Page 1 of 396   Next›  Last» 

Leszczynski’s presentation in Reykjavik, Iceland
Iceland Created: 7 Feb 2016
On January 27, 2016, I had a presentation for the working group Abyrg notkun UT at the Reykjavik City Department of Education. Presentation discussed possible/probable effects of radiation emitted by the wireless communication devices on human health. Presented were, briefly, IARC 2011 classification and the post-classification research, in context of the introduction of the wi-fi equipment in schools.

title Iceland-27-01-2016Recommendation is that the Precautionary Principle should be implemented and the internet in schools should be provided preferentially via wired connections instead of wireless, for the time being, when there is no sufficient science available on how, if at all, the long-term exposures to wi-fi might affect children.

conclusions Iceland-27-01-2016The presentation, both slides and audio of presentation and discussion, are available from this Vimeo link: http://vimeo.com/153990829
Click here to view the source article.
Source: BRHP blog, Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski, 06 Feb 2016

Cellphone tower radiations increase pain in amputees
USA Created: 7 Feb 2016
Living near cellphone towers that produce radio-frequency electromagnetic fields can amplify pain in amputees, suggests new research. ‘Our study provides evidence, for the first time, that subjects exposed to cellphone towers at low, regular levels can actually perceive pain,’ said senior study author Mario Romero-Ortega, associate professor of bioengineering at University of Texas at Dallas, US. Until this study, published online in the journal PLOS ONE, there was no scientific evidence to back up the anecdotal stories of people, who reported aberrant sensations and neuropathic pain around cellphone towers, the researchers said. ‘Our study also points to a specific nerve pathway that may contribute to our main finding,’ Romero-Ortega noted. Most of the research into the possible effects of cellphone towers on humans has been conducted on individuals with no diagnosed, pre-existing conditions. This is one of the first studies to look at the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in a nerve-injury model, Romero-Ortega said. (Read: Can electromagnetic radiation from mobile towers harm you)
The team hypothesised that the formation of neuromas — inflamed peripheral nerve bundles that often form due to injury — created an environment that may be sensitive to EMF-tissue interactions. To test this, the team randomly assigned 20 rats into two groups — one receiving a nerve injury that simulated amputation, and the other group receiving a sham treatment. Researchers then exposed the rats to a radiofrequency electromagnetic antenna for 10 minutes, once per week for eight weeks. The antenna delivered a power density equal to that measured at 39 meters from a local cellphone tower. Researchers found that by the fourth week, 88 percent of rats in the nerve-injured group demonstrated a behavioural pain response, while only one rat in the other group exhibited pain at a single time point, and that was during the first week. ‘Our model found that electromagnetic fields evoked pain that is perceived before neuroma formation; subjects felt pain almost immediately,’ Romero-Ortega said. The researchers believe that the protein TRPV4, which is known to be a factor in heat sensitivity, could be a mediator in the pain response for these rats. (Read: Are cell phone towers dangerous?)
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Robert Riedlinger/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Phone mast proposal causes controversy
United Kingdom Created: 6 Feb 2016
Plans to erect a phone mast near Birch Hill Park, off Hillberry Road, in Onchan have sparked controversy.

The site is located at Hillberry Water Reservoir, adjacent to a residential area at the northern edge of Douglas with the closest residential property around 60 metres away to the south of the site.

The proposal involves the installation of a 12-metre high slimline lattice mast at the site which was identified by Manx Telecom as the most suitable site option.

Manx Telecom say there is a lack of 2G, 3G and 4G coverage available in the Birch Hill and Governors Hill areas which results in their customers having difficulties accessing the mobile network.

A drop-in session in Onchan was held on Monday with residents of Birch Hill and Governors Hill invited to view and comment on the plans.

A spokesman for Manx Telecom said: ‘We mailshotted the area and around 50 to 60 people attended. We let MHKs know earlier, back in December, and wrote to Onchan and Douglas North commissioners.

‘There was good cross-section of feedback, from people for and against the plan with some sitting on the fence.’

Onchan commissioner Rob Callister has spoken out against the plan. He said: ‘I fully agree the area needs improvement with regards to the telecom signal but this location is not the right place. We have been in advanced discussions with the Woodland Trust about setting up a picnic and family area there for over 12 months.

‘I’m also disappointed that all three Onchan MHKs voted in favour of the Town and Planning Order 2013 in January 2014. Because of that order, this is not subject to a full planning application.’

Mr Callister said that he would be meeting with some ratepayers who had expressed their concerns.

There is a 21 day consultation period, starting from February 1, during which time people may submit their views to the planning department on the proposal.

Other sites considered for the mast were, the Cat with no Tail pub and Elder Grange Nursing Home in Hailwood Avenue, Heywood Court Sheltered Housing, the Manx Blind Welfare Society and streetworks adjacent to Heywood Court.

Onchan MHK David Quirk is also against the site proposed. He said: ‘My main concern is a Council of Ministers report in 2009 which reviewed the impact of mobile phone masts on the Isle of Man.’

The report said, in it’s conclusions, that ‘no research demonstrated any biological or health effects from mobile phones or masts’.

However, in its research recommendations it also said that ‘cancer symptoms are rarely detectable until 10 to 15 years after the cancer-producing event and, since few people had used their phones for that long, it is too early to say for certain whether mobile phones could lead to cancer, or indeed other diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases, which have not been studied at all.’

Mr Quirk said he has written to the Communications Commission, who license and regulate telecommunications in the island, expressing his concerns.

He added: ‘There is an obligation to cluster aerials together to minimise the number of towers or masts in and around the island. People are naturally worried about the consequences now and in the future of having a 49-foot tower with three aerials in their back garden. Manx Telecom needs to examine other areas which are more suitable to the needs of the community of the island.’

View the application at www.gov.im/categories/planning-and-building-control under reference 16/00068/TEL
Click here to view the source article.
Source: IOM Today, Alan Vincent, 05 Feb 2016

Science for Sale by David Lewis: recommended reading
Australia Created: 5 Feb 2016
Science for Sale by David Lewis: recommended reading
February 4, 2016 in -Mailing List, America's revolving door between govt. Agencies and corporate America, Book reviews/new books of interest, Corporate influence on Science, government and the military by EMFacts

Following a similar vein as the last blog message,”Report from the Science and Wireless 2015 event in Australia” the 2014 book, Science For Sale by David Lewis PhD is relevant reading. The sub title is:

How the US government uses powerful corporations and leading universities to support government policies, silence top scientists, jeopardize our health, and protect corporate profits.

However the title would be just as accurate if it alternatively read: ‘How powerful US corporations use the government’, etc – considering the “revolving door” between corporate America and the government where govt. agencies are effectively given over to corporate control in exchange for large election donations. If it was in a 3rd World country it would be condemned as outright corruption. In the USA however, its just accepted as business as usual.

In 2015, former president, Jimmy Carter expressed concerns over widespread corporate influence over the American government, which he saw as an Oligarchy. To quote:

Now it’s just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. And the same thing applies to governors and U.S. senators and congress members. So now we’ve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the election’s over. … The incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebody’s who’s already in Congress has a lot more to sell to an avid contributor than somebody who’s just a challenger.

So, now to Science For Sale:

From the fly leaf:

When Speaker Newt Gingrich greeted Dr. David Lewis in his office overlooking the National Mall, he looked at Dr. Lewis and said: “You know you’re going to be fired for this, don’t you?” “I know,” Dr. Lewis replied, “I just hope to stay out of prison.” Gingrich had just read Dr. Lewis’s commentary in Nature, titled “EPA Science: Casualty of Election Politics.” Three years later, and thirty years after Dr. Lewis began working at EPA, he was back in Washington to receive a Science Achievement Award from Administrator Carol Browner for his second article in Nature. By then, EPA had transferred Dr. Lewis to the University of Georgia to await termination—the Agency’s only scientist to ever be lead author on papers published in Nature and Lancet.

