Page 1 of 716   Next›  Last» 

National Toxicology Program Finds Cell Phone Radiation Causes Cancer
USA Created: 20 Sep 2017
Scientists from the National Toxicology Program presented their data on the genotoxicity of cell phone radiation in rats and mice at the annual meeting of the Environmental Mutagenesis and Genomics Society held in Raleigh, North Carolina from September 9-13, 2017.

Male and female rats and mice were exposed to 2G cell phone radiation, either CDMA or GSM, for 18 hours per day in 10 minute intervals. The rats were exposed to cell phone radiation at 1.5, 3, or 6 W/kg specific absorption rate (SAR) for 19 weeks from gestation day 5. The mice were exposed to radiation at 2.5, 5, or 10 W/kg SAR for 13 weeks from postnatal day 5.

DNA damage was assessed in three brain regions, in liver cells and in blood leukocytes using the comet assay. Chromosomal damage was assessed in peripheral blood erythrocytes using the micronucleus assay.

DNA damage was significantly increased:

- in the frontal cortex of male mice from either CDMA or GSM cell phone radiation exposure,
- in peripheral leukocytes of female mice from CDMA exposure, and
- in the hippocampus of male rats from CDMA exposure.

There were no significant increases in micronucleated red blood cells in rats or mice.

The authors concluded that, "exposure to RFR [radio frequency radiation] has the potential to induce measurable DNA damage under certain exposure conditions."

*SNIP* read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: SaferEMR blog, Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., 12 Sep 2017

Confusion and resistance hits UK smart meter plan, says new report
United Kingdom Created: 18 Sep 2017
Lack of consumer engagement, insufficient information is slowing down the UK’s £11bn energy smart meter roll-out, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Sussex.

Lack of consumer engagement, insufficient information is slowing down the UK’s £11bn energy smart meter roll-out, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Sussex.

The government plans to install smart meters in every home by 2020 to reduce national household energy consumption by 5-15%, and thereby help meet the UK’s climate change targets.

But despite a £100m marketing campaign, the smart meter programme has not met its targets due to consumer apathy and confusion, especially in the case of vulnerable people, say the researchers.

Professor Benjamin Sovacool, lead author of the study and director of the Sussex Energy Group, writes:
“We have recently seen how the government had to backtrack on its ambitions to make installation in every home obligatory; they are basically admitting a degree of failure.”

After a year of the Smart Meter Implementation Programme (SMIP) energy providers had only managed to install the meters in 7% of homes. To hit the target by 2020, suppliers would need to install 40,000 smart meters per day for the duration of the programme.

Sovacool points to consumer confusion and even resistance to the programme.
“This is a clear sign that they need to improve consumer engagement and the provision of information about the benefits of the technology. This is especially true when it comes to vulnerable classes of people, such as the elderly and those less educated.”

Dr Paula Kivimaa, Senior Research Fellow at the University of Sussex, writes:
”Given the removal of several important policy instruments targeting energy efficiency and demand reduction in buildings in 2015, the SMIP has a crucial role in advancing these policy targets. However, the failure to engage consumers effectively puts the success of this programme at risk.”

The full study is available for free until the end of September:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Electronics Weekly, Richard Wilson, 18 Sep 2017

“BLUNDER” by ICNIRP’s and WHO EMF Project’s bosses
Sweden Created: 18 Sep 2017
Recently, I came across two short videos recorded in 2016 in Stockholm. The occasion was the seminar at the SSI concerning health effects of EMF. In these videos, Emilie van Deventer, Head of the WHO EMF Project and Eric van Röngen, Chairman of the ICNIRP, answered to question from Swedish journalist Mona Nilsson.

Question was straightforward, whom should Swedes trust, the evaluation of science done by ICNIRP or the opinion of 220 scientists who signed an Appeal submitted to the United Nations and the WHO. The Appeal questioned the validity and reliability of evaluation of science done by ICNIRP that is used by the WHO EMF Project and by the telcom industry as the proof that radiation emitted by the wireless communication devices is not a human health hazard. This opinion is, of course, contrary to the opinion of IARC wherein 2011 radiation emitted by the wireless communication devices was classified as possible human carcinogen.

As seen from the video, Emilie van Deventer completely avoided response to the question from Mona Nilsson. Interestingly, Emilie van Deventer did not defend at all the correctness of the ICNIRP’s science evaluation that was done for the WHO EMF Project. Emilie van Deventer did not say that the ICNIRP evaluation of science is the correct evaluation.

*SNIP*... Read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: BRHP blog, Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski, 13 Sep 2017

New telecoms code turns landowners off mast agreements
United Kingdom Created: 12 Sep 2017
Farmers and landowners across the country are pulling out of telecoms agreements because of concerns over a tightening of communications legislation.

Strutt & Parker’s telecoms expert, Robert Paul, said that the new Electronic Communications Code, introduced in the Digital Economy Act 2017, would come into force in early 2018.

The code will affect all telecoms agreements, including BT wayleaves, and gives operators wider powers.

See also: What farmers need to know about the new telecoms code

Mr Paul said it was vital for landowners to understand how they may be affected

“The new code restricts the ability of a landowner to remove an operator, even if the lease has been breached or the rent has not been paid.

“An operator can only effectively be removed for redevelopment and then only after 18 months’ notice and potentially two separate court actions,” Mr Paul said.

He added: “Site providers, which include farmers and landowners, are now recognising the potential impact that an agreement for electronic communications equipment on their building or land might have on their normal business operations.”

Code concerns
Mr Paul said: “We are seeing many rural landowners who are unwilling to grant rights voluntarily because of concerns about the impact of the new code.”

And Mr Paul suggested that the number of landowners seeking to remove operators under the present code was up at by least 30% as they “woke up to the potential difficulties the new agreement could impose”.

The more onerous legislation was drawn up after telecoms companies complained that the existing code was unwieldy and was blocking government aims to improve coverage.

The operators voluntarily agreed to sign up to a new agreement, which imposed on them obligations to extend coverage in return for a new code improving their position.

Unrealistic demands
Developing phone technology would require a greater density of sites which, albeit with a smaller footprint, are still likely to give rise to the same issues and nuisances for site providers, said Mr Paul.

“Demands from operators for 24/7 access rights are often unrealistic and there are often good business reasons for restricting access.

“Operators’ demands for unfettered rights to fell trees, even for sites in commercial woodlands, are another major issue,” he said.

2020 network ‘unlikely’
Yet the Home Office, which is responsible for acquiring sites in more remote areas, is offering just £4,000 while also seeking wide assignation, sharing and access rights, said Mr Paul.

These issues and a growing reluctance to enter into agreements could threaten ambitions for greater coverage unless a resolution is found, he suggested.

“The terms being offered are proving unattractive to landowners and therefore the delivery of the improved network by September 2020 now looks unlikely.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Farmers Weekly, Jonathan Riley, 11 Sep 2017

InPower Episode #1: A Mass Action of Liability
Canada Created: 10 Sep 2017
The InPower Docu-Series illustrates a powerful new method to restore social justice and accountability. Episode #1 focuses on solving the ‘smart’ meter problem: how we can prevent and reverse the installation of this dangerous technology, through holding corporate executives and government actors financially accountable — for the first time ever. And in so doing, we can restore safety in our homes, and bring balance to our world.

First, watch episode #1:

and then go to:
to sign up for notification of episode #2.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: InPower Movement, 26 Aug 2017

Electronic Silent Spring, September Newsletter
USA Created: 10 Sep 2017
Read the newsletter here:
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Electronic Silent Spring, Katie Singer, 09 Sep 2017

The Guardian: If you don’t have a mobile phone, tell us why
United Kingdom Created: 9 Sep 2017
An online survey from the Guardian: As the world welcomes the latest iPhone this week, we want to hear from those who don’t have a mobile phone at all.

Apple will launch the iPhone 8 on Tuesday. The new phone is set to be a radical change for the company as it celebrates the device’s 10th anniversary.

While for some, this will be a day that they have eagerly awaited, others may be less enthused. And there may be a few who don’t have a smartphone or even a mobile altogether.
Share your experiences

We want to hear from those who don’t use mobile phones, or keeps the use of them to a limited amount. Why have you decided to do this? How has it changed your life? Has it made it easier to sleep? Do you miss key events? Are you considering getting a smartphone ever? Share your views.

Access the online survey via the souce link below (link at bottom of page)...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMFacts, Don Maisch PhD, 09 Sep 2017

Safety calls for removing wireless technology from schools
USA Created: 7 Sep 2017
Wireless technology must be removed from schools, libraries, and other public buildings because it is carcinogenic, is an endocrine disrupter, and causes other detrimental biological effects.

Wireless technology — used by cellphones and other devices — works by sending messages encoded in radiofrequency (RF) radiation, often in the microwave range. For instance, Wi-Fi operates at the same frequency as microwave ovens.

The Federal Communications Commission based its safety standard for RF exposure on the amount of tissue heating, but evidence shows that tissue heating is not the only mechanism by which RF radiation can cause harm.

The Department of the Interior has called the FCC limits “nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.” The Environmental Protection Agency stated that the FCC limits “are thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, nonthermal exposure situations.” The EPA also said, “The FCC’s exposure guideline is considered protective of effects arising from a thermal mechanism but not from all possible mechanisms. Therefore, the generalization by many that the guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified.”

Exposure to RF radiation from wireless technology is now universal because society today has made this exposure unavoidable. This is a serious problem because researchers continue to find exposure to RF radiation causes detrimental biological effects at levels far below the FCC limits.

Most people are unaware that carrying a cellphone in a pocket or holding it against your head is not an FCC-approved use.

"The evidence indicating wireless is carcinogenic has increased and can no longer be ignored," Dr. Anthony Miller, an expert cancer researcher, said July 31 at an event in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, sponsored by the Environmental Health Trust where international experts presented the best available science on cellphone and wireless radiation. Miller, who was a senior epidemiologist at the International Agency for Research on Cancer when it evaluated the carcinogenicity of radiofrequency radiation in 2011, is one of the experts now calling for reclassification of the radiation emitted by wireless technology from Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic to humans) to Group 1 (carcinogenic to humans).

The U.S. National Toxicology Program released results last year showing that exposure to nonthermal levels of RF radiation emitted by wireless technology causes cancer and DNA breakage. According to Miller, the study provides the final piece of evidence needed to classify cellphone and wireless radiation as a human carcinogen.

Cancer is only one of the possible deleterious outcomes of exposure to RF radiation from wireless technology. Studies show that such radiation is an endocrine disrupter and can affect cardiac function, increasing the risk of cardiac arrest.

Contrary to industry assertions, studies have identified mechanisms by which RF radiation can have serious biological effects at levels far below the outdated FCC limits. These mechanisms also explain why some people can experience immediate adverse cardiac and neurological effects upon exposure to RF radiation.
Click here to view the source article.
Source:, Catherine Kleiber, 31 Aug 2017

Smart meters: 'Dog's breakfast' that'll only save you 'a tenner' – report
United Kingdom Created: 4 Sep 2017
Smart meters will cost each British household £420 and save people just “a tenner a year”, according to reports.

Cost-benefit estimates for the British smart meter programme vary hugely, with figures ranging from modest savings of around £26 a year (as we reported last year) to the Mail on Sunday’s latest guess coming from Gordon Hughes, an economist at the University of Edinburgh.

“The introduction of the smart meter is a dog's breakfast. At best it is misconceived and an astonishingly expensive project. For those claiming it will bring major savings, I say they need to grow up,” Hughes dutifully raged for the Sunday newspaper.

The £11bn project, which came about in part because of European Union directive 2009/72/EC, snappily titled “Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC (Text with EEA relevance)”, along with a similar directive on gas meters, is supposed to put smart meters into 80 per cent of households by the year 2020.

An EU webpage last updated a couple of weeks ago says the UK is on track to meet this target, though the source of its claim is unclear. The same page states: “While cost estimates vary, the cost of a smart metering system averages between €200 and €250 [£184 - £230] per customer, while delivering benefits per metering point of €160 [£147] for gas and €309 [£284] for electricity along with, on average, three per cent energy savings.”

Four years ago a British report revealed that the cost of installing smart meters in the UK is £390 per household, while more recent estimates are that the benefits are now as low as £11 per household, agreeing with the University of Edinburgh’s Hughes’ estimates to the Mail on Sunday. All costs for installing the UK smart meter network, from the backend systems to the consumer unit in your home, are met by hiking up your gas and electricity bills.

A Dutch study from earlier this year also found that some smart meters are capable of giving wildly inaccurate readings, exaggerating energy consumption by up to 582 per cent.

The hugely expensive project was not helped when El Reg revealed that the monopoly comms hub supplier for the north of the UK, EDMI, wanted millions of pounds to change a single component in its hub.

As government figures have gradually watered down their language when referring to the project – the Conservatives’ 2016 manifesto referred to “offering” smart meters to households – it could be inferred that the “80 per cent coverage by 2020” target will be missed. Estimates vary widely over how many have been installed so far but the figure appears to be somewhere in the low millions, as compared to the UK’s 27 million households.

With the UK slated to leave the EU by 2020, it is unlikely that any financial penalties will result if the target is missed. ®
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Register, Gareth Corfield, 4 Sep 2017

Letter: Cancer worry over radiation
United Kingdom Created: 31 Aug 2017
Steve Grove is right, Letters, July 19 - Most low-level microwave radiation is found inside houses rather than outside them, and I agree with him – where are the facts on mobile phone masts?.

Our Government insists that drugs are tested before they are let loose on the public. No one tested the phone masts or the mobiles or the more dangerous Dect phones – Dect phones are like your own mini mobile phone mast in that they give out low-level microwaves in your home day and night. No one tested wi-fi or Bluetooth.

Basically it is left to us the public to prove that they are damaging our health.

The Government made billions selling the airwaves to the mobile phone companies who make around $17bn a year.

The economy profits. GNP goes up. Young and old are happily addicted to their phones.

The problem is that no one can see these microwaves – yet it seems to me that it is self-evident that, as our bodies/nerves work on electrical impulses, they can be interfered with by numerous other forms of radiation.

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence – for instance, in nearby Crediton there were five cancers in four homes directly behind each other in the beam of a phone mast.

These people are not all old – the cancers in the house nearest the mast being a five-year-old child and her young mother.

I spent five years going around the cancer and other illness clusters around mobile phone masts in England, houses where even the dogs and pet rats got cancers.

There are independent scientific studies that show low-level microwaves damage health. Those studying them soon stop getting research grants. The mobile phone companies do most of the studies which are short and quick and show they don’t affect us.

I can point to scientists who have been removed or sacked if they get the wrong results.

More than 6,000 doctors in Germany signed the Frieburger Appeal, pointing out the illnesses their patients were prone to when living near mobile phone masts. Our English doctors are not allowed to comment.

Phone masts, such as the new one proposed in Totnes, are for 4G phones, smart meters that GCHQ warns us can be hacked, and probably for those passing through Totnes on the train.

The Government has tied the hands of planners and our district councillors. Mobile phone masts go up as if they were lamp posts.

The planners are not allowed to object on health grounds and the councillors will incur huge fines if they do – we will then pay them via our council tax, and the masts will go up anyway.

Sue Webster

Bridgetown, Totnes
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Totnes Today, Sue Webster, 26 Jul 2017

 Page 1 of 716   Next›  Last»