News for

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 5   Next›  Last» 

Lancet Oncology posted a summary of the IARC working group's decision to classify RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen
Created: 23 Jun 2011
Lancet Oncology posted a summary of the IARC working group's decision to classify RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen this morning.
In other news, check out our latest Short Takes on: ** The attendance at last week's Bioelectromagnetics Society meeting in Nova Scotia;
** The U.S. military paying for free access to IEEE standards on both ELF and RF;

** How the dueling tumor location studies from feuding Interphone groups are confusing the U.K. press, among others.
Read all the news on our home page, http://www.microwavenews.com
Best, Louis Slesin
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Louis Slesin/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Danger of Cell Phones During Takeoff and Landing
Created: 12 Jun 2011
Brian Ross investigates the threat mobile devices may pose to airplanes.

Watch the 3 minute video via the source link below.

Related news:
Jun 2011, United Kingdom: Your mobile phone REALLY might make planes crash, leaked air transport study reveals
Jun 2011, USA: Report: Phones really could cause planes to crash
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Yahoo News, 09 Jun 2011

Electronic devices may cause plane crashes - and older aircraft are especially vulnerable. Considering what they do to people.!
Created: 21 Jan 2011
Passengers increasingly forget to switch off laptops and e-readers which can interfere with electronics
The growing obsession with mobile phones and other gadgets could create a ‘perfect storm’ of interference with aircraft instruments to cause a crash.
As more and more portable electronic devices come on the market, passengers are becoming increasingly blasé about potential dangers to sensitive cockpit equipment, experts say.
Others may forget to switch off one of their many – including laptops and electronic readers.

Most personal devices transmit a signal and all of them emit electromagnetic waves which, in theory, could interfere with the plane’s electronics.
At the same time, older planes might not have the best protection against the latest generation of devices.
'The technical advancements for wireless devices and portable electronic equipment is so rapid, it changes every week,' said Doug Hughes, an electrical engineer and air safety investigator.

'The advances in airplanes take 20 years.'
But it is not as simple as saying that if a device is on, it is a problem.
'It’s a good news-bad news thing,' said David Carson, an engineer with Boeing.

'Electronic devices do not cause problems in every case. And that’s good.
'It’s bad in that people assume it never will.'
There is no recent survey of how often passengers ignore restrictions on use of their gadgets but seven years ago Bill Strauss, then a doctoral student at Carnegie Mellon University, monitored the signals emitted from phones during flights and discovered that they were frequently being left on.
So, Mr Strauss said, the deterioration of planes and advance or decline of electronic devices over time is the immeasurable factor that is never taken into account by passengers.

'A plane is designed to the right specs, but nobody goes back and checks if it is still robust,' said Mr Strauss.

'Then there are the outliers — a cellphone that’s been dropped and abused, or a battery that puts out more (power) than it’s supposed to, and avionics that are more susceptible to interference because gaskets have failed.
'And boom, that’s where you get interference.
'It would be a perfect storm that would combine to create an aviation accident.'
Safety experts suspect that electronic interference has played a role in some accidents, although it is difficult to prove.
One crash in which mobile phone interference with a plane's navigation was cited as a possible factor involved a 2003 flight in Christchurch, New Zealand.
Eight people died when the plane flew into the ground short of the runway.
The pilot had phoned home, and the call remained connected for the last three minutes of the flight.
In the final report, the New Zealand Transport Accident Investigation Commission stated, 'The pilot’s own cellphone might have caused erroneous indications' on a navigational aid.

Since 2000, there have been at least 10 voluntary reports filed by pilots in the U.S. with the Aviation Safety Reporting System, administered by NASA.
In 2007, one pilot recounted an instance when the navigational equipment on his Boeing 737 had failed after takeoff.
A flight attendant told a passenger to turn off a hand-held GPS device and the problem on the flight deck went away.

Another of the contributory factors is the plane's altitude when it is subject to electromagnetic interference.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) bans the use of electronics below 10,000 feet because pilots have less time at lower altitudes to deal with a problem.

It is up to each individual airline to set the policy at higher altitudes.
'There’s not enough evidence to warrant a change,' said Les Dorr, a spokesman for the FAA.

Many airlines conducted experiment to decide whether to allow passengers to use phones before takeoff, to see if mobile phones would interfere with systems.
At American Airlines, people dialed cellphones from out-of-service planes parked at various airports.
'They found no interaction with the aircraft instruments on any aircraft type,' said Tim Smith, a spokesman for American Airlines.
As a result the airline, like most others, decided to allow permit the use of phones at the gate before departure and after landing.

