«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 652   Next›  Last» 

What It’s Like to Be Allergic to Wi-Fi
USA Created: 31 Mar 2015
On the Breaking Bad spin-off Better Call Saul, the character Chuck McGill, a lawyer played by Michael McKean, has a rather memorable condition. He frequently wraps himself in a space blanket to protect his body from cell phones or wireless internet, claiming the electromagnetic fields emitted by these devices sicken him. He has — or thinks he has — a case of what’s known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity, or EHS.

This is not a condition most doctors recognize. The Guardian was quick to debunk the supposed science behind EHS, claiming that the condition is overhyped by the media, and that while the symptoms sufferers report may indeed be real, it’s psychological rather than physiological. That sentiment was echoed by George Johnson in the Times, who wrote, “From the perspective of science, the likelihood of the rays somehow causing harm is about as strong as the evidence for ESP.”

While EHS is acknowledged by the World Health Organization, the group notes that its associated symptoms (like dizziness, nausea, heart palpitations, and redness, tingling, and burning sensations on the skin) are not part of any single recognized syndrome. It estimates that EHS affects a few individuals per million, and, drawing on data from self-help groups – states that about 10 percent of cases are deemed “severe.” The WHO is firm in its position that “EHS can be a disabling problem for the affected individual” but it “has no clear diagnostic criteria and there is no scientific basis to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure.”

*SNIP* read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: New York Magazine, Alexa Tsoulis-Reay, 29 Mar 2015

How on Earth can this be allowed without OUR Permission?? w. comment by editor.
United Kingdom Created: 29 Mar 2015
Facebook completes first drone flight above UK, Mark Zuckerberg confirms

Solar powered drones which provide internet access to rural and remote areas have been trialled in UK for first time by Facebook.

They “have a wingspan greater than a Boeing 737 but will weigh less than a car”, according to the social network's chief Mark Zuckerberg.

The drones, developed by Somerset-based company Ascenta which Facebook bought last March, will beam down laser-guided internet signals to those below.

Solar panels attached to the wings of the drones mean that they will be able to keep going at altitudes of 60,000 ft for months at a time.

Facebook says this will bring online connectivity to remote locations, previously inaccessible, for the first time. It is part of its Internet.org scheme to get the entire world online,
Read more at link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/media/11499142/Facebook-completes-first-drone-flight-above-UK-Mark-Zuckerberg-confirms.html

I have not been asked if this is fine with me, and more importantly Neither have Any of You!
If I had been asked my answer would have been NO Way!
This is a PRIVATE Company doing Experiments In Our Airspace! Without having to ask permission.
They live in the US, We live in the UK and they are Experimenting On US!
And their ONLY GOAL is Profit, at OUR be cost!
Wake up all, protest, this is OUR Lives and Health, they live thousands of miles away, so will not be affected!

Click here to view the source article.
Source: Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Farmers face threat from campaign to slash mobile mast rents
United Kingdom Created: 24 Mar 2015
Mobile operators mount campaign to be treated like utilities, paying £240 rather than £7,500 per year
Farmers face a threat to hundreds of millions of pounds in extra income rom their land, as mobile operators mount a campaign to slash the rent they pay for mast sites.
A coalition of all four of Britain’s mobile operators – EE, O2, Three and Vodafone – is urging the Government to intervene to give them the similar rights to energy and water companies to build out their networks.
According to a report commissioned by the operators from Deloitte and seen by The Telegraph it could mean the average annual rent for a rural mobile mast plummeting from £7,500 to less than £240. Many farms host more than one mast.

Urban landlords could also take a big hit if the mobile industry gets its way. They charge an average of £9,200.
It would mean total savings for the mobile operators of up to £271m, according to Deloitte.
Such a collapse would come as a heavy blow to many farmers and other landowners who rely on payments from mobile operators to supplement the main income. Many have already seen the payments dwindle in recent years following the 2010 merger of Orange and T-Mobile and deals between competing operators to share masts. Farmers are also struggling as a result of tumbling commodities prices.
The operators nevertheless argue the charges they face are unfair compared with utilities companies, given mobile coverage is increasingly seen as an essential utility.