The government hires scientists to support its policies; industry hires them to support its business; and universities hire them to bring in grants that are handed out to support government policies and industry practices. Organizations dealing with scientific integrity are designed only to weed out those who commit fraud behind the backs of the institutions where they work. The greatest threat of all is the purposeful corruption of the scientific enterprise by the institutions themselves. The science they create is often only an illusion, designed to deceive; and the scientists they destroy to protect that illusion are often our best. This book is about both, beginning with Dr. Lewis’s experience, and ending with the story of Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

Review by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.:

“David Lewis has been a beacon of integrity against the apocalyptical forces of ignorance and greed endeavoring to divert science from the noble pursuit of truth and pervert it into a tool that supports the most destructive policies of industry and government.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Don Maish/Agnes Ingvarsdotir

Örjan Hallberg in memoriam
Sweden Created: 2 Feb 2016
Friday the 22nd of January, 2016, Örjan Hallberg - my closest coworker for so many years - finally lost his battle against a lymphatic cancer he had had for some time. He is enormously missed.

As you may imagine, this is very tragic and very difficult for me to grasp. Örjan was a really brilliant scientist, next to him I felt small, more as a beginner. His contributions to all of us on this mailing list, as well as for mankind as a whole, is overwhelmingly appreciated and remembered. He is one of the most important persons I have ever met.

I can never fill the gap he leaves behind, hopefully someone else can. He was a unique scientist and fellow human being with a sense of moral, ethics and fighting spirit that is rare to witness. His endless sense of fair play coupled to a dry type of humour was a warm blanket for me, and a sharp mental ice pick for civil servants and politicians having to face his right-to-the-central-point questions and comments. Most often they failed in trying to answer him, but he never gave up on them. He was sure, to the very end, that he should and could have them see the light.

May he rest in peace, for ever.

With my very best regards
Yours sincerely
Olle

(Olle Johansson, associate professor
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)
Source: Prof. Olle Johansson, via email, 01 Feb 2016

Tidens kanariefugle
Denmark Created: 2 Feb 2016
Forurening med trådløs teknik og kemiske stoffer øges dag for dag - Flere og flere mennesker reagerer med ElectroHyperSensitivity (EHS) og Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS). I dag kan disse miljøreaktioner heldigvis diagnosticeres objektivt i udlandet. Det er på tide, at de danske subjektive og individuelle skøn om EHS og MCS som funktionelle lidelser ophører. Vi skal have stoppet tidens fejlvurderinger og fejlbehandlinger. Historisk set har danske neuropsykologer fejlvurderet mennesker med et malersyndrom, og nye fejlvurderinger er desværre kommet til, når det gælder mennesker med EHS og MCS, der må vurderes som nutidens kanariefugle. Lyt til dem og afskærm gravide og småbørn i tide, så de ikke bliver unødigt helbredsskadet. Det er allerede lovfæstet i Frankrig.

læserbrev i Information mandag d. 1. februar 2016
(kilde-link forneden kræver abonnement for at tilgå).
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Information, Bente-Ingrid Bruun, 01 Feb 2016

FBI's war on encryption is unnecessary because the Internet of Things will spy on us just fine
USA Created: 2 Feb 2016
The war on encryption waged by the FBI and other intelligence agencies is unnecessary, because the data trails we voluntarily leak allow “Internet of Things” devices and social media networks to track us in ways the government can access.

That's the short version of what's in “Don’t Panic: Making Progress on the ‘Going Dark’ Debate,” a study published today by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard.

The title references the government's argument that “encrypted communications are creating a 'going dark' crisis that will keep them from tracking terrorists and kidnappers,” as David E. Sanger explains in his coverage at the New York Times.

But “ ‘Going dark’ does not aptly describe the long-term landscape for government surveillance,” concludes the Berkman study convened by Matt Olsen, Bruce Schneier, and Jonathan Zittrain.

*SNIP* read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: BoingBoing, Xeni Jardin, 01 Feb 2016

WHO admits that Cell Phones cause Cancer (2011)
Switzerland Created: 1 Feb 2016
After years of denial from the cell phone companies and related scientists, linking mobile phones to cancer, the WHO has announced that it has now classified cellphones as a possible carcinogen, similar to lead, DDT and vehicle exhaust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXIyQTS4UZA
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Robert Riedlinger/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Judge lets Berkeley require cell phone warnings
USA Created: 31 Jan 2016
Over industry objections, a federal judge has allowed Berkeley to start requiring cell phone retailers to tell customers that carrying switched-on phones too close to their bodies might expose them to radiation levels higher than recommended by federal guidelines.

