News for USA

«First  ‹Previous   Page 183 of 184   Next›  Last» 


The Cellular: Health and safety chronology.
USA Created: 3 Jul 2006
May 24, 1992: Susan Reynard, 33, of Madeira Beach, Sun-Sentinel reports a lawsuit filed by her husband,
David, blames his wife's use of a cellular telephone for her brain tumor.

Jan. 21, 1993: David Reynard appears on CNN's Larry King Live with experts on radio-frequency and microwave radiation.
The next day, prices of cellular telephone stocks tumble and some customers cancel their service.

Jan. 29, 1993: U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., asks the U.S. General Accounting Office to research whether the phones pose a health risk.

Jan. 29, 1993: Thomas Wheeler, president of the Cellular Telephone and Internet Service Association, calls a news conference to say more than
10,000 studies over 40 years show no evidence linking cell phones and health hazards but promising to pay for new research to allay the public's
fears. Wheeler said the FDA would oversee the research.

Feb. 2, 1993: Markey convenes a hasty telecommunications subcommittee meeting to hear testimony about the safety of cellular telephones.
Several experts, including Dr. Quirino Balzano, vice president of Motorola, based in Plantation, testify.

Feb. 4, 1993: The FDA reports "there is no proof that cellular telephones are harmful" but recommends consumers limit the time they spend talking
on the phones if they are concerned.

July 16, 1993: Thomas Wheeler, president of the CTIA, announces the industry will spend up to $25 million over five years to study health and safety aspects of cell phone use but backs off the pledge to allow the FDA to oversee the work.

Nov. 4, 1994: GAO releases its report to Markey's committee and says it could find no research on long-term human exposure to low levels of radiation
specifically from cellular telephones. The GAO recommends more study.

1994: Researchers Henry Lai and Narendra Singh find DNA breaks in brain cells of rats exposed to RF/MW radiation at low levels.

June 1996: The World Health Organization establishes a research consortium to study health effects of electromagnetic fields including emissions from
wireless telephones.

May 13, 1997: An Australian researcher, Michael Repacholi, announces mice exposed to cell phone radiation got more cancers than an unexposed group.

June 19-20, 1999: At a colloquium on the possible health impact of cell phones in Long Beach, Calif., George Carlo, who directed the cell phone industry's research program, announces that the phones may cause cancer and other health damage. The industry disputes his claims.

May 11, 2000: The United Kingdom's Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones, chaired by Sir William Stewart, issues a report recommending a "precautionary approach" to the use of cell phones until more research is done.

Oct. 14, 2004: Researchers at the Karolinksa Institute in Sweden release a study showing an increased risk of acoustic neuroma, a tumor on a nerve linking the ear and brain, in people who used cell phones for 10 years.

Dec. 21, 2004: A consortium of researchers in several European countries announces findings showing DNA breaks in some types of human cells and rat cells from exposure to radiation from cell phones, and urges caution.

Jan. 11, 2005: The National Radiological Protection Board in the United Kingdom recommends minimizing exposures, especially in children, until more research is done.

June 20, 2005: The French Agency for Environmental Health Safety recommends that children use mobile phones only under certain conditions and that they use a hands-free set until more is known about possible health risks.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: S: Compiled by Nancy McVicar..sun-sentinel

Cellphone talkers as bad as drunk drivers: study
USA Created: 30 Jun 2006
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - People who talk on cellphones while driving, even using "hands-free" devices, are as impaired as drunk drivers, researchers said on Thursday.
"If legislators really want to address driver distraction, then they should consider outlawing cell phone use while driving," said Frank Drews, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Utah who worked on the study.
The researchers used a driving simulation device for their study, published in the summer 2006 issue of Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
They studied 40 volunteers who used a driving simulator four times -- while undistracted, using a handheld cell phone, using a hands-free cell phone and while intoxicated to a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level -- the average legal level of impairment in the United States -- after drinking vodka and orange juice.
Three study participants rear-ended the simulated car in front of them. All were talking on cellphones and none was drunk, the researchers said.
Motorists who talked on either handheld or hands-free cell phones drove slightly more slowly, were 9 percent slower to hit the brakes, and varied their speed more than undistracted drivers.
Drivers with an 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level drove a bit more slowly than both undistracted drivers and telephone users, yet more aggressively.
"Driving while talking on a cell phone is as bad as or maybe worse than driving drunk," said Drews, who said alcohol was involved in 40 percent of the 42,000 annual U.S. traffic fatalities.
Just like many people who have been drinking, the cellphone users did not believe themselves to be affected, the researchers found.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: REUTERS, Maggie Fox, 30 jun 2006

