- Forums - Sign Up - Reply - Search - Statistics -
www.mast-victims.org forum / Health / Mobile Phone/Mast Radiation
<< . 1 . 2 .
Author Message
Tom
Member
# Posted: 14 Jun 2009 23:27
Reply 


It seems bb has already been hit hard by the radiation, judging from his spelling?

Clear line of sight is always bad, we have direct line of sight to the next mast at one point of the garden, though it is about 2,8 km away. one can still receive 20-30 µW/m˛ (peak hold) with a broadband meter.;( Perhaps even a little more, UMTS isn't that easy to measure with those meters, due to the broad UMTS signal (5 MHz). Though it is both GSM + UMTS.

Anonymous
# Posted: 10 Nov 2010 13:58
Reply 


I was once worried about EMF but I found an amazing website with great products to protect me and my whole family and still enjoy modern technology. It is also full of useful and helpful information (If your actually interested in the statistics), but also covers other helpful tips.

Wave Shield

charles
# Posted: 15 Nov 2010 18:36
Reply 


@Anonymous,

if you feel that they do protect you, you are not electrosensitive.
Those gimmicks are only for cell phones.

I prefer the BioProtect card (Germany).
There is a small one for placing on the cell phone, and costs € 4,-
And there is the one for carrying on youe body, for € 24,-

Many electrosensitives do experience a great relief by it.
See: http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina164b.html

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 16 Nov 2010 00:40
Reply 


I had high hopes for the BioProtect body card, but it did absolutely nothing. Not better, not worse. It might as well have been a supermarket clubcard.

EG.

charles
# Posted: 16 Nov 2010 13:41
Reply 


@ericgeneric

I have quite e number of persons who benefit from it (also my wife).
Amazingly, some persons even ecperienced instant relief instantly.

You may have a look at: http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina11c.html and scroll to 26-03-2010 the military, one can see a screendump of a peak at just 6.660 MHz or 6.66 GHz.
This peak went on and off. When the peak was on, this person was shaking in pain. When the peak was gone, the pain diminished.
When he held my BioProtect card, his pains lessened immediately.
The peak was only 27 nW/m˛ (measured RMS) which is fairly low.

When I asked the dutch as wellas the belgian authorities who did have a license for this signal, I came upon a stone wall.
However, later I never could detect this signal again.

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 16 Nov 2010 14:07
Reply 


I can imagine people might get relief from it; the same thing happens with me and protective items which others have said are totally ineffective. We're all different, I guess. What works for one, does nothing for another.

EG.

ann
# Posted: 25 Nov 2010 17:21
Reply 


This website seems really strange to me.
Irradiating water? Perhaps irradiating the plants one could come to some conclusion that the microwaves are damaging the seedlings but I cannot see how the irradiated water could affect the growth!
H2O is still H2O before and after irradiation. In any case most of the microwaves will be absorbed by the first few layers of molecules of water.
(H2O, 2 should be a subscript)

Charles
# Posted: 25 Nov 2010 19:38
Reply 


Water is special substance, that can hold a large amount of information.
That is the reason why homeopathy works. No particle of the original siubstance is there anymore to be found, but it still works, because the information is still there.

The negative information of radiation remains in the water, and therefore the seedlings stay behind in growth.

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 26 Nov 2010 01:46
Reply 


What's that saying....The Memory of Water? I remember something about that from school. Not much, mind.

EG.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 26 Nov 2010 17:59
Reply 


ericgeneric,

Here how I've understood it:
Water can "remember" the structure of f.x bacterial DNA.
Water molecules form a "cast" around the DNA and can retain that state while the original DNA is removed from the water by filtering and dilution.

The cover story of New Scientist, april, 2006 was called "The Quantum Elixir" and described how water molecules act around DNA:

"Biochemists have long suspected water molecules are important: concentrations of them around DNA appear to correlate with biological activity.
It turns out that water undergoes radical changes as it approaches the surface of DNA. As the [water] molecules draw near the double helix, the seething network of hydrogen bonds within bulk water becomes disrupted, and the motion of individual molecules becomes more and more sluggish.
The latest research focuses on what happens around the "troughs" in the double helix formed by specific base pairs. It seems that water molecules linger longer and rotate more slowly around some base pairs than others. Suddenly that link between hydration levels and biological activity doesn't seem so perplexing. After all, the base pairs on DNA are the building blocks of genes, and their sequence dictates the order in which amino acids are stitched together to make proteins. If water molecules linger longer around some base pairs than others, the level of hydration will mirror the sequence of base pairs."


It turns out that DNA reflects background radiation in a way that it creates a signature frequency for that DNA. For certain bacteria, these frequencies have been found to be in the kilohertz range.
After the bacteria itself has been removed from the solution, the water, now mimicking the bacterias structure, keeps on reflecting background radiation and producing the signature frequency that the original DNA did. Thus the "information" of the DNA can be safely introduced into the body so the immune system can learn to recognize the signature frequency of the bacteria without the bacteria itself being present to infect, spread and do damage :-)
Problem is, that the more ambient radiation (wireless, power-frequency, the lot), the more biologically active the electromagnetic environment becomes. Also real bacteria become more "potent" since their "signals" become stronger (like a biological RFID chip). After some time the immune system burns out attempting to respond to all this alarm.

The "establishment" idea of how the immune system recognizes bacteria is flawed. It says that only physical receptors detect bacteria when they fit into a "keyhole" receptor. When you think of how complex 3 dimensional physical structures, say, proteins, enzymes and bacterial DNA are and that the conventional view insists that the DNA in question must have a ridiculously precise orientation, speed and location to miraculously fit into such a "keyhole" receptor - it's a complete wonder that anything would happen in the body under such assumed conditions.
Far more likely is that immune system receptors "sense" the bacteria in some way via electromagnetic forces. A recent study by Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier provides evidence for this mechanism.
In the absence of natural radiation within certain frequency bands, evolution has enabled our bodies to leverage that "silence" to listen for potiential intruders. Problem now is that "silence" has turned into a persistent screaming noise of artificial ambient radiation.

Update:
I recommend that everyone reads this 2 page paper called "Nature abhors a vaccum" by Dr. Grahame Blackwell.

wired
Member
# Posted: 17 Dec 2010 20:26
Reply 


Ok several points here:
1) Don't buy or use mobile phones. Mobile phone operators only put these masts up because there is a demand for this service.
2) Discourage friends and relatives from getting mobile phones.
3) Don't BUY anything that is wi-fi.

Kill the demand.

wired
Member
# Posted: 17 Dec 2010 20:33
Reply 


Hi All
How can I shield my house from the signal sent out by mobile phone masts?
There are at least 3 mobile phone masts about 150 metres from my house.
If I line the walls of my house with lead will this help to block the mobile phone signal entering the inside of my house?

Any help or information is much appreciated.
Thanks

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 18 Dec 2010 03:15
Reply 


Good advice, wired, albeit slightly wishful thinking I fear! It is the best way to kill the demand, but sadly the public are constantly misled, lied to and encouraged with freebies and sexy ads and offers (a definite air of tempting kiddies with sweets to lure them into danger), so they are either ignorant or resistant to stopping.

As for your own situation with the 3 masts; the best thing - really, the only thing to do, is move. I hate having this said to me as well, but the way things are now, and given that you have them all so close (ours are barely 100 meters and are frying us), just get the heck out of there. Modern mast emissions are too strong for the shielding materials to work as well as they might have done before.

EG.

YorkshireGirl
# Posted: 18 May 2011 23:37
Reply 


Hi there,

I hope someone is still around to help me out.

I have just recently found out that we are about to have a 'Network Rail' mast erected in the next few weeks. Apparently there is a loop hole in the law meaning they do not need planning persmission. After reseaching and finding out all of the health risks possibly involved, I am seriously concerned with the location of the new mast.
I was given a map with a cross to show where the mast will be and a circle around it showing a 100m circumference of the area 'affected'. This area includes 2 schools, 2 pre-school nursery's and 100's of houses. Some of these houses are less than 10m away.
I am hoping someone could tell me if there is anything we can do to prevent this mast being put up. With having children myself who live and school in that radius I am extremely shocked that they are able to get away with this.
All responses greatly appreciated.

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 19 May 2011 02:29
Reply 


Hi,

For the good of your own health, and that of your children, move away now. Get the ball rolling. Until these insane (evil) laws are changed, and these companies are prevented from stamping all over innocent people's lives, all we can do is stay as far away from these abhorrent masts.

100m is too close, let alone 10. Don't put children near it. And, since the government refuse to acknowledge health risks as a factor in the location of masts, you don't have to give that as a reason to ANYONE when you sell your home and take your children out of the school. They cannot have it both ways; either they accept what these masts do, or they don't.

Best of luck.

EG.

Will
Member
# Posted: 22 May 2011 16:38
Reply 


The policy of not siting next to schools is bull**** there are 3 primary schools within 200m of my nearest mast and I noticed a new one the other week within 100m of a primary school. They actually seem to want to put them next to schools. Is this supposed to be aversion therapy or is it actually brainwashing the children. Fact is, what they do and what they say do not agree. Call it hypocrisy if you want, I just call it lies.