Widespread: Even pilots and cabin crew have been known to call home
But as the number of different devices increases and people become more reliant upon them, there is also a balance to strike between what passengers want, and what is safe.

One airline passenger, Nicole Rodrigues of Los Angeles, acknowledges that she listens to music on her mobile phone when she is not supposed to.
'In my head, I imagine it not being a problem,' she said.
'The whole airplane is filled with electronics that are constantly on.
'Is my little cellphone going to make that big of a difference?'

Even cabin crew - charged with enforcing the rules - flout them, but more through ignorance than malice.
'I don’t believe it is general knowledge that someone could plug in an iPod and potentially harm the aircraft — even among the flight attendant and pilot community,' said Dinkar Mokadam, an occupational safety specialist with the Association of Flight Attendants.

Tom Hendricks, head of safety and operations for airline trade group the Air Transport Association, said: 'We’re accommodating the wishes of our passengers.
'They wish to use these devices.'
John Darbo, an air safety consultant and former airline executive who was a member of the group that helped the FAA develop rules, said airlines could not police passengers or stop them from bringing electronics on the airplane.
'Do you expect us to do that?' he asked.
'That’s absurd. What we have to do is tell them what’s going on, elicit their cooperation and harden the airplanes.'
By Liz Thomas. Daily Mail
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Agnes Ingvarsdóttir. www.mast-victims.org

‘Electromagnetic Phenomena and Health – A Continuing Controversy?’
Created: 28 May 2010
Dear All,
The proceedings for‘Electromagnetic Phenomena and Health – A Continuing Controversy?’,
10 September 2008, The Institute of Physics, London, UK, are now available at: http://iopscience.iop.org/1755-1315/10/1

For my own chapter, please, go to: http://iopscience.iop.org/1755-1315/10/1/012005/pdf/1755-1315_10_1_012005.pdf

Best regards
Yours
Olle

(Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
&
Professor
The Royal Institute of Technology
100 44 Stockholm
Sweden)

http://iopscience.iop.org/1755-1315/10/1/012005/pdf/1755-1315_10_1_012005.pdf
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Olle Johansen/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Is Dirty Electricity Making You Sick?
Created: 11 Dec 2009
Is Dirty Electricity Making You Sick?
Too many electromagnetic fields surrounding us--from cell phones, wifi, and commonplace modern technology--may be seriously harming our health. Here's how to minimize your exposure.

Fox news on electrosmog 8.12
http://video.foxnews.com/12332056/electrosmog/?category_id=51159be5212057bdece5a791436b44246af96bf8

Prevention article
http://www.prevention.com/cda/article/is-dirty-electricity-making-you-sick/9e60d47569225210VgnVCM10000030281eac____/health/healthy.lifestyle/creating.healthy.habits/0/0/3?print=true&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prevention.com%2Fcda%2Farticle%2Fis-dirty-electricity-making-you-sick%2F9e60d47569225210VgnVCM10000030281eac____%2Fhealth%2Fhealthy.lifestyle%2Fcreating.healthy.habits%2F0%2F0%2F3
Click here to view the source article.
Source: MN

ScienceDirect Alert: Pathophysiology, Vol. 16, Iss. 2-3,2009
Created: 29 Jul 2009
New Volume/Issue is now available on ScienceDirect
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science>;
<http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/scidiralert.rbi/;categ=medicinedentistry;subcat=pathol;ISSN=09284680;sz=728x90>;

<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/5138-2009-999839997-1345066>; Pathophysiology <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09284680>;

Volume 16, Issues 2-3 <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/issue/5138-2009-999839997-1345066>; , Pages 67-250 (August 2009)

Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Special Issue Edited by Martin Blank
1. Editorial Board <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4WV0XFY-1&amp;md5=e4d2e9bdb9ee059085f51097f9f38fd9>;
Page CO2

Preface

2. Preface <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VRWNH1-4&amp;md5=53bce6429939b5cc1e43ae98e3c3ab90>;
Pages 67-69
Martin Blank

EMF Effects on DNA

3. Electromagnetic fields stress living cells <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VS3NYH-1&amp;md5=99c4268a0000aa4fb1d81bc100edab10>;
Pages 71-78
Martin Blank, Reba Goodman

4. Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VRWNH1-5&amp;md5=ec48bb76eb7bb781ada330c71daea078>;
Pages 79-88
J.L. Phillips, N.P. Singh, H. Lai

5. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VTVJNM-1&amp;md5=84a08f91c0cc8f33b33a0dbf3e8e78a2>;
Pages 89-102
Hugo W. Ruediger

EMF Effects on the Brain

6. Increased blood–brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4W0345T-1&amp;md5=d0e3298d1020c4b0b1d29c4fd5f01613>;
Pages 103-112
Henrietta Nittby, Arne Brun, Jacob Eberhardt, Lars Malmgren, Bertil R.R. Persson, Leif G. Salford

7. Epidemiological evidence for an association between use of wireless phones and tumor diseases <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VS3NYH-2&amp;md5=b81764117dfdb176ce0570380905c005>;
Pages 113-122
Lennart Hardell, Michael Carlberg, Kjell Hansson Mild

8. Mobile phone base stations—Effects on wellbeing and health <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VRWNH1-2&amp;md5=3c9e392fb5b64245713a8e311aa144bf>;
Pages 123-135
Michael Kundi, Hans-Peter Hutter

9. Estimating the risk of brain tumors from cellphone use: Published case–control studies <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4W14HMG-1&amp;md5=fb6182acb12f861ca1071b357f0ee186>;
Pages 137-147
L. Lloyd Morgan

EMF in the Environment

10. Long-term exposure to magnetic fields and the risks of Alzheimer's disease and breast cancer: Further biological research <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VT5CHR-1&amp;md5=5f0fcd4631db1f09e6a2b0f726599261>;
Pages 149-156
Zoreh Davanipour, Eugene Sobel

11. Disturbance of the immune system by electromagnetic fields—A potentially underlying cause for cellular damage and tissue repair reduction which could lead to disease and impairment <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4W4JR04-1&amp;md5=c89c7a079b50e200509d4485571542c1>;
Pages 157-177
Olle Johansson

12. Reproductive and developmental effects of EMF in vertebrate animal models <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VT17NS-1&amp;md5=e08923de298bbbd657b0e61f3c65b5df>;
Pages 179-189
Aris F. Pourlis

13. Electromagnetic pollution from phone masts. Effects on wildlife <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VRWNH1-1&amp;md5=b9b08366e712a5bdb6b0abdb71583f44>;
Pages 191-199
Alfonso Balmori

14. FM-radio and TV tower signals can cause spontaneous hand movements near moving RF reflector <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VS3NYH-3&amp;md5=9b62e7cd0edb561ff59a3abc19922cee>;
Pages 201-204
Paavo Huttunen, Osmo Hänninen, Risto Myllylä

15. Cell phone radiation: Evidence from ELF and RF studies supporting more inclusive risk identification and assessment <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VRWNH1-3&amp;md5=f26b92e7fae5e4288355a22d29e0892d>;
Pages 205-216
Carl Blackman

Science as a Guide to Public Policy

16. Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Towards realism and precaution with EMF? <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4WBH58H-1&amp;md5=c29c950628093162a48d107275c923ee>;
Pages 217-231
David Gee

17. Public health implications of wireless technologies <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4VV1B6P-1&amp;md5=d730288817d8fb03825e347035672cc2>;
Pages 233-246
Cindy Sage, David O. Carpenter

18. The London Resolution <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?-ob=GatewayURL&amp;_method=citationSearch&amp;_urlVersion=4&amp;_origin=SDVIALERTHTML&amp;_version=1&amp;_uoikey=B6TBB-4W2V4HW-2&amp;md5=cf842a45ce2e33323164fa48351c8cbd>;
Pages 247-248

Send my e-mail in plain text format <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/account>;

Modify or Remove My Alerts <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/alerts>;
Access the ScienceDirect Info site <http://www.info.sciencedirect.com>; if you have questions about this message or other features of this service.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Iris Atzmon

Kamakura is beautiful place, but now kamakura is microwave city.
Created: 24 Mar 2009
There are 18 persons who died of leukemia called the cancer of blood.
mast, mast, mast....
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/theme-10006482910.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10175408846-10117964255.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10175408846-10117964248.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10164905406-10054807643.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10159657448-10106715784.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10159657448-10112856715.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10159657448-10112856708.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10183021138-10123288001.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10183021138-10123287996.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/image-10078014145-10052121729.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/theme-10006484337.html
http://ameblo.jp/kitakamakurakeitaing/theme-10006482910.html

Kamakura city, It is the City where Nobel prize winner Kawabata Yasunari lived.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HeV4VJxSOA
Source: DN

Ryanair to allow passengers to use mobile phones during flights...for £2 a minute
Created: 25 Jan 2009
Ryanair is to allow passengers to use their mobile phones in flight – at a cost of around £2 a minute.
The budget airline's boss was quick to dismiss fears that the move might disturb other travellers.
'If you want a quiet flight, use another airline,' said Michael O'Leary. 'Ryanair is noisy, full and we are always trying to sell you something.'
The service, which will begin within two weeks, follows a deal between the Irish carrier and Swiss communications company OnAir.

