«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 543   Next›  Last» 

The risk of subjective symptoms in mobile phone users in Poland - An epidemiological study
Poland Created: 8 Apr 2014
OBJECTIVES: To assess the type and incidence of subjective symptoms related to the use of mobile phones in Polish users.

The study was conducted in 2005 using a questionnaire survey. Although it has been quite a long time, up to now, no such data have been published for Poland. The questionnaire consisted of 53 questions concerning sex, age, education, general health, characteristics of a mobile phone (hand-held, loud-speaking unit) as well as the habits associated with its use (frequency and duration of calls, text messages, etc.) and complaints associated with using a mobile phone.

As many as 1800 questionnaires were sent. The response was obtained from 587 subjects aged 32.6±11.3 (48.9% women, 51.1% men); the age did not differ significantly between men and women. The subjects owned a cell phone for an average of 3 years. Majority of the respondents used the phone intensively, i.e. daily (74%) or almost daily (20%). Headaches were reported significantly more often by the people who talked frequently and long in comparison with other users (63.2% of the subjects, p = 0.0029), just like the symptoms of fatigue (45%, p = 0.013). Also, the feeling of warmth around the ear and directly to the auricle was reported significantly more frequently by the intensive mobile phone users, compared with other mobile phone users (47.3%, p = 0.00004 vs. 44.6%, p = 0.00063, respectively). Most symptoms appeared during or immediately after a call and disappeared within 2 h after the call. Continuous headache, persisting for longer than 6 h since the end of a call, was reported by 26% of the subjects.

Our results show that the mobile phone users may experience subjective symptoms, the intensity of which depends on the intensity of use of mobile phones.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: PubMed / Int J Occup Med Environ Health, Szyjkowska A et al, 01 Apr 2014

Govt. phone data retention is against human-rights - top EU court rules
Belgium Created: 8 Apr 2014
(Reuters) - The European Union's highest court ruled on Tuesday that an EU directive requiring telecoms companies to store the communications data of EU citizens for up to two years was invalid.

"The Court of Justice declares the Data Retention Directive to be invalid," the court said in a statement.

The data-retention directive was introduced in March 2006 after bombings on public transport in Madrid and London. The aim was to give the authorities better tools to investigate and prosecute organized crime and terrorism.

It required telecoms service providers to keep traffic and location data as well as other information needed to identify the user, but not the content of the communication. The records were to be kept from six to 24 months.

Austrian and Irish courts asked the European Court of Justice to rule if the law was in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. The law also caused a public outcry in Germany.

"It entails a wide-ranging and particularly serious interference with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data, without that interference being limited to what is strictly necessary," the court said.

"The Court takes the view that, by requiring the retention of those data and by allowing the competent national authorities to access those data, the directive interferes in a particularly serious manner with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data," it said.

"Furthermore, the fact that data are retained and subsequently used without the subscriber or registered user being informed is likely to generate in the persons concerned a feeling that their private lives are the subject of constant surveillance," it said.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Reuters, Pawel Kopczynski, 08 Apr 2014

The Swiss flats where smoking, painting and mobile phones are banned
Switzerland Created: 8 Apr 2014
Years ago (in 2006) we had a case history by Charles Cavanaugh, which is a front-runner to this case, only Charles NEVER got ANY Help from anyone!, so I suppose he still lives in his car, in the woods and the mountains, as best he can!
First Low then High Frequency

But now the Swiss have at least started to wake up to the the on-coming catastrofic health effects of EMR!
Block of flats has been built in Zurich for people who claim to suffer from hypersensitivity to chemicals and electromagnetic radiation
No smoking, no perfume and no mobile phone use – the list of rules at one newly built block of flats in Zurich is so long it is a wonder anyone chooses to live there.
But for those who do, there is good reason.
The 15 apartments have been designed specially for people who claim to have a condition known as “multiple chemical sensitivity”.
Sufferers fall ill when exposed to the slightest waft of perfume or whiff of cleaning products.
Most of the residents in the building in Switzerland's Leimbach say they also become weak and sick when near mobile phones or other wireless devices that emit radio waves or electromagnetic radiation.

While few doctors recognise the affliction, The Healthy Life and Living Foundation, which campaigns for greater recognition for MCS sufferers, convinced the Zurich authorities to provide land for the £4.1 million building.

Christian Schifferle, 59, the head of the foundation, said he had suffered from MCS since being exposed to toxic fumes in his parents’ furniture factory as a young child. He has spent most of his adult life camped in a trailer in the pure air of the Swiss Alps. “All my life it has been like I was only half alive,” he said.

Mr Schifferle said he only realised he was not alone at the age of 35, when he discovered an American book on MCS. “It makes me weak, anxious, I can’t breathe, my lungs hurt, and I get dizzy.”

Swiss officials say the building, which opened in December, is the first of its kind in Europe. They estimate that about 5,000 people suffer from MCS in Switzerland. Many become isolated and say they cannot function in the modern workplace.

Lydia Trueb, a Zurich housing office spokeswoman, said: “We wanted to help these people to have a calm home where they hopefully will be less sick.”

People entering the building are asked to switch off their mobile phones, although they do not work anyway, as the apartments have a built-in shield against electromagnetic radiation which blocks mobile reception. There is no wi-fi, but there are landlines and Internet connections. The few cleaning and personal hygiene products allowed are on display in the lobby.

The block has odourless plaster on the walls, and construction workers were banned from smoking or using aftershave. Even so, Mr Schifferle spends only a few days a week in his flat, as he says he can still smell traces left by the builders.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Conclusions of the Canadian report confirm that EHS research, and its review, are polluted by the bad science
Finland Created: 7 Apr 2014
Recent publication of the Canadian report on Safety Code 6 (RF-EMF and health) brought again to limelight the problem of electromagnetic hypersensitivity – EHS.

Yet again, scientists and lay audiences were fed with the standard mantra in the Canadian report: “The symptoms are real, but what causes them is a mystery”. The same mantra is propagated by WHO, ICNIRP and numerous expert committees.

I have the feeling that this mantra was introduced to the EMF research area few years ago for the sole purpose to “get the EHS people off our backs”. Designers of this mantra assumed that by showing compassion for the suffering of EHS people they will alleviate tensions that exist between EHS sufferers and decision-makers.

They were mistaken. The mantra did not alleviate tensions and EHS sufferers more and more forcefully demand solution to their problem. Simple admission that their symptoms and suffering are real is not enough. What is needed is both, precautionary approach and a serious research effort to find out what and how causes EHS.

Unfortunately the arena of EHS research is polluted with bad science. Badly designed studies waste money and produce bad conclusions. This status quo is perpetuated and new funding is granted for new badly designed studies. Are scientists gone mad? Don’t they understand what they are doing?

*SNIP* ..read the entire article via the source link below
Click here to view the source article.
Source: BRHP blog, Dariusz Lesczcynski, 06 Apr 2014

The Difference Between Science and the Law
Canada Created: 6 Apr 2014
I would like to point out that there is a difference between science and the law. Even if 50% of the scientific studies failed to show any biological effect from non-ionizing radiation, under U.S. law (and probably Canadian law, as well) citizens have a legal right not to be forcibly exposed.

There is a huge legal difference between consensual exposure (such as the voluntary use of a cell phone or wifi) versus non-consensual exposure (i.e. from the Smart Grid, cell phone towers (masts), police and military installations, involuntary ambient wifi, etc.). The difference in legal terms can be referred to as contributory negligence or volenti no fit injuria, meaning that the injured party willingly participated in causing his or her own injury. It can also encompass legal theories of unclean hands, since the cell phone or wifi user knowingly exposed others when he or she chose to use the radiation-emitting device.

Battery laws protect persons against non-consensual, harmful or offensive contact, including radiation and other airborne exposures. A substance that causes headaches, insomnia, skin rashes, tinnitus, sinus and lung congestion, difficulty breathing, heart palpitations, etc. is most certainly offensive, if not harmful.

Negligence is the failure to exercise due care of a reasonably prudent person. Would a reasonably prudent person expose others to a substance that 50% of the scientific studies have proven to cause harm, while the other 50% of the scientific studies have been inconclusive? Under the law, just one scientific study proving harm is enough, regardless of how many studies are inconclusive. This is not an election, nor is it a popularity contest. This is the public health, a precious resource that must be safeguarded.

The public policy debate is held to different standards than the scientific debate. The public policy objective is to protect the public health from unnecessary risk. Since we have had and can have safe wired telephone, internet, electricity, cable TV, etc, the risk of exposing billions of people to non-ionizing radiation for the sake of these utilities is entirely unnecessary. Even if all of the studies were inconclusive and none of the studies proved any biological effects, the risk would still be unnecessary. The current scenario is more compelling, whereby 70% of the independent (non-industry funded) studies prove a biological effect (according to Dr. Henry Lai). To allow this entirely unnecessary exposure is unconscionable criminal negligence.

While further research may be desirable, we do not need to wait for any further research to be conducted. We must take action now to protect the public health. We must dismantle the Smart Grid and restore the safe analog grid. We must remove all wifi and restore safe wired internet connections. We must disconnect all cell phone towers (masts) and restore safe wired telephone service. We must take down all television and radio transmitters and satellites giving preference to safe cable conduits. Prudent public policy demands this.

I hope this helps to clarify the legal and public policy perspective.

Source: OmegaNews, via email, 06 Apr 2014

Wi-Fi Radiation Induces “Diabetic-Like Status” in Rats
Tunisia Created: 6 Apr 2014
In a recent study published in the journal of Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, an investigation was performed to study the effects of exposing rats to radiofrequency (RF) radiation from Wi-Fi devices and to further study the possible protective role of administering an olive leaf extract to reduce the damage in liver and kidney cells of the exposed rats.

According to the article, there has been “considerable interest in finding natural antioxidants from plant materials in order to repair several diseases caused by endogenous or environmental factors such as artificial EMF.” It was further stated that olive leaf extracts have been shown to have “anti-oxidative” properties.

As a part of the study, rats were exposed to RF radiation from Wi-Fi devices broadcasting with a signal at 2.45 GHz. Rats were exposed for only one (1) hour per day for a total of 21 consecutive days. This type of exposure was referred to as “sub-chronic.” Control rats were tested under the same conditions but there were no RF emissions from the Wi-Fi devices.

A principal finding of the study was that “RF exposure induced a diabetes-like status through alteration of oxidative response” and that “RF exposure could decrease body weight between the first and the last day.” In addition, it was found that administration of the “olive leaves extract was able to correct glucose metabolism disorder by minimizing oxidative stress induced by RF in rat tissues.”

Here is another selected quotation from the published article:

“Indeed, RF radiation induced glucose metabolism disorders. … The disorders in glucose metabolic could be explained by alteration in function, structure, and/or secretion of insulin after RF exposure. … Furthermore, RF radiation could affect the glucose uptake by peripheral tissues.”

In the figure shown below, slide A shows normal liver cells with “well preserved cytoplasm, nucleus, nucleolus.” However, in the case of RF exposed rats, slide B shows liver cells that “were hypertrophied with clear cytoplasm” and that “have a vegetal cell shape, the enclaves were optically empty represent[ing] the steatosis [fatty cells] which defined hepatic lesions.”

The results summarized above appear quite stunning, and the implications are clear; RF radiation induces adverse biological effects upon cell structures and the functioning of those cells. Use of antioxidant agents, in this case olive leaf extracts, may be able to provide a protective role against damage caused by RF radiation exposure.

The “highlights” of the published article as summarized at the ScienceDirect website are:

- The exposition to the radio frequencies (2.45 GHz) induced metabolic disorders.
- The exposition to the radio frequencies (2.45 GHz) induced a diabetic-like status.
- The exposition to the radio frequencies (2.45 GHz) induced oxidative stress.
- Olive leaves extract prevented against metabolic alterations.
- Olive leaves extract enhanced antioxidant responses.

[1] “Effects of Olive Leave Extract on Metabolic Disorders and Oxidative Stress Induced by 2.45GHz WIFI Signals,” by Salah, et. al., Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, Volume 36, Issue 3, November 2013, pages 826–834.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: ScienceDirect, Salah MB et al, 03 Aug 2013

'Unequivocal' cell phones cause cancer!
United Kingdom Created: 6 Apr 2014
Proof from Germany
Please All Take the Time to Look and Listen to this video from Burgerwelle in Germany.
'Unequivocal' cell phones cause cancer!
Kind regards,
John Weigel
Click here to view the source article.
Source: John Weigel/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

BioInitiative website updated
USA Created: 5 Apr 2014
The BioInitiative Working Group is pleased to announce a new feature on this website called ‘What’s New’.
From time to time, we will post new information that is of interest to our readers. This may include updated technical chapters, BioInitiative Working Group expert comments on scientific reviews, perspective pieces and individual commentaries, letters and press releases from the BioInitiative Working Group and important new developments on electromagnetic radiation issues.