The city’s ordinance had been scheduled to take effect last June, but was blocked by court order after CTIA-The Wireless Association sued, claiming the law violated freedom of speech. In September, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of San Francisco issued an injunction against the entire ordinance because it contained a disputed warning that “this potential risk is greater for children.”

The City Council then removed that warning, and on Wednesday Chen allowed the rest of the ordinance to take effect, rejecting the industry group’s request for a stay while it asks a federal appeals court to declare the entire ordinance unconstitutional.

The measure requires retailers to notify customers that the federal government sets radiation standards for cell phones, and that a user may be exposed to levels that exceed those standards by carrying a phone in a pocket or tucked into a bra when the device is connected to a wireless network.

Chen ruled in September, and reiterated Wednesday, that Berkeley had based that warning on the Federal Communications Commission’s research and guidelines. By contrast, he said, the now-discarded warning about a potentially greater risk for children was not based on scientific consensus or federal guidelines, but was a matter of scientific debate that retailers could not be required to pass on to customers.

In arguing that the overall ordinance was unconstitutional and seeking a stay, CTIA cited a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said government agencies could require product-sellers to pass along government messages only if the statements are “factual and uncontroversial.” The industry group contended Berkeley’s message was overstated and misleading, since the FCC, by its own admission, built in a considerable safety margin when it set guidelines for carrying cell phones.

But Chen said the city had referred accurately to the FCC guidelines and would not interfere with legitimate free-speech rights by requiring the standards to be communicated to customers.

Although the federal agency established standards that may have been stricter than necessary, “it did set specific limits and did so in order to assure safety,” Chen said.

CTIA’s disagreement is not enough to make the city’s message “controversial,” the judge said, noting that “science is almost always debatable at some level.” He also said the industry group and its members are free to criticize the message, as long as they comply with the requirement to pass it along to customers.

CTIA criticized the ruling and said it would ask the Ninth U.S.Circuit Court of Appeals to halt enforcement of the ordinance while the industry group appeals.

“The overwhelming scientific evidence refutes Berkeley’s ill-informed and misleading mandatory warnings about cell phones,“ CTIA said in a statement.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: SFGate, Bob Egelko, 28 Jan 2016

Bad exposures not bad luck cause cancers
USA Created: 29 Jan 2016
Workplace, environmental and other ‘extrinsic’ exposures are the cause of up to 90 per cent of cancers, researchers have concluded.

The study by a team at Stony Brook University in the US was prompted by a heavily criticised paper in the journal Science which in January 2015 claimed ‘bad luck’ was behind most cancers.

The new research “found quantitative evidence proving that extrinsic risk factors, such as environmental exposures and behaviours weigh heavily on the development of a vast majority (approximately 70 to 90 per cent) of cancers.”

Song Wu, lead author of the paper and assistant professor in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Stony Brook University, said; “Many scientists argued against the ‘bad luck’ or ‘random mutation’ theory of cancer but provided no alternative analysis to quantify the contribution of external risk factors.” He added: “Our paper provides an alternative analysis by applying four distinct analytic approaches.”

The finding, published online in the journal Nature on 16 December 2015, concluded cancers are overwhelmingly the result of external risk factors and not bad luck.

The authors used four separate research techniques, employing both data- and model-driven quantitative analyses to reach their conclusion. These analyses discovered “collectively and individually that most cancers are attributed largely to external risk factors, with only 10-to-30 per cent attributed to random mutations, or intrinsic factors.”

Co-author Professor Yusuf Hannun, director of Stony Brook University Cancer Center, concluded that their overall approach “provides a new framework to quantify the lifetime cancer risks from both intrinsic and extrinsic factors, which will have important consequences for strategising cancer prevention, research and public health.”

Song Wo, Scott Powers, Wei Zhu and Yusuf A Hannun. Substantial contribution of extrinsic risk factors to cancer development, Nature, published online 16 December 2015.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: CancerHazards.org, Rory O'Neill, 07 Jan 2016

 Page 1 of 396   Next›  Last»