Ryanair passengers will be able to use their mobiles inflight within two weeks on 14 of its aircrafts

The airline is fitting 14 of its 166 aircraft with miniature mobile phone masts to enable up to six passengers at a time to make and receive calls and texts, and emails via BlackBerry and similar devices.

The calls will be charged according to the in-flight roaming charge imposed by the phone user's network, which industry experts say is currently around £2 a minute.

Ryanair says that if the move is successful, it plans to fit its entire fleet with the technology.

OnAir said the service had been approved by the European Aviation Safety Authority.

A spokesman said the proximity of the miniature mast to passengers' phones meant handsets would emit only a low signal, keeping potential for interference with the aircraft's avionics to a minimum.
As part of the new service passengers Ryanair passengers will be able to send unlimited texts and emails during their flight, but only six passengers at any one time will be able to make a call.
If a passenger tries to make a call when six other phones are already in use, they will receive a 'network busy' message.
Initially only passengers signed up to the O2 and 3 networks will be able to use the service but more are expected to sign up shortly.
Ryanair's move means inflight mobile phone calls for the masses.
So far only full-service airlines like Dubai-based Emirates already allows the use of mobiles on some of its flights since March this year.
OnAir said calls will be charged according to the in-flight roaming charge imposed by the phone user's network.
But Ryanair will take a large cut from the payments made to the network provider.

OnAir's rivals, British-based AeroMobile who already have a system up and running for Dubai-based Emirates, said passengers typically paid the phone companies around £2 a minute.
The Crawley-based company says Quantas is introducing their mobile system, with Turkish Airlines, Saudi Arabian Airlines and Vaustralia set to follow suit. Each system costs up to £200,000 per plane to fit.
Britain's BMI British Midland, Air France, TAP Air Portugal plus a number of carriers in the Middle East and Asia are also about to start trialling the technology.
OnAir said Ryanair's in-flight phone service has been given the green light by the European Aviation Safety Authority.
A spokesman said the proximity of the miniature phone mast, or picocell, to passengers' mobile phones means that handsets will emit only a low signal, so potential for interference with the aircraft's avionics are kept to a minimum.
But experts admit the main obstacle to its introduction is social, not technical.
Ryanair said: 'People generally keep their conversations short. They don't want to be overheard. Only six people can speak at a time.'
But British Airways chief executive Willie Walsh, speaking at the World Low Cost Airlines conference in London said BA passengers had signalled loud and clear that they didn't want mobile phones on board: 'The vast majority of our customers have said please don't offer mobile phone communication.
''We don't want to be stuck next to people shouting into their phones.'
He said there were phones in the communications systems if fliers were really desperate. But most weren't.
Why it's now safe to use a mobile phone on a flight For years we have been told it is dangerous to use a mobile phone on a plane for fear of causing interference or even bringing down the aircraft.
Now using your own personal phone seven miles high is about to become the norm.
Ryanair is introducing the technology within a fortnight that allows in flight phone calls.
But Dubai-based Emirates has been running a similar service since March using British technology developed by Sussex-based AeroMobile which is about to go into full service with Qantas on domestic routes, Saudi Arabian, Turkish Airlines and V Australia.
AeroMobile vice president David Coiley said their system creates a 'bubble' around the aircraft which prevents interference to sensitive controls.
'We create a little country in the air with its own transmitter.
'Mobiles work by seeking out and connecting to a ground station.
'We create a bubble around the plane which prevents signals leaving the aircraft, or entering it.
'Instead, we capture these signals at very lower power, and transmit them ourselves from the plane's own a miniature transmitter-receiver.'
Experts said using a mobile phone in a plane without this channelling low-power system has the 'potential' to interfere with sensitive avionics equipment such as radar and flight controls, though most of this is now shielded on modern planes.
Banning the use of mobiles during take-off and landing is more to do with eliminating distractions than with electronic interference, say experts.
The Ryanair system works in broadly the same way.
AeroMobile's Mr Coiley said the total power used in flight is less than that of the aircraft's microwave oven: 'It's a 1,000th of the power used on the ground.'
Phones may only be used at cruise altitude above 20,000ft - not during take-offs, landing and during climbs or descents.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: By Ray Massey . Agnes Ingvarsdottir. www.mast-victims.org

Electrosensitivity: Sham radiation can cause real pain
Created: 27 Sep 2008
Mind your phone . Sham radiation can cause real pain
WHETHER mobile phones can cause cancer remains moot (see article). But they are also accused by some of causing pain. A growing number of people around the world claim to be "electrosensitive", in other words physically responsive to the electromagnetic fields that surround phones and the other electronic devices that clutter the modern world. Indeed, at least one country, Sweden, has recognised such sensitivity as a disability, and will pay for the dwellings of sufferers to be screened from the world's electronic smog.

The problem is that, time and again, studies of those claiming to be electrosensitive show their ability to determine whether they are being exposed to a real electric field or a sham one is no better than chance. So, unless they are lying about their symptoms, the cause of those symptoms needs to be sought elsewhere.

Michael Landgrebe and Ulrich Frick, of the University of Regensburg, in Germany, think that the "elsewhere" in question is in the brain and, in a paper presented recently to the Royal Society in London, they describe an experiment which, they think, proves their point.

Dr Landgrebe and Dr Frick used a body scanner called a functional magnetic-resonance imager to see how people's brains react to two different kinds
of stimulus. Thirty participants, half of whom described themselves as electrosensitive, were put in the imager and told that they would undergo a series of trials in which they would be exposed either to an active mobile phone or to a heating device called a thermode, whose temperature would be varied between the trials. The thermode was real. The mobile phone, however, was a dummy.

The type of stimulus, be it the authentic heat source or the sham electromagnetic radiation, was announced before each exposure and the volunteers were asked to rate its unpleasantness on a five-point scale. In the case of heat, the two groups' descriptions of their experiences were comparable. So, too, was their brain activity. However, when it came to the sham-phone exposure, only the electrosensitives described any sensations—which ranged from prickling to pain. Moreover, they showed neural activity to match. Some of the same bits of their brains lit up as when they were exposed to high temperatures.

This suggests that electrosensitivity, rather than being a response to electromagnetic stimulus, is akin to well-known psychosomatic disorders such as some sorts of tinnitus and chronic pain. A psychosomatic disorder is one in which the symptoms are real, but are induced by cognitive functions such as attitudes, beliefs and expectations rather than by direct external stimuli.

The paradoxical upshot of Dr Landgrebe's and Dr Frick's experiment is that mobile phones do indeed inflict real suffering on some unfortunate individuals. It is just that the electromagnetic radiation they emit has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12295230
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Sylvie.

DNA damage from cellphones and research fraud charges
Created: 6 Sep 2008
Making sweeping statements about scientific knowledge is always challenging, especially when writing about an unfamiliar field of research.
Take, for example, this opening sentence from an article, "Fraud Charges Cast Doubt on Claims of DNA Damage from Cell Phone Fields" by Gretchen Vogel in this week's Science magazine:

"The only two peer-reviewed scientific papers showing that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from cell phones can cause DNA breakage are at the center of a misconduct controversy at the Medical University of Vienna."

Sweeping ... and wrong.

Not counting the two papers from Hugo Rüdiger's lab in Vienna, here are 11 papers that point to changes in DNA breaks following exposures to cell phone radiation:

• R.J. Aitken et al., "Impact of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation on DNA Integrity in the Male Germline," International Journal of Andrology, 28, pp.171-179, 2005 (Australia);
• W. Baohong et al., "Studying the Synergistic Damage Effects Induced by 1.8 GHz Radiofrequency Field Radiation (RFR) with Four Chemical Mutagens on Human Lymphocyte DNA Using Comet Assay in Vitro," Mutation Research, 578, pp.149-157, 2005 (China);
• W. Baohong et al., "Evaluating the Combinative Effects on Human Lymphocyte DNA Damage Induced by Ultraviolet Ray C Plus 1.8 GHz Microwaves Using Comet Assay in Vitro," Toxicology, 232, pp.311-316, 2007 (China);
• G. Gandhi and Anita, "Genetic Damage in Mobile Phone Users: Some Preliminary Findings," Indian Journal of Human Genetics, 11, pp.99-104, 2005 (India);
• J. Kim et al., "In Vitro Assessment of Clastogenicity of Mobile-Phone Radiation (835 MHz) Using the Alkaline Comet Assay and Chromosomal Aberration Test," Environmental Toxicology, 23, pp.319-327, 2008 (Korea).
• S. Lixia et al., "Effects of 1.8GHz Radiofrequency Field on DNA Damage and Expression of Heat Shock Protein 70 in Human Lens Epithelial Cells," Mutation Research, 602, pp.135-142, 2006 (China);
• J. Phillips et al., "DNA Damage in Molt-4 T-Lymphoblastoid Cells Exposed to Cellular Telephone Radiofrequency Fields in Vitro," Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, 45, pp.103-110, 1998 (U.S.);
• T. Nikolova et al., "Electromagnetic Fields Affect Transcript Levels of Apoptosis-Related Genes in Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Neural Progenitor Cells," The FASEB Journal, 156, pp.495-502, 2001 (Germany);
• K. Yao et al., "Effect of Superposed Electromagnetic Noise on DNA Damage of Lens Epithelial Cells Induced by Microwave Radiation," Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 49, pp.2009-2015, 2008 (China).
• K. Yao et al., "Electromagnetic Noise Inhibits Radiofrequency Radiation-Induced DNA Damage and Reactive Oxygen Species Increase in Human Lens Epithelial Cells," Molecular Vision, 19, pp.964-969, 2008 (China).
• D. Zhang et al., "Effects of GSM 1800 MHz Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields on DNA Damage in Chinese Hamster Lung Cells," Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine, 40, pp.149-152, 2006 (China, in Chinese).

Some of these experiments investigated the effects of cell phone radiation alone while others looked at synergistic action with other agents. Some found large effects, while others saw small ones. Most found increased DNA breaks, while Jerry Phillips measured both increases and decreases. Nevertheless, they all reported DNA changes with cell phone radiation.

In addition, others have shown chromosomal changes following exposure to cell phone radiation. For instance:

• L. Manti et al., "Effects of Modulated Microwave Radiation at Cellular Telephone Frequency (1.95 GHz) on X-Ray-Induced Chromosome Aberrations in Human Lymphocytes in Vitro," Radiation Research, 169, pp.575-583, 2008 (Italy);
• M. Mashevich et al., "Exposure of Human Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes to Electromagnetic Fields Associated with Cellular Phones Leads to Chromosomal Instability," Bioelectromagnetics, 24, pp.82-90, 2003 (Israel);
• P. Sykes et al., "Effect of Exposure to 900 MHz Radiofrequency Radiation on Intrachromosomal Recombination in pKZ1 Mice," Radiation Research, 156, pp.495-502, 2001 (Australia).

And finally, a number of researchers have documented DNA changes at other, similar microwave frequencies but which are not used in mobile phone networks. For instance:

• H. Lai and N.P. Singh, "Acute Low-Intensity Microwave Exposure Increases DNA Single-Strand Breaks in Rat Brain Cells," Bioelectromagnetics, 16, pp.207-210, 1995 (U.S.);
• H. Lai and N.P. Singh, "Single- and Double-Strand DNA Breaks in Rat Brain Cells After Acute Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation," International Journal of Radiation Biology, 69, pp.513-521, 1996 (U.S.);
• R. Paulraj and J. Behari, "Single-Strand DNA Breaks in Rat Brain Cells Exposed to Microwave Radiation," Mutation Research, 596, pp.76-80, 2006 (India);
• S. Sarkar et al., "Effect of Low-Power Microwave on the Mouse Genome: A Direct DNA Analysis," Mutation Research, 320, pp.141-147, 1994 (India);
• M. Zhang et al., "Study of Low-Intensity 2450 MHz Microwave Exposure Enhancing the Genotoxic Effects of Mitomycin C Using Micronucleus Test and Comet Assay in Vitro," Biomedical and Environmental Sciences, 15, pp.283-290, 2002 (China);
• M. Zhang et al., "Effects of 2450 MHz Microwave on DNA Damage Induced by Three Chemical Mutagens in Vitro," Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases, 21, pp.266-269, 2003 (China, in Chinese).

Sources tell us that there are more papers currently in the publication pipeline.

None of this should be interpreted as indicating that the cell phone–DNA issue is closed. Others have failed to see such genetic effects and the jury is still out. But clearly to state that only two papers have shown DNA breaks is grossly misleading —no, simply wrong.

We have been closely following the University of Vienna story for some months and we will be reporting on it in detail sometime soon. The Science story gives but a glimpse of some of the maneuvering going on behind the scenes; in this case, manipulating the media to influence public opinion. At the moment, we are still trying to sort out who is doing what.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Microwave News, Louis Slesin, 03 Sep 2008

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 5   Next›  Last» 
 News item: