«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 640   Next›  Last» 

Consultation on WHO’s EHC on RF is a sham – decision of 'no health effects' was made already
Australia Created: 17 Nov 2014
On November 11, 2014, in Wollongong, Australia, took place workshop organized by ICNIRP, ACEBR and ARPANSA. The workshop briefly presented and reviewed opinions of ICNIRP about the health hazard of RF exposures. Following the ICNIRP/ACEBR/ARPANSA workshop was the Science & Wireless (S&W) 2014 event dedicated to the EHS.

I will write more about the individual presentations later, when I return from my lecture tour of Australia.

For now, I can say that the general outcome of the workshop and the S&W2014 event can be summarized in a simple Australian Crocodile Dundee’s saying: “no worries mate”.

This worries me a lot… and here is why…

*SNIP* read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Blog BRHP, Dariusz Leszczynski, 16 Nov 2014

Recordings from the EESC hearing on EHS
Belgium Created: 16 Nov 2014
Dear all, here are the recordings from the European Economic and Social Committee open hearing on electrohypersensitivity in Brussels 04 November 2014.

Mast-Victims.org brought a audio-recorder to the hearing.

Go here for a complete playlist of the 11 recordings in sequence:

To play a track: hover the mouse over the track-thumbnail and click the orange "play" arrow.

To download a track as MP3 file: hover the mouse over the track-title and click the download icon (last one on right).

Some speakers did not speak English and on those recordings the English interpretation is overlaid.
On track #3 the interpreter comes in at approx. 3½ minutes (apologies for the delay, due to technical difficulties).
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Mast-Victims.org, H.Eiriksson, 16 Nov 2014

Europe starts to take EHS / ES seriously
Belgium Created: 15 Nov 2014
The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) has held a public hearing on electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS/ES) on 4th November 2014, attended by about 50 people, followed by a working group meeting in the afternoon to decide on how best to move forward on the EHS issue. The idea of the hearing was apparently their own, submitted by Bernardo Hernández Bataller. The group think the European Commission should pay more attention to this issue.

Who are the EESC?
It is an EU advisory body acting as a bridge between Europe and organized civil society. "The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall be assisted by an Economic and Social Committee and a Committee of the Regions acting in an advisory capacity." (Treaty on European Union, Article 13.4). It is an assembly of 353 members representing civil society from the 28 Member States of the EU. Members are appointed for a renewable five-year term by the Council of Ministers on the basis of lists drawn up by the national governments. It sends its opinions to the EU Parliament, the EC and Consilium.

What they are saying so far:
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is causing distress and loss of quality of life to a growing number of Europeans. The most common sources of Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) pollution are mobile phone masts, cordless phones and Wi-Fi routers installed in the homes. All these emit microwaves permanently (24/7) in the places where they are installed.

Each day the number of EHS sufferers increases, and they often have to deal with the scepticism of doctors and misdiagnoses. According to new estimates, between 3% and 5% of the population are electro-sensitive, meaning that some 13 million Europeans may suffer from this syndrome, which has various names (electro-sensitivity, Wi-Fi syndrome, microwave syndrome, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, etc.).

Ever since the adoption of its opinion on the EU GSM Directive (TEN/308) in 2008, the EESC has been concerned with the ongoing protection of the public against electromagnetic radiation from electronic communications, such as internet usage, and other household equipment that forms part of the information society.

As part of the opinion work, local authorities, transport services, as well as cultural, sports and leisure centres will be consulted on their practices to install wireless internet connections. In recent technological developments, WiMAX environments (similar to Wi-Fi but longer-range), have started to emit constant electromagnetic pollution. The opinion might also advocate enhanced efforts at EU, Member State, regional and local level to identify, minimise and prevent exposure both at home and in the workplace, allowing citizens to live in places free from electromagnetic pollution, so-called white areas. The EESC can act as trusted adviser towards these stakeholders.

What is the time-scale?
4-Nov-2014: Working Document
5-Dec-2014: Preliminary Draft Opinion
7-Jan-2015: Draft Opinion
21-22-Jan-2015: Plenary Opinion

Powerwatch Comments: We are pleased at this initiative to take EHS issues seriously across the EU. Powerwatch and other EMF and EHS organisations were taken by surprise, hearing about this meeting only 9 days before it happened. That led to a large number of emails, Skype and telephone calls to find out who had the time (etc) to attend and present information to the hearing. Somehow the organisation had failed to invite any of the many EHS/ES groups across Europe. We believe this was a genuine administration error rather than an effort to keep us away!

Short presentations, by the following people, were made on why the EU should deal with EHS, and the best approach to use.

Susana Galera Rodrigo, Professor of Administrative Law, King Juan Carlos University Madrid
Isaac Jamieson, Member of the group of stakeholders on electromagnetic fields for DG SANCO
Olle Johansson, Professor of Neuroscience, The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm
Marc Cendrier, Robin des Toits (Association Nationale pour la Securité Sanitaire dans les Technologies sans fil), France
Inés Ayala Sender, Member of the European Parliament

The presentations were followed by a debate with the audience and the rapporteur's notes taken to the afternoon meeting of the EESC study group on electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

Isaac Jamieson gave a very informative presentation which showed that that whilst many studies indicate impacts as a result of exposure, there were others that showed no impact or were neutral/inconclusive. This included the results of the review of 919 studies by Rahmani et al (2011) documenting the percentages of EMF studies that revealed either impact, no impact or were neutral/inconclusive. He also mentioned Cucurachi et al (2013) obtaining similar results in their review of 113 studies, with the majority revealing impacts as a result of exposure. He discussed the potential costs that may arise if individuals are detrimentally affected by EMFs and best practice measures that could be applied to reduce risk.

Olle Johansson concentrated on the difference between treating EHS as a functional impairment, as in Sweden, as opposed to as a disease, and he was really quite eloquent and made some good points, not really about EMFs as such but about societal attitudes to disability and equality - which is the angle the EESC is going for - i.e. to prevent social exclusion due to the almost universal electrosmog now present around us.

Marc Cendrier gave a good presentation and he also presented a formal statement on behalf of the EHS of Europe [2]. Electrosensibles Derecho Salud and UneTerrePourLesEHS had rushed to prepare this joint statement for submission to the EESC TEN study group on EHS by presentation at the meeting.

Many people there were asserting the "there is plenty enough evidence to conclude that EMFs cause EHS" position, but the debate felt less heated than is often the case. However, at the end two people from the mobile industry's MMF accused one pro-precaution speaker of misrepresentation but also ridiculously claimed that there is no point in reducing exposure because existing exposure levels are already 100% safe. One said that you can't apply the precautionary principle because there is already no risk, and you can't label equipment with emission values because they are all already "safe" and you can't have "safer than safe" (a direct quote). That, predictably and understandably, provoked some reaction from other people, but the meeting was running out of time by then so the argument didn't really develop.

So, for most of the time, the main issues in play were exploring appropriate measures to take, and doing so in a fairly constructive way, barring a few extremes. There was some arcane but probably quite important discussion about what the various articles of the various treaties allow the EU to do; broadly, the Commission or Commission-aligned voices were arguing that the responsibility lies with member states, but other people were saying there is more that the EU can do, for example using single-market rules to require common provisions for equipment, or requiring public consultation, and which it has done in other areas.

There seems some hope that the Committee might well come up with something reasonably balanced, in that they seem to be aware both of the amount of public concern and the seriousness of the issue for sufferers, and also of the need for proportionality and for a sense of the realistic; but one person's "proportionality" is another person's "disgraceful failure to take sufficient action" and another person's "throwing the science away on a tide of hysterical emotion", so we'll have to see what they actually say in their published Opinion which is due in January.

However, the European Commission will take quite a lot of persuading to take any new action unless their own processes (primarily SCENIHR) give them a justification or a push, which is unlikely. However, the current signs at the EESC are suggesting that their opinion will support a more precautionary stance to help EHS people from being excluded from being able to take part in modern public life.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Powerwatch, Alasdair Philips, 04 Nov 2014

Kilder: USA bruger falske telefonmaster på fly til at indsamle mobildata
Denmark Created: 14 Nov 2014
Myndighederne i USA indsamler store mængder data fra mobiltelefoner ved hjælp af en slags falske telefonmaster placeret på fly.

Det skriver avisen Wall Street Journal, der har talt med en række anonyme kilder med kendskab til metoden.

Ifølge avisen er mobilmasterne placeret på mindre fly, der regelmæssigt flyver fra mindst fem større amerikanske lufthavne og afdækker størstedelen af USA.

Ved hjælp af de falske mobilmaster kan amerikanske myndigheder samle data fra både kriminelle og uskyldige amerikanere uden at bede de store mobiloperatører om tilladelse.

Kan indsamle data fra masser af telefoner

Udstyret bruges i Boeing-producerede Cessna-fly og manipulerer folks mobiltelefoner til at tro, at de kommunikerer med normale mobilmaster. Dermed får myndighederne adgang til store mængder private data.

I løbet af en enkelt flyvning kan flyene angiveligt indsamle data fra titusindvis af mobiltelefoner.

Målet med de falske master er ifølge Wall Street Journal officielt at lokalisere mistænkte kriminelle. Systemet er så præcist, at det kan finde frem til en person med blot tre meters usikkerhed.

Programmet er angiveligt drevet af U.S. Marshals Service, der ligger under det amerikanske justitsministerium. Systemet har været anvendt siden 2007.

Lever op til krav

Ifølge Wall Street Journal har programmet meget til fælles med et andet program, som bliver benyttet af efterretningstjenesten NSA, der indhenter samtaledata fra millioner af mobiltelefoner hver dag både i USA og resten af verden.

En topembedsmand fra USA's justitsministerium ønsker hverken at be- eller afkræfte eksistensen af de falske master. Embedsmanden understreger, at justitsministeriet lever op til de gældende lovkrav på området.

Click here to view the source article.
Source: Politiken, ritzau, 14 Nov 2014

Use Of Cellphones Linked With Brain Cancer In Massive Study
Canada Created: 14 Nov 2014
A new study out of Sweden indicates that talking on cellphones and even cordless phones can be related to a certain form of brain cancer.

The study, published in the journal Pathophysiology in October, analyzed the results of 1,498 cases of people with malignant brain tumours and 3,530 controls to determine whether phone use had any effect on their cancer.

In their findings, it appeared that the longer a person used a cell or cordless phone, the more likely they were to get become gliomas, a type of tumour found in the brain or spinal cord that is malignant in 80 per cent of cases, according to WebMD.

“The risk is three times higher after 25 years of use. We can see this clearly,” the study's lead researcher, Dr. Lennart Hardell, told Reuters.

Those who had only been using a cell or cordless phone for less than a year were at the least amount of risk, while those who used their phone on the same side of the body (or "ipsilaterally") for many years had the highest odds for brain cancer.

The cause for concern with cellphones comes from the radiofrequency energy, a type of electromagnetic radiation emitted by the phones, explains the National Cancer Institute. These waves can then be absorbed by the tissues of the brain, and it is not yet understood how this may or may not affect the development of cancer.

Dr. Gabriel Zada, a neurosurgeon in California, noted to Reuters that children could be particularly at risk due to having smaller heads, thinner skulls and higher brain conductivity.

Earlier this year, a study from France found similar results about cellphone use and glioma, though the results in that study showed tumours developing on the opposite side of the brain, reported The Atlantic's The Wire.

As of October, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified cellphones as "possibly carcinogenic," according to the World Health Organization, which is planning for a further study into health outcomes from phones by 2016.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Huffington Post Canada, Rebecca Zamon, 12 Nov 2014

United Federation of Teachers warns members against wireless radiation
USA Created: 13 Nov 2014
Wireless radiation is emitted by the myriad of wireless devices we encounter every day. It was once thought to be relatively harmless. However, we now know that wireless radiation can cause non-thermal biological effects as well, including damage to cells and DNA, even at low levels.

Reducing Your Exposure to Wireless Radiation
Some tips to reduce your exposure to wireless radiation:

What You Need to Know About Wireless Radiation and Your Baby:
Taking certain precautions around wireless radiation is appropriate for our most vulnerable populations, including pregnant women.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: United Federation of Teachers,

Cell phone towers raise new concerns about safety
USA Created: 13 Nov 2014
It's a growing concern in the Valley and across the country.
All those cell phone towers popping up on buildings and rooftops.
CBS 5 has found that many of those towers violate federal safety rules intended to keep people safe.
Federal studies show the powerful RF radiation that the towers send out is not harmful to anyone on the street and beyond a few feet.
But what about someone doing work, or standing right in front of an antenna?
Sherrie Anderson manages a Phoenix office building, which happens to have a few cell phone towers on the roof.
"When you have no guidelines, we're basically just throwing the dice with our health and safety," said Anderson.
Anderson told CBS 5 that the companies who installed the cell towers have never given them any safety instructions, or provided any guidelines for maintenance workers, who may be exposed to high levels of electric and magnetic power.
"If you're putting floor polish on, there's an OSHA standard," said Anderson. "If you're doing electrical work - there's an OSHA standard. We have no standards - no protocol. Basically, we're just up there blind."
Engineer Marv Wessel, with RF Solutions, has inspected thousands of cell phone antenna sites across the country.
He said that many of the antenna sites he's seen, have emissions well over the federal safety limits.
"The license holders are ultimately responsible - its their responsibility," said Wessel. "When they get a license they must ensure that the rules are followed, and if that's not happening, ultimately, they're the ones that would shoulder the blame."
But there's a problem.
Not all cell phone carriers make the necessary steps to protect the public, and insure that workers, or anyone else are not exposed to RF radiation.
Studies have shown that RF radiation can cause neurological problems and other health issues, including cancer.
Wessel showed CBS 5 another site, in a community near Camelback Mountain in Phoenix, where residents and maintenance crews can walk right by the antennas.
The only thing keeping people away was a plastic chain and some pvc pipe.
According to Wessel, the FCC doesn't have the time or manpower to inspect these sites, or respond to complaints.
Wessel even called a phone number listed on one of the cell towers, to say he'd be working close by and ask about any safety concerns.
"As long as I wasn't working on their equipment they didn't seem too concerned," said Wessel. "I was fine to go anywhere I wanted on the rooftop."
T-Mobile released this statement:
"All of us at T-Mobile take the safety of our partners, customers, the public and our employees very seriously. We have a robust compliance program that we continually update as wireless technology evolves. We check and audit sites on an ongoing basis to help ensure they remain in compliance."
Sprint released this statement:
"Sprint takes great lengths to comply with the FCC's regulations in this area. This includes an annual review process to ensure all of our sites are compliant with the Commission's rules on RF exposure limits, including signage and barriers. We've also instituted additional sites reviews with our Network Vision installations to certify the compliance of this new infrastructure."
By Jason Barry
Please watch the accompanying video at the link:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: HM/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

US Safe place: The U.S. Town With No Cell Phones or Wi-Fi
USA Created: 12 Nov 2014
Dear all
Robert Riedlinger in Canada has sent us this Y-tube link to publish for you all if you need a safe place to live or have holiday breaks away from the Electrosmog where you live.
Check it out.
It could just be what you need for survival and quality of life.

And here is another US FREE ZONE, posted on Mast-victims.org in 2012, by anonimous.
West Virginia's 'Quiet Zone' becomes refuge for those on the run from wireless technology
Best regards.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Robert Riedlinger/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

iPhone 6 BendGate: Apple's Instructions Say Not to Keep Your Phone in Your Pocket Anyway
USA Created: 7 Nov 2014
As the Internet lights up with images of the iPhone 6 plus emerging from people’s pockets bent like a used paperclip, it may be useful to consider this: Apple explicitly tells you not to carry your phone in your pocket, due to the radiation exposure threat it poses.

In the little handbook that comes with every iPhone (the one that gets discarded almost immediately because, it’s a cell phone, we all know what to do with those, right?) Apple also explicitly states that the phone is not supposed to touch your body much, if at all.

In fact, in the manual for the iPhone 5, Apple says users should carry their iPhones a full 10 millimeters (or 0.39 inches) away from their bodies at all times. That means, if the device is in the pocket of your jeans, it’s much too close.

Previous manuals were more explicit. The iPhone 3G safety manual warns that radiation exposure may exceed government standards during “body-worn operation” if the phone is “positioned less than 15 millimeters (5/8 inch) from the body (e.g., when carrying iPhone in your pocket).” The iPhone, Apple says, should always be worn in a belt clip or holster.

Cell phone radiation, measured in radio-frequency exposure, is regulated in the U.S. by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). All phones must be tested to ensure that they emit a specific absorption rate of not more than 1.6 watts of radio-frequency energy per kilogram of body tissue, a rule designed to prevent harm from the heat generated by radio-frequency waves.

But while cell phones are tested against a simulated human head in the “talking” position, they are not tested against the body (or in a pocket) in the “carrying” position. Instead, the tests assume the user is carrying the phone in a holster, away from the body, whenever the phone is broadcasting at full power. And since radio-frequency energy exposure increases sharply the closer the phone gets to your body, some worry that FCC testing is missing a lot of actual exposure.

In addition, the FCC tests do not consider biological effects caused by anything other than the heat generated from radio-frequency energy, like altered protein expression or DNA damage. Experts and organizations like the Environmental Working Group have expressed concern over the testing rules for cell phones, citing studies that show links between cancers and cell phone radiation exposure. In 2011, a World Health Organization report classified radiation from cell phones as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” particularly as cell phone use relates to an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer.

Then there are the gaps in cell phone radiation testing. The American Academy of Pediatrics, for example, recently urged the FCC to begin taking child users of cellphones into account. “Children are not little adults and are disproportionately impacted by all environmental exposures, including cell phone radiation,” their letter to the FCC reads.

Yet the science is inconclusive. The National Cancer Institute points to several studies that have been unable to establish a relationship between cell phone use and cancer.

The FCC is currently conducting an ongoing reassessment of its policies.

"The U.S. has among the most conservative standards in the world. As part of our routine review of these standards, which we began last year, we will solicit input from multiple stakeholder experts, including federal health agencies and others, to guide our assessment,” a spokesman for the FCC tells Newsweek.

Radiation from cell phones is not an Apple-only problem, of course. Blackberry’s user manual advises 0.59 inches of separation between the body and the phone. Earlier manuals pushed for nearly a full inch (.98 inch) of separation, and told users to "use hands-free operation if it is available and keep the BlackBerry device at least 0.98 inch (25 millimeters) from your body (including the lower abdomen of pregnant women and teenagers)."

A manual for an earlier Blackberry model—the 8830 World Edition—includes a warning against carrying the phone directly on the body: “Carrying solutions, including RIM-approved carrying solutions and carrying solutions not approved by RIM, that do not come equipped with an integrated belt clip SHOULD NOT be worn or carried on the body.”

It adds that users should not try to use the phone where there is not a good signal, because radiation output grows higher and higher as the phone struggles to connect with a tower. Neither Apple nor Blackberry responded to a request for comment at the time of publishing.

Dr. David Carpenter, the director of the Institute for Health and the Environment University at Albany, New York has spent several years reading research on radio-frequency exposure and has testified to Congress on the subject. He says he is very wary of cell phones.

“My personal sense is that the evidence for increases in cancer is quite strong. It’s not one hundred percent, but most studies have shown that [people with] high exposures have elevations in leukemia, brain cancers [and] some other kinds of cancers.”

He predicts that cancer rates will go up in the coming decades.

“Latency for brain cancer is 20 to 30 years. Cell phones haven’t been around for all that long. I think it’s likely that we’ll see an increase in cases over the next years,” Carpenter says.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Newsweek, Zoë Schlanger, 26 Sep 2014

Heavy mobile usage may cause cancer of salivary glands: Study
India Created: 7 Nov 2014
NAGPUR: Several organizations and experts have warned about the harmful effects radiations can have on the health of human beings. While acknowledging that wireless phones can cause cancer in brain and auditory canal, salivary glands have been overlooked by most researchers. Study by a city-based researcher, however, has shown that prolonged mobile phone use can be potential indicator of cancer of the parotid glands.

Dr Stuti Bhargava, an assistant professor in the department of oral medicine and radiology in VSPM Dental College and Research Centre, has done the study in three phases over the last three years. Consisting of over 300 subjects, the research led to the conclusion that several functional changes and an increase in the size of the parotid glands are observed in people with longer exposure to the radio frequency radiation (RFR) emerging from hand-held phones. These effects could range from migraine to potential indicator of cancer of the parotids.

"Previous researchers had spoken about the dangers to organs like brain and auditory canal. While these are protected by the skull, the parotid glands are not. They are also at a closer proximity to mobile phones when the devices are in use. This made me believe that they would be potentially at greater risk of adverse effects from phone use," said Dr Bhargava, explaining the reason for the study.

The glands are located in front of the ear, beneath the skin of the face, the area most in contact with a cellphone. Radiations emitted by the phone when it is being used can be directly absorbed by the glands through the skin. This makes parotid glands especially vulnerable to changes, if any, resulting from mobile phone heat and radiation.

Based on this hypothesis, people using mobile phones for longer durations in a day were observed. It was seen that they showed a marginal increase in protein content in the glands, increase in their size, increase in amount of saliva generated (salivary flow rate), and increased blood flow rate in the glands. "All these changes are indicative of possible neoplastic changes in a heavy user in the near future. These people also had other minor complaints including tingling sensation of skin, heating of skin and many of them suffered from migraine," said Dr Bhargava.

The study has won much acclaim having been published in multiple international journals. The first phase of the study was even awarded the best paper award at a national symposium. After completion, it was presented at Asia Pacific Dental Congress Dubai 2014 for which the travel grant was sanctioned by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences.

Other than Dr Bhargava, several people from VSPM Dental College were associated with the study including Dr Mukta Motwani and the late Dr Vinod Patni as the guides, Dr Arpita S and Dr Amit S as contributors. Dean Dr Usha Radke and vice-dean of Dr Ramakrishna Shenoi also contributed.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Times of India, Payal Gwalani, 05 Nov 2014

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 640   Next›  Last»