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 22 May 2011 19:58
Reply 


I call it lies as well.

Hadn't thought of aversion therapy being a tactic, actually. Probably giving them too much credit...more likely to influence the kids' mental development and behaviour.

EG.

stuart
# Posted: 19 Aug 2011 19:01
Reply 


Its obvious to me that were not worth(money wise) looking after (people whom are phiscally affected by wireless technologies) otherwise people would not regard technology over our loved ones. People love their phones, laptops, wifi access and rather be distracted with these than face up to the real consquences which ly ahead. People would rather communicate than be lonely(not all people) and most people think that communicating to select type of person rather than your neighbour is better for them. Is it? its for you to decide. Me, I keep it simple and face reality.
Stuart

Anonymous
# Posted: 7 Dec 2011 11:58
Reply 


There is a 9 metre high mast 500m from my house and a 33.5metre mast working for 4 mobile phone companies about 1000 metres from both our house and my daughters nursery...are these too close to cause me concern do you think?

me
# Posted: 7 Dec 2011 12:50
Reply 


Have you measured the actual levels in your home?
If in the UK, there are firms which hire out meters for a week.
EMFields hire out their Acoustimeter.

Anonymous
# Posted: 16 Dec 2011 22:54
Reply 


Hi,

I am trying to compose an objection to the local council for a proposed mast approx. 50m from my back garden (and young children). I have been on sitefinder and noted all the masts cyrrrently in the area, but the transmission power is given in dbW. I have no idea how these figures translate to V/m or W/m2. Could someone please explain?

Thanks,

Anonymous
# Posted: 27 May 2013 22:54
Reply 


Hi

Looking at purchasing a house in a rural area and we noticed on our second visit a base mast for 3g located behind a barn some 150m away from the house. The mast is about 25 metres high.

Ive read everything thats been written, what can be done about this? Can the mast be moved/removed?

Any help or thoughts much appreciated.

Henrik
Admin
# Posted: 27 May 2013 23:29
Reply 


Hi Anonymous,

Try looking up the location on SiteFinder:
http://www.sitefinder.ofcom.org.uk/search
and have a look if there are more mast site lurking that you might not have noticed.
(note you have to zoom in until "balloon" markers show up on the maps. Each balloon represents a mast site. Click a balloon to get info about the site).

Simple rule of thumb is that the main-beam of a mast hits ground at a distance of about 10 times the height of the mast. You don't want to be in the main-beam! Actual distance depends of course on the tilt of the transmitting panels on the mast. Since it's located rurally, I'd expect the main-beam to extend far and if you're really lucky, will send the main-beam over your heads. But I wouldn't bet on it. If you're really considering buying that property, make sure to have a proper electromagnetic radiation survey done. When I write "proper" I mean: done by a non-industry party.
You'll want to know actual radiation levels and not just some "percentage of guidelines" value which really make no sense since the guidelines only offer protection against short-term thermal exposure.
I've seen industry measuring equipment calibrated to show zero unless the guidelines are exceeded. So get someone independent to survey the place.

If you need help interpreting the info from SiteFinder then ccopy/paste it here.

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 28 May 2013 01:19
Reply 


Anonymous...I'd choose somewhere else to live. Those numbers add up to a whole lot of trouble.

EG.

Anonymous
# Posted: 28 May 2013 22:02
Reply 


thank you appreciate the advice and you've just reinforced what we had already decided, we were hoping that there was a way to get the mast moved/removed, but i think it was maybe wishful thinking ... thank you

Anonymous
# Posted: 23 Jun 2013 10:01
Reply 


New study links over 7,000 cancer deaths to cell phone tower radiation exposures

http://www.naturalnews.com/040905_cell_phone_towers_radiation_cancer.html

vips
# Posted: 13 Aug 2013 20:47
Reply 


advertisement spam link removed by admin

ericgeneric
Member
# Posted: 13 Aug 2013 22:14
Reply 


I agree with you but today's life without mobile can't be possible. We need mobile. So please stop thinking like it.

Rubbish. Take your agenda elsewhere.

EG.

<< . 1 . 2 .
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Underlined Style  Image Link  URL Link 

» Username  » Password 
You can post anonymously by entering a nickname with no password (if that nickname has not been taken by another member) or by leaving both fields empty. If you have an account you can also log in from this page without posting a message.
 

These forums are running on free forum software miniBB™ © 2001-2022