Consumer Groups Warn Public of Cell Phone Industry Tactics; Aronstein Statement, AARP New York State Director
USA Created: 28 Jun 2006
UPDATE: Consumer Groups Warn Public of Cell Phone Industry Tactics; Aronstein Statement, AARP New York State Director
NEW YORK, June 15 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement by Lois Aronstein, AARP New York state director:
The cell phone industry is working hard in the final days of the legislative session to keep New Yorkers from the consumer protections they deserve. In fact, Mywireless.org is even soliciting community-based consumer and senior organizations to join their "grassroots" efforts to defeat the Cell Phone Consumer Protection Act. They also recently released a poll to state legislators claiming that, if passed, consumer protection legislation will hurt consumers and seniors.

Mywireless.org is an organization created and funded by the nation's largest cell phone companies. In fact, mywireless.org's office in Washington DC is located in the same office as the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), the cell phone industry's trade association and lobbying arm. CTIA and its member cell phone companies are doing everything in their power to defeat the legislation which will provide cell phone consumer protections to New Yorkers.

Passing the legislation will make the industry more competitive and responsive to consumers. For example, the bill lengthens the trial period for cell phone purchasers so they won't get caught in lengthy contracts prior to seeing their first bill. The bill also requires cell phone companies to improve their coverage maps and to disclose all hidden fees and surcharges.

Attached is a letter signed by New York State's leading consumer organization that is being sent to community-based organizations statewide alerting them to beware of solicitations for support from Mywirless.org. AARP is urging New York legislators to stand up to the industry and deliver the cell phone consumer protections we need and deserve.

(An AARP survey of New York cell phone consumers can be found on-line at:
http://www.aarp.org/research/reference/publicopinions/aresearch-import-870.html )

NOTE TO EDITORS: Adds Michael Burgess to list who signed letter

---

Dear Friend,

Please be alerted to the fact that an organization you have probably never heard of, Mywireless.org, is circulating a memo asking organizations to oppose the NYS Wireless Consumer Protection Act and peddling a poll that purports to represent consumers' attitudes on the need for cell phone consumer protections.

Mywireless.org is an organization created and funded by the nation's largest cell phone companies. In fact, their office in Washington DC is located in the same office as Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA ) the cell phone industry's trade association and lobbying arm.

Please don't be fooled by the claims or materials of this organization. Well-known and respected consumer groups such as Consumers Union, NYPIRG, the
Public Utility Law Project, and AARP NY have been working with legislators for three years to pass this legislation. We strongly support this legislation and
urge you to do the same.

This consumer protection legislation would:

-- Allow cell phone consumers to cancel their cell phone contracts 15 days after they receive their first bill without paying a penalty;

-- Require cell phone companies to provide more accurate coverage maps of where cell phones will work including the E 911 emergency features; and

-- Require companies to disclose to consumers all fees and charges that go with buying a phone.

This legislation is needed and the public supports it.

1. The cell phone industry now outpaces used car dealers with the most complaints registered nationally, according to the Better Business Bureau.

2. The New York State Consumer Protection Board logged over 3,700 complaints about telephone and cellular phone billing and services, ranking it the industry with the second most complaints in 2003.

3. An AARP NY 2004 survey of New York residents age 18+ shows overwhelming support for the provisions of this bill. For example, nine out of ten New Yorkers surveyed support giving consumers the right to terminate their cell phone service up to fifteen days after receiving their first bill.

Unlike other organizations, we stake our reputations on the information we provide to legislators and the public. We have attached a copy of the complete poll released by AARP in 2004 showing strong support for the provisions of this legislation. The survey report is based on data from a telephone survey of 801 New York residents age 18 plus that was conducted from May 6 through May 17, 2004. The survey has a sampling error of plus/minus 3.5 percent.

We urge you to look with a skeptical eye upon any other polling on this issue and to consider the source of it.

Please call 1-800-869-5861 today and urge your legislators to pass this bill before the end of the legislative session in Albany.

Thank you.
Sincerely,
Lois Aronstein, State Director, AARP NY
Russ Haven, Legislative Counsel, NYPIRG
Chuck Bell , Program Director, Consumers Union
Ben Wiles, Senior Attorney, Public Utility Law Project
Michael Burgess, Legislative Representative, New York Statewide Senior Action Council

http://www.usnewswire.com/
/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
6/15/2006 4:28:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: State Desk
Contact: David Irwin, 518-447-6723; Bill Ferris, 518-447-6712
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milt Bowling
Clean Energy Foundation
Phone: 1 888 436 2152
or 604 436 2152 in Vancouver
Fax: 604 436 2154
www.cleanenergycanada.com
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Catherine Gamba/Milt Bowling

Cellphone start-ups struggle in US - report
USA Created: 20 Jun 2006
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A wave of cellphone start-ups, hoping to attract users to television, music and other premium services, are floundering as they fight over a thin slice of the US market, a report said on Tuesday.
About 30 wireless operators and hundreds of related wireless technology firms have been launched in the past four years, but many are struggling and face losses, The Wall Street Journal said.
In the past 16 months, start-up cellular carriers raised at least $1 billion, according to Rutberg & Co., a San Francisco investment bank, the newspaper said.
But only 1 percent of cellphone users regularly use their phones to watch videos, even as the number of U.S. cellphone users has doubled over the past six years to 215 million, it said.
Venture capitalists and others remain hopeful that the new-media offerings, which have proved popular in Asia, will prove the same in the United States, the Journal said.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: REUTERS, 20 Jun 2006

The better choice by the wireless industry would be to implement measured steps aimed at true consumer protection.
USA Created: 16 May 2006
Letter by Dr George Carlos “7 October 1999 (In French and English)
Mr. C. Michael Armstrong
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
AT & T Corporation
32 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 100313-2412

Dear Mr Armstrong:
After much thought, I am writing this letter to you, personally, to ask your assistance in solving what I believe is an emerging and serious problem concerning wireless phones. I write this letter in the interest of the more than 80 million wireless phone users in the United States and the more than 200 million worldwide. But I also write this letter in the interest of your industry, a critical part of our social and economic infrastructure.

Since 1993, I have headed the WTR surveillance and research program funded by the wireless industry. The goal of WTR has always been to identify and solve any problems concerning consumers' health that could arise from the use of these phones. This past February, at the annual convention of the CTIA, I met with the full board of that organization to brief them on some surprising findings from our work. I do not recall if you were there personally, but my understanding is that all segments of the industry were represented.
At that briefing, I explained that the well-conducted scientific studies that WTR was overseeing indicated that the question of wireless phone safety had become confused.
Specifically, I reported to you that:
The rate of death from brain cancer among handheld phone users was higher than the rate of brain cancer death among those who used non-handheld phones that were away from their head;
The risk of acoustic neuroma, a benign tumour of the auditory nerve that is well in range of the radiation coming from a phone's antenna, was fifty percent higher in people who reported using cell phones for six years or more, moreover, that relationship between the amount of cell phone use and this tumour appeared to follow a dose-response curve:
The risk of rare neuro epithelial tumours on the outside of the brain was more than doubled, a statistically significant risk increase, in cell phone users as compared to people who did not use cell phones;
There appeared to be some correlation between brain tumours occurring on the right side of the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head;

Laboratory studies looking at the ability of radiation from a phone's antenna to cause functionalgenetic damage were definitively positive,and were following a dose-response relationship.
I also indicated that while our overall study of brain cancer occurrence did not show a correlationwith cell phone use, the vast majority of the tumours that were studied, were well out of range of the radiation that one would expect from a cell phone's antenna. Because of that distance, the finding of no effect was questionable. Such mis-classification of radiation exposure would tend to dilute any realeffect that may have been present. In addition, I reported to you that the genetic damage studies we onducted to look at the ability of radiation from the phones to break DNA were negative, but that the positive finding of functional DNA damage could be more important, perhaps indicating a problem that is not dependent on DNA breakage, and that these inconsistencies needed to be clarified.
I reported that while none of these findings alone were evidence of a definitive health hazard fromwireless phones, the patternof potential health effects evidenced by different types of studies,from different laboratories, and by different investigators raised serious questions.
Following my presentation, I heard by voice vote of those present, a pledge to " do the right thing in following up these findings" and a commitment of the necessary funds.
When I took on the responsibility of doing this work for you, I pledged five years. I was asked to continue on through the end of a sixth year, and agreed.
My tenure is now completed. My presentation to you and the CTIA board in February was not an effort to lengthen my tenure at WTR, nor to lengthen the tenure of WTR itself. I was simply doing my job of letting you know what we found and what needed to be done following from our findings. I made this expressly clear during my presentation to you and in many subsequent conversation with members of your industry and the media.
Today, I sit here extremely frustrated and concerned that appropriate steps have not been taken by thewireless industry to protect consumers during this time of uncertainty about safety. The steps I am referring to specifically followed from the WTR program and have been recommended repeatedly in public and private for and by me and other experts from around the world. As I prepare to move away from the wireless phone issue and into a different public health direction. I am concerned that the wireless industry is missing a valuable opportunity by dealing with these public health concerns through politics, creating illusions that more research over the next several years helps consumers today, and false claims that regulatory compliance means safety. The better choice by the wireless industry would be to implement measured steps aimed at true consumer protection.
Alarmingly, indications are that some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings suggesting potential health effects, have repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including children, and have created an illusion of responsible follow up by calling for and supporting more research. The most important measures of consumer protection are missing:
complete and honest factual information to allow informed judgement by consumers about assumption of risk; the direct tracking and monitoring of what happens to consumers who use wireless phones; and, the monitoring of changes in the technology that could impact health.
I am especially concerned about what appear to be actions by a segment of the industry to conscript the FCC, the FDA and The World H ealth Organization with them in following a non-effectual course that will likely result in a regulatory and consumer backlash.
As an industry, you will have to deal with the fallout from all of your choices, good and bad, in the long term. But short term, I would like your help in effectuating an important public health intervention today.
The question of wireless phone safety is unclear. Therefore, from a public health perspective, it is critical for consumers to have the information they need to make an informed judgement about how much of this unknown risk they wish to assume in their use of wireless phones.
Informing consumers openly and honestly about what is known and not-known about health risks is not liability laden - it is evidence that your industry is being responsible, and doing all it can to assure safe use of its products. The current popular backlash we are witnessing in the United States today against the tobacco industry is derived in large part from perceived dishonesty on the part of that industry in not being forthright about health effects. I urge you to help your industry not repeat that mistake.
As we close out the business of the WTR, I would like to openly ask for your help in distributing the summary findings we have complied of our work. This last action is what always has been anticipated and forecast in the WTR's research agenda. I have asked another organization with which I am affiliated, The Health Risk Management G roup (HRMG ) , to help us with this public health intervention step, and to put together a consumer information package for widespread distribution.
Because neither WTR nor HRMG have the means to effectuate this intervention, I am asking you to help us do the right thing.
I would be happy to talk to you personally about this.

Sincerely yours

George L. Carlo P h.D, M.S., J .D
Chairman
Wireless Technology Research LLC
1711 N. Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington DC 20036 -2811
(202) 785 3939 telephone (202) 785 -3940 facsimile
wtr@ hrmgroup.org e-mail
fooshu@ aol.comfooshu@ aol.comjtukey@ popmail.ucsd.edu.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Next-up.org

Wireless network use grows
USA Created: 11 May 2006
One in five broadband users in the US and Europe is hooked up to a wireless network in their home, prompting analysts Strategy Analytics to suggest that Wi-Fi is emerging as a "mass market phenomenon".

The report found that seven per cent of all households now have a wireless network. The US is the leading market with 8.4 per cent penetration, followed by the Nordics with 7.9 per cent.

In the UK penetration rates are at 6.1 per cent and 5.1 per cent in Germany.
When the numbers are crunched to include just broadband users, the survey found that 20 per cent of broadband subscribers across the US and Europe now use Wi-Fi to share their internet connection between PCs and other devices.
"Wi-Fi has become the preferred networking technology for affluent early adopters," analyst David Mercer said. "Rising ownership of laptop PCs and other portable internet devices will make Wi-Fi the dominant home networking choice for most broadband subscribers."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Register, 11 may 2006

A new interview with professor Olle Johansen
USA Created: 28 Apr 2006
Yet another splendid interview by Layna Berman at "Your Own Health and Fitness", KPFA FM, San Francisco Bay Area, is now on-line for one week:
"The Science of RFR Health Risks --- Olle Johansson, PhD, associate professor at the Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, discusses new research about the dangers of exposure to radiofrequency radiation from cell phones and wireless technologies."

To all, Open the website ,click on latest show upper right

(Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)
Tuesday, April 25th
Click here to view the source article.

The Hidden Hazards Of Microwave Cooking
USA Created: 28 Apr 2006
Is it possible that millions of people are ignorantly sacrificing their health in exchange for the convenience of microwave ovens?
Why did the Soviet Union ban the use of microwave ovens in 1976? Who invented microwave ovens, and why?
The answers to these questions may shock you into throwing your microwave oven in the trash.
Over 90% of American homes have microwave ovens used for meal preparation. Because microwave ovens are so convenient and energy efficient, as compared to conventional ovens, very few homes or restaurants are without them. In general, people believe that whatever a microwave oven does to foods cooked in it doesn't have any negative effect on either the food or them.
Of course, if microwave ovens were really harmful, our government would never allow them on the market, would they? Would they? Regardless of what has been "officially" released concerning microwave ovens, we have personally stopped using ours based on the research facts outlined in this article.
The purpose of this report is to show proof - evidence - that microwave cooking is not natural, nor healthy, and is far more dangerous to the human body than anyone could imagine.
However, the microwave oven manufacturers, Washington City politics, and plain old human nature are suppressing the facts and evidence. Because of this, people are continuing to microwave their food - in blissful ignorance - without knowing the effects and danger of doing so.

Read more at source: http://www.mercola.com/article/microwave/hazards.htm
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Kalle Hallberg: by Anthony Wayne and Lawrence Newell

Stress is linked to depression
USA Created: 18 Apr 2006
A hormone released during periods of long-term stress has been directly linked to depression for the first time.
Scientists already knew that many people with depression had high levels of the stress hormone cortisol. But it was not clear whether cortisol caused the condition or was a consequence of it.
The new study provides strong evidence that long-term exposure to cortisol contributes to the symptoms of depression. The researchers from Harvard Medical School exposed 58 mice to cortisol for both short and long periods of time. The animals were then tested by being placed in a small dark compartment.

Mice given the stress hormone for more than two weeks took significantly longer to emerge from the compartment into a brightly lit open field. They were more fearful and less willing to explore a new environment. Chronic treatment also dulled their reactions to startling stimuli.
The findings, published in the journal Behavioural Neuroscience, fit in with human evidence. People with Cushing's disease, in which too much cortisol is released, commonly suffer depression and anxiety. People receiving corticosteroid therapy for inflammatory conditions and other disorders are also known to have mood problems.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Independent, John von Radowitz, 18 April 2006

Court victory is a first for cell-phone programmers (with British comments) USA
USA Created: 15 Apr 2006
PLEASE READ! IMPORTANT!!:

Court victory is a first for cell-phone programmers (with British comments) USA
Sharesa Price thought it was just another in a series of sinus infections.
Her head and eyes hurt, and she was vomiting.
But then Price had a seizure, and a brain scan found something far more troubling.

"When I got home, the phone was ringing. It was the doctor's office, and they told me, `Brace yourself. Honey, you have a brain tumor.'
I was standing by the refrigerator, and I just collapsed, saying, `no, no, no, it can't be a brain tumor,'" she recalled.

After her diagnosis in 1999 and surgery to remove most of the tumor, Price started looking for answers.
She became convinced that exposure to radio-frequency radiation on the job, where she programmed cell phones for new customers, had caused
the tumor.

In May, an administrative law judge who handles worker's compensation claims awarded her $30,000 to pay her medical bills and other expenses.
Price may be the first person to convince a judge that her illness was caused by radio-frequency radiation.
The decision is unlikely to have widespread repercussions for the cell phone industry, however, because the settlement was small.

Price's customers at Advanced Communications Systems in northern California were doctors, firefighters, police departments and security departments
for casinos, and she loved her work. She used a cell phone several hours each day, and the room in which she worked contained transmitters that
emitted radio-frequency radiation, she said.

Price said when she filed a workers comp claim, her boss fired her, eliminating her health insurance. Then she lost the case.
The Native American single mother of two daughters was devastated.
She turned to Tribal Health, a government health agency for Native Americans, to get anti-seizure medication.

"If I hadn't been Indian, I would have died," she said.

Her former boss, Dave Bohlen, said that he did not fire Price, that she quit based on her doctor's advice that she not return to work there.
Bohlen said he dropped the insurance because she was no longer an employee.
He called her worker's comp case "frivolous" and said there was no proof her tumor was caused by working in his small shop.

"There's nothing harmful going on here," he said.

After Price recovered from brain surgery, she went to the Internet and found researchers studying the biological effects of radio-frequency radiation,
and got to know them.

"I would call them up and say, `You are absolutely dead on. If a rat could talk, this is what it would say. I'm the human rat.' "

Price couldn't find an attorney to take her case until she contacted Carl Hilliard, a semi-retired lawyer and president of the Wireless Consumers Alliance,
a California-based consumer-advocacy group.
Hilliard volunteered to represent her pro bono and re-filed her workers comp case.

Hilliard said his group has represented cell phone users in issues involving poor service, billing problems and misrepresentations by cell phone service
providers.
"We're the ones who filed a case saying federal law does not pre-empt state law [on consumer issues] and won that case four years ago,"
Hilliard said.

Hilliard brought in Dr. Nachman Brautbar, an occupational toxicologist and clinical professor of medicine at the University of Southern California School
of Medicine, to review Price's medical records.

Brautbar has been an expert witness in a number of high-profile cases, including the chromium poisonings from polluted drinking water portrayed in the
movie Erin Brockovich.

Brautbar reviewed Price's case and wrote a report supporting her claim that the tumor was caused by exposure to radio-frequency radiation.

"It's not a money issue, suing the company, it's a health and safety issue," said Price, who speaks to school assemblies and classes about the need to
use a headset when talking on a cell phone.
"We need to explain to people that just like putting on condoms, you have to take this precautionary measure to make the product be as safe as it can be."

Nancy McVicar can be reached at nmcvicar@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4593.
Through MWN http://www.microwavenews.com/fromthefield.html

Comment By Dr. Grahme Blackwell www.starweave.com in Britain : It's a start !
.
"Note" that we have here a legal precedent of non-ionising (radiofrequency) radiation being ruled to have caused a tumour - something the NRPB, WHO etc etc say is not possible, (But it's directly in line with findings of the REFLEX Project, and other studies, that say it IS).

Comment by Eileen O´Connor of SCRAM Britain:

It is a step in the right direction, let’s hope it now open’s up the flood gates for claims against the mobile phone Industry.

Comment by Agnes: www.mast-victims.org: $30,000 is no compensation for a brain tumour caused by mobile technology.
The compensation that the Mobile provider H3G UK Ltd. demands from an unsucesssful protester of radiation
exposure in their own home in Britain comes to £. 407.398.06 (British pound Sterling) which is more than 20 times
the awarde compensation.

Click here to view the source article. Source: By Nancy McVicar Health Writer.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-otumor02oct02,0,5431813.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

Best regards
Agnes.
www.mast-victims.org
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Source: By Nancy McVicar Health Writer.

«First  ‹Previous   Page 183 of 184   Next›  Last» 
 News item: