the FAA. In order to improve efficiency, planes will fly closer together using GPS technology. As a result, interference from electronics “cannot be tolerated,” the agency said last year. While sticking with its prohibitions on use during some phases of flight, the FAA starting in 2010 issued guidelines allowing broader use of personal electronics. Following techniques suggested by RTCA Inc., a Washington-based non-profit that advises the FAA on technology, airlines have been able to install Wi-Fi networks allowing passengers to browse the Web in flight. No Tolerance Four in 10 airline passengers surveyed in December by groups including the CEA said they want to be able to use electronic devices in all phases of flight. Thirty percent of passengers in that same study said they’d accidentally left on a device during a flight. McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat, has called for lifting restrictions on non-phone devices such as the Kindle if passengers keep them in airplane mode, Drew Pusateri, her spokesman, said in an interview. The existing rules are “ridiculous,” she said in an interview. “I was aware from the research that’s been done that there has never been an incident of a plane having problems because of someone having a device on in the cabin,” she said. The dangers from radio waves interfering with electronic equipment has been known for decades. A fire aboard the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal in 1967 killed 134 people, when a rocket on a fighter jet accidentally fired after a radar beam triggered an electronic malfunction, according to a 1995 NASA review. GPS Useless Restrictions on U.S. commercial aircraft began in 1966 after research found some portable radios interfered with navigation equipment, according to the FAA’s request last year for comments on whether it should change existing rules. In one 2004 test, a now-discontinued Samsung Electronics Co. (005930)wireless phone model’s signal was powerful enough to blot out global-positioning satellites, according to NASA. The device, which met all government standards, was tested because a corporate flight department had discovered the phone rendered a plane’s three GPS receivers useless, NASA’s researchers reported. While incidents haven’t led to any commercial accidents and and are difficult to recreate afterward, they continue to pile up. A log kept by the Montreal-based International Air Transport Association airline trade group recorded 75 cases of suspected interference from 2003 to 2009, Perry Flint, a spokesman for the group, said in an interview. Ghost Theories Peter Bernard Ladkin, a professor of computer networks at the University of Bielefeld inGermany, compiled similar accounts from pilots in Europe, he said in an interview. “These are serious, conscientious pilots,” Ladkin said. “They know what they’re doing. They don’t subscribe to theories about ghosts or something.” Damaged devices have transmitted on frequencies they weren’t designed for, according to David Carson, an associate technical fellow at Boeing who has participated in industry evaluations of electronics. If those radio waves reach an antenna used for navigation, communication or some other purpose, it may distort the signal it’s supposed to receive. Inflight Wi-Fi systems are safe in part because devices connect to them at low power levels, according to Carson, who was co-chairman of an RTCA panel that produced testing standards. Devices searching for a faraway connection, such as a mobile phone trying to connect to a ground network in flight, send out more powerful radio waves, he said. Pilots’ IPads Airlines such as Delta and Alaska Air Group Inc. (ALK) have used the FAA guidelines to allow their pilots to carry Apple iPads to replace paper charts and manuals. McCaskill and others have used that as an example of why passengers should be allowed to use tablet computers during landing and takeoff. One difference is that airlines don’t purchase tablet models that use connections through wireless phone networks. Similar devices used by passengers haven’t been tested for safety in the passenger compartment, Carson said. Plus, there’s no guarantee passengers will put the devices into airplane mode or the devices haven’t been damaged, he said. “Something a passenger brings in, you don’t know if it fell in a mud puddle or they put a bigger battery in,” he said. The RTCA group recommended against allowing passengers to use devices during taxi, landing and takeoff, Carson said. The Association of Flight Attendants, the U.S.’s largest union for those workers, told the FAA last year that electronic devices should be stowed during those critical phases of flight, just as bags and purses must be. Any decision should be based on science, not on politics or passengers’ desires to stay connected, John Cox, a former airline pilot who is chief executive officer of the Washington-based consulting firm, Safety Operating Systems, said in an interview. “The question is: Do we want to do aviation safety based on lack of testing and certification standards?” Cox said. To contact the reporter on this story: Alan Levin in Washington at alevin24@bloomberg.net To contact the editor responsible for this story: Bernard Kohn at bkohn2@bloomberg.net By Alan Levin - May 16, 2013 1:23 AM GMT+0900
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMR Refugee/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Obama’s Bad Pick: A Former Lobbyist at the F.C.C.
USA	Created: 14 May 2013
Memo to a President who said, in November, 2007, “I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists in Washington that their days of setting the agenda are over”: If you are going to name a former lobbyist for big cable and wireless companies as head of the federal agency that regulates the cable and wireless industries, you had better find a public-interest-group advocate to say something positive about him (or her) before you make the announcement. Job done. By Wednesday, when the White House confirmed that it was nominating Tom Wheeler, a veteran Washington insider who has headed not one powerful industry association but two, as the next chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, the nomination had already secured the support of Public Knowledge, an advocacy group that promotes open and unlimited access to the Internet. “Certainly we will have disagreements with the new Chairman (assuming Wheeler is confirmed), but we expect that Wheeler will actively work to promote competition and protect consumers,” Harold Feld, a senior vice-president at Public Knowledge, wrote in a blog post. That’s a relief—or is it? The closer you look at Wheeler’s selection, the more questionable it appears. After being poorly led for more than a decade—particularly under the disastrous tenure of Michael Powell, son of Colin—a strong argument can be made that the last thing the F.C.C. needs is an industry insider with close ties to many of the companies it oversees. In recent years, the cable and telecom industries have consolidated into a handful of quasi-monopolistic corporations, such as Comcast, Time Warner Cable, A.T. & T., and Verizon, which, all too often, are busy trying to gouge their customers while asking Washington for covert favors. Perhaps what is really wanted is another Elizabeth Warren—a vigorous consumer advocate and proponent of competition who’s willing to stand up to these corporate giants. Even with the best will in the world, it’s hard to see Wheeler as this type of crusading figure. From what I’ve read about him, Wheeler appears to be a knowledgeable and intelligent fellow with some independent views that he expresses on his blog. To some extent, though, you are your résumé. Between 1979 and 1984, Wheeler was chief executive of the National Cable Television Association (a job now held by, once again, Michael Powell). From 1992 until 2004, he headed up the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, which represents cell-phone operators. Since 2005, he’s been a managing director at Core Capital Partners, a Washington-based venture-capital firm that invests in small technology companies. To be sure, it’s been some years now since Wheeler was paid to influence Administration officials and Congressmen on behalf of big corporations. But in view of his long tenure in the lobbying industry, it’s hardly surprising that doubts have been raised about his independence. “All of the senators in the Commerce Committee know Tom as a lobbyist who funnels funds to them, not as a stand-up guy from a regulatory agency who is able to take heat,” another veteran Washington telecommunications insider told Reuters. While Public Knowledge has come out in favor of Wheeler’s nomination, other public-interest activists have expressed serious reservations about it. One of them is Phillip Dampier, the founder of Stop the Cap!, a consumer group that campaigns for better broadband service and unlimited usage. In a long and detailed blog post, Dampier pointed out that, in 2011, Wheeler appeared to express support for A.T. & T.’s proposed merger with T-Mobile, one of its few viable competitors, which the Justice Department blocked on monopoly grounds. Dampier wrote: What is almost completely absent in most of Wheeler’s writings is the perspective of, or concern for ordinary consumers. What would Mr. and Mrs. Joe Average think about yet another consolidating merger between AT&T and one of its smaller competitors? What impact would another cable merger have on the bills paid by ordinary people in Colorado, Nebraska, or Pennsylvania?… It is a safe bet most of the industry will welcome and celebrate Wheeler’s appointment. Many know him personally. Many others will feel safe that he is a reachable industry insider already familiar with the issues that concern them. This is what makes the D.C. revolving door so insidious. When you move from the regulated to the regulator (and back again), the only real outsiders are average consumers. Wheeler’s defenders, such as Harold Feld, say he saw the proposed merger between A.T. & T. and T-Mobile as an opportunity for the government to impose some meaningful oversight on wireless operators, which the 1996 Telecommunications Act explicitly excluded from rate regulations and other public-interest rules that apply to landline providers. Wheeler’s original post, from April 1, 2011, backs this up, but it also appears to assume that the merger would be nodded through, which would have been a travesty. And Dampier was right about the cable and telecom giants welcoming Wheeler’s nomination. As detailed in a story at Ars Technica, they could hardly contain their delight. A.T. & T., the biggest wireless carrier, called it “an inspired pick to lead the F.C.C.” Comcast, the biggest cable provider, said, “We applaud President Obama’s nomination and we look forward to working with the Commission under Tom’s leadership.” When