Last year the Government applied heavy pressure to extract an agreement from each operator to cover at least 90pc of Britain’s landmass by 2017. The proportion of land where all four rivals provide a signal is also due to increase, from 69pc to 85pc.
The deal with Government requires new masts to be built in far-flung locations where the investment was previously judged unjustified because few customers would use them.
In return the mobile operators won a small reduction in radio spectrum licence fees and a pledge to reform “the out-dated and ineffective” rules that were drawn up in 1984 to regulate relationships between mobile operators and landlords. The Culture Secretary, Sajid Javid, opened a consultation on the issue last month, with the mobile operators going into battle against landlords.

The Deloitte report, produced by the accountants for the Mobile Operators Association, claims that while the mobile industry would save hundreds of millions if it was treated the same as water or energy companies, the rural economy could benefit by £1.4bn from improved coverage.
Deliotte said: “The rental reductions from applying the water or energy regime scenario to the operators, if invested in expanding network coverage, would be sufficient to increase outdoor coverage to around 99pc of the country.”
It claimed based on confidential discussions with one mobile operator that landlords were increasing rents by around 20pc when it installed 4G equipment to speed up mobile broadband. The need to cover areas means that many large rural landowners have an “effective monopoly”, Deloitte said, meaning operators have no alternative in commercial negotiations.
The charged faced by utilities companies are based on the impact of facilities on the underlying value of the land.

Henry Robinson, president of the Country Land and Business Association (CLA), which represents landowners, said: “We fully recognise the importance of having better mobile phone coverage in Britain. The current market operates well and rents paid to landowners are minimal compared to the overall capital cost to the large multinational commercial companies putting in a mobile network.
“Given how effective the market for mobile mast rents currently is, we do not believe it is necessary to impose such a sweeping change which would damage the rural economy.”
The organisation has also complained that the agreement between the Government and operators to improve rural coverage did not go far enough.

The consultation on mast regulations is due to report back after the election.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Los Angeles Firefighters ignite battle against cell-towers on firestations
USA Created: 23 Mar 2015
LA firefighters are running radio and TV spots for support against cell-towers.

This radio ad will be broadcast every hour until Tuesday:

"This is fire captain Lew Currier. Los Angeles County is installing cell towers on 86 fire stations near you. The radiation generated by these seven story eye sores can cause debilitating health effects. Studies suggest nearby families could get sick too, yet the board of supervisors is erecting these toxic towers without public hearings or required studies. This time, be there for us, your firefighters. Call the Board of Supervisors at 213-974-1411. Tell them to stop the cell towers, NOW. This message is brought to you by Los Angeles County firefighters local 1014.

Go here for the radio & TV spots:

Go here for the campaign website:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: LA Firefighters Local 1014, 23 Mar 2015

Residents win 2nd battle to stop mobile phone mast being installed
United Kingdom Created: 23 Mar 2015
Residents on a Melton housing estate are celebrating after telecoms company Vodafone decided to shelve plans to install a mobile phone mast there following a protest campaign.

The company has planning permission for the scheme, on the corner of Grange Drive and Sapcote Drive, but it has had a re-think after householders complained their health would be adversely affected and parked a caravan at the proposed site.

Melton MP Alan Duncan, who recently met representatives of Vodafone to discuss the plans, has received a letter from the firm stating the mast would not go up if an alternative location could be found.

Related news:
Mar 2015, United Kingdom: MP to meet phone mast firm

Mr Duncan said: “This is the best possible outcome. People were dismayed at the prospect of this mast being put up on Sapcote Drive – that will not now happen. I am pleased that Vodafone has re-considered and paid attention to local opinion.”

The letter, from Paul Morris, head of government affairs at Vodafone UK, states: “Following our meeting in the House of Commons on March 19, I am now able to confirm that it is Vodafone’s intention not to proceed with the mast proposed for the junction of Grange and Sapcote Drive, as long as we are able to acquire and build an alternative in the area.”

The company said it will consult with local people before it decides where the mast might now go.

The letter continues: “A number of alternative locations have been identified as part of our recent search, and one inparticular appears to satisfy all our requirements.

“As we discussed, a new site must meet future coverage demands in the area, fit well with the existing network, and have the necessary power and backhaul broadband connections.

“We intend to contact the local authority to obtain the necessary planning and landlord consents for this new proposed site so we can proceed with this new location.

“We will of course undertake local stakeholder consultation prior to submitting the planning application.”

This is the second time residents have fought successfully against the phone mast since Melton Council gave planning permission in 2009.

Workmen from Vodafone were seen investigating the proposed site again last month prompting the latest protest campaign.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Melton Times, 23 Mar 2015

New Expert Study Confirms NY Times Questions on Wearable Tech
USA Created: 23 Mar 2015
New studies demonstrate that microwave radiation from cellphones and other devices constitutes a (Group 2A) probable human carcinogen.

A recent New York Times article by Nick Bilton is raising important and unanswered questions about the safety of wearable tech, according to the non-profit research group, Environmental Health Trust (EHT). EHT believes, that in response to the article, several national media outlets such as Slate, Wired, and Medscape rushed to dismiss concerns raised by the NY Times piece and have each failed to report on growing evidence of harms linked with cell phones and other devices.

Related news:
Mar 2015, USA: Wireless Empire Strikes Back
Mar 2015, USA: The Health Concerns in Wearable Tech

EHT President and Founder Dr. Devra Davis notes that, "Wearable tech has never been tested for safety. Period. No one can say it is safe, because there have been no long-term studies into the health effects of these devices. Quite to the contrary, wireless wearables operate with the same microwave radiation as cell phones—that have been tied with many poor health outcomes including cancer. Our new website www.showthefineprint.org includes specific manufacturers' warnings that advise keeping phones away from the body. It makes absolutely no sense to assume that wireless wearables (that are often used in tandem with cellphones) are safe."

Davis and other EHT scientists with ties to the World Health Organization (WHO) released a new updated analysis of the increased cancer risks of cell phones. The International Journal of Oncology just published their conclusion that radiofrequency (wireless) radiation from cellphones and other devices constitutes a (Group 2A) probable human carcinogen. Quickly changing technologies and intensive uses of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) emitting phones pose "a challenge to public health" according to the authors.

The paper was penned by two leading members of the Environmental Health Trust, Lloyd Morgan and Devra Davis PhD, MPH, along with Anthony B. Miller, MD and Annie Sasco, MD, PhD, who have over 50 combined years of expertise with the WHO's International Agency for the Research on Cancer (IARC). Dr. Miller participated in the IARC Monograph 102 on RF-EMF, detailing IARC's 2011 finding of RF as a Group 2B (possible) Carcinogen. In her 22 years with the WHO, Dr. Sasco has served as Chief of Epidemiology for Cancer Prevention and Acting Chief of the Cancer Control Programme of the WHO.

The authors note that exposures to wireless transmitting devices (WTDs) have increased exponentially in the past few years— a trend that shows no signs of abating. They cite CERENAT, a national study in France, which found an up to 8-fold increased risk of brain cancer tied with cellphone use. "The CERENAT finding of increased risk of glioma [a specific type of tumor of the nervous system] is consistent with studies that evaluated use of mobile phones for a decade or longer and corroborate those that have shown a risk of meningioma from mobile phone use."

"As a physician and epidemiologist with decades of experience working with the World Health Organization, I am deeply concerned with what the data are showing. We have to take precautions with these devices now - especially to protect our children," says Dr. Sasco.

The authors urge that additional data should be gathered on exposures to mobile and cordless phones, other wireless transmitting devices (WTDs), mobile phone base stations and WiFi routers to evaluate their impact on public health.

They conclude with recommendations that the as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principle be adopted for this technology while a major cross-disciplinary effort is initiated to train researchers in bio-electromagnetics and to provide monitoring of potential health impacts of RF-EMF.

Peer-reviewed research has demonstrated adverse effects of wireless radiation, including immune dysfunction, cognitive processing effects, stress protein synthesis, sleep and memory disturbances and sperm dysfunction. For example, research just published in the International Journal of Toxicology showed cognitive impairment and neurotoxic effects in exposed animal subjects, concluding that "chronic low-intensity microwave exposure in the frequency range of 900 to 2450 MHz may cause hazardous effects on the brain." Other new experimental studies from the German government have recently shown that cell phone radiation promotes tumors in animals.

In light of these recent studies, they recommend that the as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principle—currently used to set standards for diagnostic radiation for children-- be adopted for this technology. At the same time they urge that a major cross-disciplinary effort be initiated to train researchers in bio-electromagnetics and to provide monitoring of potential health impacts of RF-EMF.

The EHT expert paper can be downloaded here:

For a free-book: Understanding the Health Risks of Google Glass, follow this link:

About Environmental Health Trust
Environmental Health Trust (EHT) educates individuals, health professionals and communities about controllable environmental health risks and policy changes needed to reduce those risks. Currently EHT is raising health concerns about wireless in schools and recommending safe hardwired internet connection installations. EHT's website is the go-to place for clear, science-based information to prevent disease. Please visit http://www.ehtrust.org. Find EHT on Facebook

Dr. Davis is available by wired Skype interviews. Media contact: Janet Vasquez/JVPR/212-645-5498 jvasquez@jvprny.com

To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: SYS-Con Media, Environmental Health Trust, 23 Mar 2015

Wireless Empire Strikes Back
USA Created: 23 Mar 2015
This week the New York Times published an article questioning the safety of wearable wireless devices such as the new Apple Watch. I thought the tech writer, Nick Bilton, wrote a thoughtful piece that pointed out some issues with wireless technology. Namely, that we probably shouldn’t be wearing microwave radiation transmitters on our bodies all day. Especially considering what the most recent science is saying.

Mr. Bilton ended the article by stating that after doing his own research, he will no longer put a cell phone (or Apple Watch) to his head. This isn’t exactly a revolutionary idea considering that your cell phone owner’s manual states the same thing.

What followed is the most interesting part of this story. The tech media quickly came out with all guns blazing. Within 24 hours, at least 20 media outlets such as Wired and Slate published articles attacking Mr. Bilton. Reading their pieces, I couldn’t help but notice a similar structure and the same derogatory language meant to attack the author and his article, rather than his basic premiss of precaution. This left me wondering if some of these articles were coordinated? Here is a sampling of the language used in the Wired and Slate articles. Note that the first five phrases were exact matches within both articles:

“Fear mongering, “expert”, poisoning the well, Creationist analogies, pseudoscience/anti-science, ignorance, bet-hedging, conspiracy-miners, quack, anti-vaxx bully, cherry picking, tabloid quality writing . . .”

*SNIP* read the entire article at the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMFAnalysis, Jeromy Johnson, 21 Mar 2015

School Boards Left On The Hook For Wi-Fi Injuries
Canada Created: 21 Mar 2015
School districts, school boards and school medical health officers have been notified that Lloyd’s of London has now excluded any liability coverage for injuries, “directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to by electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise.” This would include the microwave radiation emitting from the commercial wi-fi transmitters and wireless devices in our schools.

In response to a request for clarification, this response was received on Feb. 18, 2015 from CFC Underwriting LTD, London, UK agent for Lloyd’s:

“The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion (Exclusion 32) is a General Insurance Exclusion and is applied across the market as standard. The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionizing radiation exposure i.e. through mobile phone usage.”

Lloyd’s of London, one of the world’s largest insurance companies often leads the way in protection by taking on risks that no one else will. At the end of this article there is a copy of a recent renewal policy which, as of Feb. 7, 2015, excludes any coverage associated with exposure to non-ionizing radiation.

In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) dropped a bombshell on the wireless industry. They designated exposure to wi-fi radiation to be a possible human carcinogen. As well in the 1990s illnesses resulting from asbestos exposure, covered by Lloyd’s at the time, almost destroyed the insurance company. Due to these issues, it appears Lloyd’s is acting fast to avoid another such financial fiasco by not covering illnesses that result from exposure to wireless radiation.

With the Lloyd’s of London announcement, parents and teachers are left with this question: exactly who is liable if their child is harmed by wi-fi in their school? Concomitantly, are the individuals who approved the installation of wireless internet networks in our schools to be held personally liable for negligence?

School officials and administrators appear to be in a bind as they have refused to acknowledge the 1000s of peer-reviewed, non-industry funded studies by scientists and medical experts that show that wi-fi radiation is harmful, especially to children. Moreover, their dogged allegiance to Health Canada’s now invalidated safety guidelines have left parents with nowhere else to turn other than the courts. It appears that school boards’ intransigent position on the issue may have left board members themselves vulnerable to being personally sued.

School boards may be covered by directors’ insurance which applies to people who are performing their duties “in good faith.” The question is: are they still protected when it could be shown that they were being “willfully blind?”


“In good faith:” in contract law, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is a general presumption that the parties to a contract will deal with each other honestly, fairly, and in good faith, so as to not destroy the right of the other party or parties to receive the benefits of the contract.

“Wilful blindness:” (sometimes called ignorance of law, wilful ignorance or contrived ignorance or Nelsonian knowledge) is a term used in law to describe a situation in which an individual seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting him or herself in a position where he or she will be unaware of facts that would render him or her liable.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Bridge News Service, Janis Hoffman, 26 Feb 2015

The Health Concerns in Wearable Tech
USA Created: 20 Mar 2015
In 1946, a new advertising campaign appeared in magazines with a picture of a doctor in a lab coat holding a cigarette and the slogan, “More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.” No, this wasn’t a spoof. Back then, doctors were not aware that smoking could cause cancer, heart disease and lung disease.

In a similar vein, some researchers and consumers are now asking whether wearable computers will be considered harmful in several decades’ time.

We have long suspected that cellphones, which give off low levels of radiation, could lead to brain tumors, cancer, disturbed blood rhythms and other health problems if held too close to the body for extended periods.

Yet here we are in 2015, with companies like Apple and Samsung encouraging us to buy gadgets that we should attach to our bodies all day long.

While there is no definitive research on the health effects of wearable computers (the Apple Watch isn’t even on store shelves yet), we can hypothesize a bit from existing research on cellphone radiation.

The most definitive and arguably unbiased results in this area come from the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a panel within the World Health Organization that consisted of 31 scientists from 14 countries.

After dissecting dozens of peer-reviewed studies on cellphone safety, the panel concluded in 2011 that cellphones were “possibly carcinogenic” and that the devices could be as harmful as certain dry-cleaning chemicals and pesticides. (Note that the group hedged its findings with the word “possibly.”)

The W.H.O. panel concluded that the farther away a device is from one’s head, the less harmful — so texting or surfing the Web will not be as dangerous as making calls, with a cellphone inches from the brain. (This is why there were serious concerns about Google Glass when it was first announced and why we’ve been told to use hands-free devices when talking on cellphones.)

Please read the whole article at source:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: New York Times, NICK BILTON, 18 Mar 2015

Mobile phone radiation causes brain tumors and should be classified as a probable human carcinogen (2A) (Review)
USA Created: 19 Mar 2015
Quickly changing technologies and intensive uses of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF)‑emitting phones pose a challenge to public health - Mobile phone users and uses and exposures to other wireless transmitting devices (WTDs) have increased in the past few years.

We consider that CERENAT, a French national study, provides an important addition to the literature evaluating the use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumors. The CERENAT finding of increased risk of glioma is consistent with studies that evaluated use of mobile phones for a decade or longer and corroborate those that have shown a risk of meningioma from mobile phone use. In CERENAT, exposure to RF‑EMF from digitally enhanced cordless telephones (DECTs), used by over half the population of France during the period of this study, was not evaluated. If exposures to DECT phones could have been taken into account, the risks of glioma from mobile phone use in CERENAT are likely to be higher than published.

We conclude that radiofrequency fields should be classified as a Group 2A "probable" human carcinogen under the criteria used by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Lyon, France). Additional data should be gathered on exposures to mobile and cordless phones, other WTDs, mobile phone base stations and Wi‑Fi routers to evaluate their impact on public health.

We advise that the as low as reasonable achievable (ALARA) principle be adopted for uses of this technology, while a major cross‑disciplinary effort is generated to train researchers in bioelectromagnetics and provide monitoring of potential health impacts of RF‑EMF.

Get the PDF via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: International Journal of Oncology, Morgan/Miller/Sasco/Davis, 25 Feb 2015

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 652   Next›  Last»