In March and April, 2014, we updated four sections of the BioInitiative 2012 Report.

Section 1: Summary for the Public is updated with new genetic and neurological studies and statistics for those studies showing ‘effects’ and ‘no effects’ by study.

Table 1-1 is updated with the corresponding information keyed to Section 1

Section 6: Genetic Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Fields - 2014 Supplement (Dr. Lai)

Section 9: Neurological Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Fields - 2014 Supplement (Dr. Lai)

Updated Research Summaries:

The Research Summaries by Dr. Lai include published scientific study references and abstracts. These are invaluable resources that can are searchable by key words. They identify the relevant peer-reviewed, published literature that reports on biological effects of non-ionizing radiation (ELF-EMF and RFR, and static field studies).

• Research Summary on Extremely-Low Frequency EMF Free Radicals – 2014 (49 pages)

• Research Summary on Radiofrequency Radiation Free Radicals – 2014 (46 pages)

• Radiofrequency Radiation Research Summary – 2014 (606 pages of Abstracts and References)

Give us your feedback at info {-at-} bioinitiative.org
Click here to view the source article.
Source: BioInitiative Working Group, 04 Apr 2014

2'nd grader with Biologist Mom replicates Danish watercress experiment
USA Created: 4 Apr 2014
ALMONT — When the school district rolled out the Ipads this year, Aiden Fitchett noticed something new; as he did when seated near the wireless projector any time a teacher used one for a presentation: headaches. Bad ones. Bad enough that the 8-year-old second grader would come home crying from the pain.

His mom, biologist Rachel Fitchett, made a correlation between Aiden's headaches and the circumstances: wireless fidelity waves or WiFi, which has been associated with causing physical effects in a small percentage of the population.

"I knew the health risks associated with WiFi and asked the teacher to relocate him and the headaches stopped," Rachel says.

While that was great, the situation still puzzled Aiden's inquisitive mind. So when Science Fair time rolled around he knew exactly what he wanted to delve into.

"I want to know why I get headaches when I'm around wireless devices but not the wires," Aiden says. "We use a laptop at home, and we have a television set, and it's only around wireless that I get the headaches."

So Aiden set about to answer his question. Patterning his experiment after a Danish experiment by a group of 9th grade students, Aiden and his mom bought some garden cress seeds, growing trays and napkins and got to work.

Aiden placed an equal amount of garden cress seeds atop two napkins, which he placed inside two growing trays. Each was watered until damp. One tray was placed six inches from a wired laptop which was kept on the whole time.

The other tray was placed six inches from a WiFi router in a neighbor's home which was turned on the whole time as well.

Both trays received sunlight from west windows, and both rooms were kept at 69 degrees. The trays were watered daily with the same amount of water.

After six days, the results—similar to those in the Danish experiment—were stunning.

"At first Aiden was excited as the seeds started to grow, but by the second to the last day one of his notations on the WiFi sprouts was 'strange,'" Rachel says.

In the Danish experiment, the cress seeds placed near the WiFi device did not sprout at all. While Aiden's WiFi seeds sprouted, they did not look anything like the robust sprouts growing in the wired room.

The sprouts tasted different as well. Garden cress is a fast-growing herb with a peppery, tangy flavor and smell. The wired seeds tasted strong and peppery—so much so that Aiden had to run for a glass of water. The WiFi seeds had little taste at all. In fact, Aiden said they tasted "like water."

Aiden's conclusion?

"The garden cress are living and growing just like me," he says. "The ones by the WiFi were not healthy and looked crazy. Wireless devices must send things through the air that are not good for my body."

Aiden's mom tends to agree—although in more scientific terms.

"Results clearly showed reduced DNA repair capacity and cell proliferation , hence mimicking the growth of cancerous cells," she says. "The Garden Cress seeds exposed to wireless signals were in fact mutated and unhealthy."

Rachel believes when the wireless signals are intensified by use of multiple devices, so is the negative effect.

"The more that are together, the more concentrated the ill effects are," she says.

Aiden's headaches continued during computer class, so he has since been pulled.

"He's a very bright kid who excels in all subjects, Rachel says. "He doesn't need to get whatever it is they're getting in there."

Along with Aiden, Rachel and husband Matthew are parents of Caila, 6, Levi, 4, and Eliniah, 21 months.

For more information on the Danish experiment visit http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Andre_sprog/English/2013/05/17/130946.htm.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Tri-City Times, Catherine Minolli, 02 Apr 2014

Let’s not be clueless about wireless - Open Letter to Obama
USA Created: 4 Apr 2014
Before this nation makes wifi in schools like it is in coffee shops, as the president recently urged, we need to consider what this could do to our children’s brains and bodies.

Three years ago the World Health Organization declared cellphone and other wireless radiation to be a possible human carcinogen, the same category as some pesticides, lead and engine exhausts. Since then evidence has mounted that such radiation can profoundly affect human biology, altering brain metabolism, damaging animals exposed during pregnancy and reducing sperm count. Before blanketing our preschools, kindergartens and middle schools with wireless radiation we need a full life-cycle assessment of economic and health costs and benefits of wireless technology.

As you have said in other contexts, “Just because we can do something, does not mean that we should do something.”

The notion that the fast-developing brains of children benefit from digital devices flies in the face of what experts in neurodevelopment understand. Your pledge to put wireless in all schools for children from prekindergarten on does not rest on any proof that such technology is safe or that children actually learn better using such technology.

While our nation excels at many things, our wireless-based Internet connection is inferior to those of a slew of other countries, including Korea, Latvia, Romania, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic — all of which have invested in “fiber to the home” rather than wireless Internet connections. Wireless routers are costlier and less reliable and can be three to 10 times slower than wired systems that can operate at speeds of up to 1 gigabyte a second. As other technologically savvy nations appreciate, there are also important health risks posed by classrooms full of closely held wireless devices.

Growing numbers of experts in telecommunications understand that plans to phase out wired phone lines or have energy systems rely on wireless metering are frankly ill-conceived and uneconomic. A parallel interdependent network of wired fiber-optic cables is faster, safer and more secure against criminal or terrorist attacks or wide swings in weather. It is more difficult to hack into or take down a wired network than a wireless one, especially if the latter has not been properly encrypted. Bravo to Google for recently announcing its expansion of wired services in many major cities.

Studies finding wireless radiation tied to serious biological impacts have moved governments in Israel, Canada, Australia, Korea, India and Finland to advise reducing children’s exposure. Following actions in Turkey, France and other nations, the health minister of Belgium recently banned the sale of cellphones for children ages 7 and younger. What does she know that you don’t?

Ignoring these serious concerns, the mobile phone industry has treated reports of risks of cellphone radiation as inconveniences to be rapidly undermined using science as a form of public relations. When confronted with the possibility that cellphone radiation could damage the brain cells of rats way back in 1994, Motorola wrote a memo to its public relations firm noting the need to “war-game the science.” More recently, in response to the World Health Organization declaration of possible dangers of cellphone radiation, the global manufacturers forum set up a quarter-of-a-billion-dollar fund to produce defensive information, effectively attacking the credibility of the WHO and its scientists and promoting other expert reviews that counter and undermine the WHO.

We are flying blind here, as there are no studies on the safety or efficacy of microwave-based learning for young children, nor are any planned. Despite repeated advice from expert groups, the U.S. has no training or research programs underway in this field and is forced to rely on outdated science and foreign reports. One way to fund such programs would be to impose a $1 fee (split between consumers and industry) on every phone for five years to fund much-needed independent training and research to evaluate and improve the technology.

Until we have better information at hand, you should encourage the growth of fiber-optic and Ethernet cables and order the Federal Communications Commission to drop wireless expansion into schools with young children — relying instead on wired systems and keeping wireless tablets on airplane mode if they have already been purchased. Apple should develop a lightning-to-USB-to-Ethernet adapter and software driver to reduce radiation from already purchased devices.

Years ago the philosopher Immanuel Kant noted that “What man must do, he can do.” But the opposite is not true. A rigorous analysis of the full costs and benefits of wired and wireless infotech is long overdue.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Jackson Hole News & Guide, Devra Davis, 02 Apr 2014

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 543   Next›  Last»