President Obama announced Wheeler’s nomination, he said, “If anybody is wondering about Tom’s qualifications, Tom is the only member of both the cable television and the wireless industry hall of fame. So he’s like the Jim Brown of telecom, or the Bo Jackson of telecom.” That’s a bit absurd. Last I checked, Brown holds the N.F.L. records for rushing yards, rushing touchdowns, and total touchdowns. Jackson won the Heisman Trophy and tied the record for consecutive home runs. Wheeler wasn’t out there on the playing field as a cable or telecom executive: he reached the hall of fame by exerting influence in Washington. A more fitting sports metaphor would be to compare him to one of the lawyers who helped finagle a lucrative anti-trust exemption for professional football and baseball. In addition to being a former lobbyist, Wheeler has been a big campaign contributor to President Obama, giving $38,500 of his own money between 2008 and 2011, and also bundling together contributions from friends and associates. In the 2008 campaign, he raised between two hundred thousand and five hundred thousand dollars in this way for Obama, according to OpenSecrets.org, and he then led the Obama transition team focussed on science, technology, and the arts. During last year’s campaign, he raised more than five hundred thousand dollars for Team Obama. Rewarding campaign contributors is par for the course in Washington, of course. Usually, though, the prizes are ambassadorships or appointments to obscure boards rather than the chairmanship of a big federal regulatory agency. That’s another thing that makes Wheeler’s appointment look like just the sort of Washington inside job that Obama used to decry as a candidate. And it’s not as if there weren’t other candidates available. If the President had wanted to appoint somebody with regulation and Capitol Hill experience, he could have pushed for Jessica Rosenworcel, one of the five commissioners of the F.C.C., who had garnered the support of thirty-seven Democratic senators, including her former boss Jay Rockefeller. If Obama had wanted somebody with economic expertise, which has often appeared lacking at the F.C.C., he could have picked Jason Furman, the deputy director of the National Economic Council, whose name was frequently mentioned as a candidate. And if he had wanted a Warren-style firebrand, he could gone with Susan Crawford, a tech-policy expert and professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, who recently published a book titled “Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly in the New Guilded Age.” Instead of selecting one of these names—and there were other plausible candidates, too—Obama went with Wheeler. Perhaps the best that can be said about his nomination is that, assuming he’s confirmed, he’ll have an incentive to demonstrate that he isn’t a patsy for the companies he used to lobby for. In the coming months and years, the F.C.C. will juggle a host of significant issues, including the establishment of new rules for media cross-ownership, a wireless spectrum auction, and the resolution of a legal challenge to its authority to enforce rules compelling Internet-service providers to treat all data on the network equally. In all of these areas, the issues are complex, and they tend to go over the heads of ordinary Americans. Big corporations, with their lawyers and their lobbying budgets, can exploit this complexity to further their own interests at the expense of competitors and the public. That’s why it’s critical to have somebody heading the F.C.C. who gets up every day determined to protect the public interest. Is Wheeler up to the job? A lot of people will be watching. Related news: May 2013, USA: Help stop nomination of Thomas Wheeler to Chair FCC
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The New Yorker, John Cassidy, 02 May 2013

Help stop nomination of Thomas Wheeler to Chair FCC
USA	Created: 14 May 2013
Dear Supporters - Thank you for signing our petition to Hold hearings to fire FCC and hire EPA to set RF radiation safety limits. Thomas E. Wheeler, a former lobbyist for CTIA who opposed meaningful RF safety limits in the 1996 Telecommunications Act, has been nominated to be Chairman of the FCC. Please help us to educate the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation about the serious conflicts of interest that Mr. Wheeler has that mean he is unfit to be Chairman of the FCC. Below you will find a sample letter, please personalize it by inserting a statement about your own experience between paragraph 4 and 5 or delete reminder placeholder, and add your name and address at the top and your name at the bottom. A brief first-hand experience illustrating the need for biologically-based RF safety limits and maintaining the landline phone system would add power to your letter. Please send your letter AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Mr. Wheeler's confirmation hearings begin soon. Below is a list of email addresses to send your letter to. Please copy and paste it into the TO line of your email. If you have not already done so, please promote the petition on twitter, facebook, websites, and in newsletters, links below. Thank you for your continued support, The EMRadiation Policy Institute Here's the petition link: http://www.change.org/petitions/chairman-rockefeller-senate-committee-on-commerce-science-transportation-hold-hearings-to-fire-fcc-and-hire-epa-to-set-rf-radiation-safety-limits-4 On Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/pages/EMR-Policy-Institute/188070864579167 On Twitter at: https://twitter.com/@emrpolicy Sample Letter: ***Your name and address*** Dear Chairman Rockefeller and Commerce Committee Members: I urge you to reject the nomination of Thomas E. Wheeler for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In his position as President of the Cellular Telephone and Internet Association (CTIA) from 1992-2004, Mr. Wheeler was the chief lobbyist for the wireless telecommunications industry. Presently he sits on the board of various telecommunications companies. His glaring inherent conflict of interest will lead to the laxer RF limits the industry desires, resulting in even greater threat to the public health, and the loss of the landline phone system at a time when governments around the world are cautioning citizens to use wired phone and internet systems preferentially to wireless due to the health hazards. The FCC has already exhibited industry bias detrimental to the public health by not enforcing its existing inadequate thermally-based RF safety limits. The FCC has no established procedure for filing violations complaints, responding to complaints received in spite of the lack of procedure, for verifying compliance, or meaningful penalties for violations. Please see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oICZOtMwPo for a short summary of the investigation conducted by The EMRadiation Policy Institute which includes findings of violations up to and in excess of 600%. Mr. Wheeler's past history suggests that enforcing RF radiation limits to protect public health would not be a priority. These violations are particularly dangerous because the current FCC RF safety limits are only thermally-based, not biologically-based. These RF limits are in need of serious revision. The biological effects people are experiencing can be serious and life-threatening. Please watch this short video about women who got breast cancer from their cellphones http://www.ktvu.com/videos/news/special-report-keeping-cell-phone-in-bra-may-lead/vhPF8/ this video about cardiac arrhythmia being caused by DECT cordless phones http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-mw_nCJWs4 and this video about RF health effects on public health http://www.heartmdinstitute.com/v1/wireless-safety/cordless-phone-use-can-affect-heart . You can also watch this short video about the radiation in our homes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAnrmJ3un1g ****Insert your personal statement here.*** The FCC has opened a docket to examine whether it should revise its RF limits, potentially to relax them as requested by industry. Even in the Notice of Inquiry (NOI), the FCC exhibits bias toward industry and away from protecting Americans. From the FCC's docket language: Given the complexity of the information on research regarding non-thermal biological effects, taking extra precautions in this area may fundamentally be qualitative and may not be well-served by the adoption of lower specific exposure limits without any known, underlying biological mechanism. Additionally, adoption of extra precautionary measures may have the unintended consequence of “opposition to progress and the refusal of innovation, ever greater bureaucracy,... [and] increased anxiety in the population.” This is a perfect example of why the EPA, a public health agency without statutory obligation to promote the very technology it is supposed to regulate, should be in charge of setting RF safety limits to protect the public health. Mr. Wheeler's appointment would greatly exacerbate the glaring conflict of interest inherent in having an agency promote and regulate a technology due to his many ties to industry and industry interests. Finally, Mr. Wheeler can be expected to move further toward dismantling the landline phone system at a time when governments around the world are urging use of wired phones and wired internet due to the evidence of harm caused by wireless. Please reject the nomination of Thomas E. Wheeler for Chairman of the FCC. Sincerely, ***
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMRadiation Policy Institute, via email, 14 May 2013

Brain Diseases Affecting More People and Starting Earlier Than Ever Before
USA	Created: 13 May 2013
Professor Colin Pritchard's latest research published in journal Public Health has found that the sharp rise of dementia and other neurological deaths in people under 74 cannot be put down to the fact that we are living longer. The rise is because a higher proportion of old people are being affected by such conditions -- and what is really alarming, it is starting earlier and affecting people under 55 years. Of the 10 biggest Western countries the USA had the worst increase in all neurological deaths, men up 66% and women 92% between 1979-2010. The UK was 4th highest, men up 32% and women 48%. In terms of numbers of deaths, in the UK, it was 4,500 and now 6,500, in the USA it was 14,500 now more than 28,500 deaths. Professor Pritchard of Bournemouth University says: "These statistics are about real people and families, and we need to recognise that there is an 'epidemic' that clearly is influenced by environmental and societal changes." Tessa Gutteridge, Director YoungDementia UK says that our society needs to learn that dementia is increasingly affecting people from an earlier age: "The lives of an increasing number of families struggling with working-age dementia are made so much more challenging by services which fail to keep pace with their needs and a society which believes dementia to be an illness of old age." Bournemouth University researchers, Professor Colin Pritchard and Dr Andrew Mayers, along with the University of Southampton's Professor David Baldwin show that there are rises in total neurological deaths, including the dementias, which are starting earlier, impacting upon patients, their families and health and social care services, exemplified by an 85% increase in UK Motor Neurone Disease deaths. The research highlights that there is an alarming 'hidden epidemic' of rises in neurological deaths between 1979-2010 of adults (under 74) in Western countries, especially the UK. Total neurological deaths in both men and women rose significantly in 16 of the countries covered by the research, which is in sharp contrast to the major reductions in deaths from all other causes. Over the period the UK has the third biggest neurological increase, up 32% in men and 48% in women, whilst women's neurological deaths rose faster than men's in most countries. Professor Pritchard said, "These rises in neurological deaths, with the earlier onset of the dementias, are devastating for families and pose a considerable public health problem. It is NOT that we have more old people but rather more old people have more brain disease than ever before, including Alzheimer's. For example there are two new British charities, The Young Parkinson's Society and Young Dementia UK, which are a grass-roots response to these rises. The need for such charities would have been inconceivable a little more than 30 years ago." When asked what he thought caused the increases he replied, "This has to be speculative but it cannot be genetic because the period is too short. Whilst there will be some influence of more elderly people, it does not account for the earlier onset; the differences between countries nor the fact that more women have been affected, as their lives have changed more than men's over the period, all indicates multiple environmental factors. Considering the changes over the last 30 years -- the explosion in electronic devices, rises in background non-ionising radiation- PC's, micro waves, TV's, mobile phones; road and air transport up four-fold increasing background petro-chemical pollution; chemical additives to food etc. There is no one factor rather the likely interaction between all these environmental triggers, reflecting changes in other conditions. For example, whilst cancer deaths are down substantially, cancer incidence continues to rise; levels of asthma are un-precedented; the fall in male sperm counts -- the rise of auto-immune diseases -- all point to life-style and environmental influences. These `statistics' are about real people and families, and we need to recognise that there is an `epidemic' that clearly is influenced by environmental and societal changes."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Science Daily, 10 May 2013

Scientists Conclude There Are Grounds to Designate Cell and Cordless Phone Radiation a PROBABLE Carcinogen
USA	Created: 11 May 2013
In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared that radio frequency (RF) radiation was a possible carcinogen. Based on new evidence not available to IARC a just published science paper finds there is sufficient evidence to declare cell and cordless phone radiation is a Probable carcinogen. Studies showing statistically significant risks for cancers resulting from cell and cordless phone use include brain cancer, tumors of the acoustic nerve, salivary gland cancers in the cheek, and leukemia. Adding to the strength of the evidence that cell and cordless phone radiation is a probable carcinogen is the highest risks of brain cancer, acoustic nerve tumors and salivary gland cancers is on the side where the cell or cordless phone was used. Children, because the brains are more absorbent, absorb twice the amount of cell and cordless phone radiation that do adults resulting in an even higher risk of cancer. The paper cites a letter to Congress from the American Academy of Pediatrics expressing particular concern of cell and cordless phone induced cancer in children “Children are disproportionately affected by environmental exposures, including cell phone radiation. The differences in bone density and the amount of fluid in a child’s brain compared to an adult’s brain could allow children to absorb greater quantities of RF energy deeper into their brains than adults. It is essential that any new standards for cellphones or other wireless devices be based on protecting the youngest and most vulnerable populations to ensure they are safeguarded through their lifetimes.” Contacts: Dr. Devra Davis, ddavis {-at-} ehtrust.org, (202) 427-2206 Dr. Anthony Miller, ab.miller {-at-} utoronto.ca, 416-487-5825 Dr. Santosh Kesari, skesari {-at-} ucsd.edu, (858) 876-5142
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Environmental Health Trust, 10 May 2013

U.K. Cell Phone Study Points to Acoustic Neuroma, Not Brain Cancer
USA	Created: 11 May 2013
A new study from the UK is adding support to the still controversial proposition that long-term use of a cell phone increases the risk of developing acoustic neuroma, a tumor of the acoustic nerve. No higher risk of glioma or meningioma, two types of brain cancer, was observed. (snip) Read the entire article at Microwave News: http://microwavenews.com/short-takes-archive/uk-study-points-acoustic-neuroma-not-glioma-risk
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Microwave News, Louis Slesin ph.D, 11 May 2013

Telco industry lobbyist to Be Chairman of “independent” FCC
USA	Created: 1 May 2013
President Barack Obama will name Tom Wheeler, a top campaign fundraiser and former leader of wireless- and cable-industry groups, to head the US Federal Communications Commission. Wheeler, managing director at Core Capital Partners LP in Washington, would succeed Chairman Julius Genachowski, a Democrat who has pushed to expand access to high-speed Internet service, said a White House official who asked not to be named because the appointment hasn’t been announced. Wheeler’s appointment will be announced by the White House today, the official said. Genachowski on March 22 announced his departure from the post he has held since 2009. Wheeler needs Senate confirmation before joining the independent agency that regulates broadcasters, cable companies and telephone-service providers. Mignon Clyburn, the commission’s senior Democrat, will be acting chairwoman until Wheeler’s confirmation. Wheeler would arrive with a public record on some issues. As president of a wireless trade group, Wheeler in 2001 pushed to eliminate limits on how many airwaves a company can hold in a given city. The FCC is considering whether to revise the limits. Responding to research indicating possible cancer risks from mobile-phone use, Wheeler in 1999 said responsible scientific studies hadn’t found a connection. The FCC is studying whether U.S. standards need to be updated to protect people from radiation emitted from a phone’s radio signals. Wheeler in 2011 wrote the U.S. could let AT&T Inc. (T) buy smaller wireless competitor T-Mobile USA Inc. by putting conditions on the deal. The FCC and Justice Department opposed the merger, and AT&T abandoned it. SNIP Read full article here: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-30/core-capital-s-wheeler-to-be-named-chairman-of-u-s-fcc.html
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMFacts, Don Maisch, 02 May 2013

Cicadas and Cell Phones: Welcome to the 21st Century
USA	Created: 30 Apr 2013
What does the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) have in common with the cicada bug? They both follow 17-year cycles. In 1996, the first and last time the agency considered standards for cell phones, cicada carcasses clogged Washington, D.C. streets, a stamp cost 32 cents and there was no email. Its Good Friday afternoon announcement that the FCC would seek advice on cell phones is long overdue. Five years ago, Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, head of Pittsburgh's Cancer Institute, recommended simple steps to reduce microwave radiation exposures from cell phones. Since then more than a dozen other tech-savvy nations -- including Israel, India and Finland -- or expert groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, have offered similar advice. Just this week, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer published a detailed explanation of their 2011 determination that cell phone and other wireless radiation was a "possible human carcinogen." In a new publication, Santosh Kesari, M.D., Ph.D., chief of neuro-oncology at the University of San Diego, believes that evidence mounted since 2011 warrants the classification of cell phone radiation as a "probable human carcinogen," warning that resources to treat new cases of this highly-malignant tumor cannot meet the projected increase in demand. He notes that the only studies in the world to include those who began using cell phones as teenagers find that younger users develop between four to eight times more malignant brain tumors than those whose use starts in their 20s. The wisdom of Herberman's advice from 2008 has more than withstood the test of time. Just as the Government Accountability Office advised in its report to Congress this past July, it's long overdue that the FCC questions the use of 20th century methods to handle 21st century technology. Current standards for phones mistakenly assume that weak pulsed radiation cannot possibly produce any heat or other biological impact. In fact, Memorial Sloan Kettering radiation physicist David Gultekin and Bell Labs electrical engineer Lothar Moeller reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that this assumption is wrong. Low levels of pulsed microwave radiation emitted by today's cell phones create tiny hotspots -- as much as 7 degrees Fahrenheit -- in cow brain tissue kept alive in the laboratory. Scientists understand that warming the brain should be avoided at all costs, as this can lead to nervous system damage, hearing loss, and potentially, cancer. Other recent research led by Yale University chairman of Obstetrics and Gynecology Hugh Taylor finds that prenatally-exposed mice develop damaged brains and serious learning and behavioral problems. Experiments produced by NATO-supported teams led by Nesrin Seyhan in Turkey have also found that offspring of rabbits, rats and mice exposed in utero to cell phone radiation have damaged brains, liver, skin and eyes. Smart phone manufacturers understand that new science requires new policies and now include warnings to keep phones off the body. Apple advises that iPhones are tested and should be used at least 10 millimeters away -- advice that can be found within the phone by going to settings/general/about/legal/radiofrequency radiation. Blackberry users are told in fine print to keep phones an inch from the body and avoid exposure to the pregnant or teenaged abdomen. Tawkon and Cell Spacer are but two of a number of growing apps that squawk or light up to warn users when their devices exceed approved limits. Based on these and other developments, the Russian National Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, the Austrian Medical Association, the Israeli Dental Association and the European Environment Agency, have also issued precautionary advice about phones and other wireless devices. Israel, France and Finland are among those nations urging that phones be used with speakerphones or headsets and that wired connections are safer, faster and more secure. Belgium and Turkey have banned sales and advertising of phones for young children. Professor Erik Peper, an award-winning expert on computer safety, generally advises that simple precautions are appropriate to reduce direct wireless exposures. Unaware of these growing concerns, American parents are providing their youngsters with more and more of these devices at younger ages. In light of growing use of these two-way microwave-radiating devices by toddlers and young children, the FCC's notice is a case of better late than never. Left unaddressed in this FCC announcement is the troubling fact that the U.S. has no major training or research program underway to identify potential health impacts of these ubiquitous devices. Most physicians have no training in electrical engineering, and most engineers remain unaware that these remarkable technologies can have important health impacts. Cell phones today are like cars were in the 1960s -- essential devices for which safety standards can improve efficiency and reduce risks. Simple reprogramming and other software reconfiguration can save battery life and reduce radiation exposures and network demand. If phones sought signals from towers every 10 seconds rather than every 0.9 seconds and went into airplane mode whenever signals were weak, body and brain absorbed radiation would be reduced and batteries would last longer. The FCC's overdue request for advice on how to update its standards provides a welcome chance to get rid of outmoded assumptions of current standards and provides a rallying point for those concerned with protecting brains and bodies from avoidable exposures to microwave radiation. If distance is kept between the phone and the body, extending the life of batteries could also improve that of humans.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Devra Davis, Ph.D., Huffington Post, 30 Apr 2013

Cell Phone Warning Label Bill to be Re-Introduced Based on World Health Organization, Cell Phone Use/Brain Cancer Advisory:
USA	Created: 30 Apr 2013
PRESS RELEASE Cell Phone Warning Label Bill to be Re-Introduced Based on World Health Organization, Cell Phone Use/Brain Cancer Advisory: In the face of mounting evidence of increased risk for malignant brain tumors with cell phone use, including a recent Italian court case that was won proving cell and cordless phone use was the cause of a man’s brain tumor and the banning of sales and advertising of cell phones to children in the country of Belgium, Rep. Andrea Boland (D) Maine, re-introduces The Children’s Wireless Protection Act, a legislative bill to inform Maine consumers of the possible health risks associated with cell phone use. The bill would require retailers to provide an informational flyer at point of purchase stating the following: 1. 'The World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use... This has relevance for public health, particularly for users of mobile phones, as the number of users is large and growing, particularly among young adults and children.' World Health Organization press release, May 31, 2011 2. Manufacturers' manuals provide guidance to avoid direct contact with head and body and commentary on ways to reduce excessive exposure, if you choose, such as: A. Limiting use by children; B. Keeping away from reproductive organs; and C. Operating with a wired headset." The bill would also require retailers to label cell phones at point of purchase with stickers stating the following: "This device emits radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Avoid direct contact." Additional verbiage on cell phone packaging would state: "For the Safety of You and Your Family, Please Read Guidance for Use" Univ. of Maine economists and Maine businesses alike also see passage of the bill as a potential business advantage in the opening of new markets and revenue streams in cell phone remediation devices. Rep. Boland feels the time has come for the passage of this protective bill to give Maine constituents fair warning of the very serious and potentially lethal ramifications of cell phone use. Contact info: Rep. Andrea Boland 207-324-4459, Bill Sponsor: AmericanAssociationForCellPhoneSafety.org, Liz Barris 310-455-7530, Full text of the bill can be found at: http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_126th/billtexts/HP071101.asp
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Liz Barris/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Page 1 of 125   Next›  Last»

News item: