News for Canada
|«First ‹Previous Page 40 of 40 |
|Health concerns limit wireless Internet at Canadian University|
|Canada||Created: 22 Feb 2006|
There are many benefits to studying at Lakehead University but ubiquitous wireless Internet access, however, isn't one of them - and that's because president Fred Gilbert won't allow it until he's satisfied EMF (electric and magnetic fields) exposure doesn't pose a health risk, particularly to young people.
Gilbert, who was interviewed last week on the CBC about the university's policy as stated in a town hall meeting last fall, told ITBusiness.ca he based his decision on scientific literature that indicates the potential for “some fairly significant” health consequences.
“These are particularly relevant in younger people (who have) fast-growing tissues, and most of our student body are late teenagers and still growing, so it's just a matter of taking precautions and providing an environment that doesn't have a potential risk associated risk,” he said.
Gilbert cited studies done by scientists for the California Public Utilities Commission, whose findings boil down to the fact that while there is no proven link between EMFs exposure and diseases such as leukemia and brain tumours, the possible risk warrants further investigation.
He also said Canadian regulation allows for a higher minimum degree of exposure to EMFs than do some other countries.
“All I'm saying is while the jury's out on this one, I'm not going to put in place what is potential chronic exposure for our students,” he said. “Admittedly that's highest around the locations of the antenna sites and the wireless hotspots, but those are the places people tend to gravitate to because they get the best reception.”
Gilbert added he believes there are many environmental impacts that are not manifest for 30 to 40 years after exposure. “Second-hand tobacco exposure is a case in point,” he said. “We're just finding out now what some of those impacts are. Asbestos is another example.”
Lakehead, which is located at the head of Lake Superior in Thunder Bay, Ont., has some wireless access, but only where the university's fibre optic network doesn't reach. There are plenty of computers around campus where students can access the Internet 24 hours a day, so it's not like they're cut off, Gilbert said.
And it doesn't necessarily mean there will never be ubiquitous wireless at Lakehead, he said.
“When we get to the stage where the evidence is conclusive there is no health impact I have no problem putting wireless in place,” said Gilbert. “Even the World Health Organization in its international review says it doesn't have a great deal of concern but it admits the information is not 100 per cent.”
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: ITBusiness.ca, Kathleen Sibley, 23 jan. 2006|
|Killing Fields: Microwaving Our Planet!|
|Canada||Created: 6 Feb 2006|
Killing Fields: Also see Microwaving Our Planet!
Today Iam homeless.
My money does not provide me shelter.
My good health does not ensure my survival.
My friends are unable to help me.
I am being killed, but the law offers me no protection.
An invisible electrosmog engulfs us, destroying the health of many who do not even know why they have fallen ill. Why is no one listening to the mass of evidence telling us we are frying our brains?
In February this year Richard Box, artist-in-residence at the University of Bristol's physics department, installed hundreds of fluorescent light tubes in a field underneath power lines. The tubes came on at dusk, powered solely by the EM field generated by the cables above.
For eight years I have provided advocacy and support in North America and worldwide for people in similar circumstances. Some have epilepsy, or heart disease, or diabetes, or cancer. Some have allergies or asthma. But most, like me, are in good health. The assault we are all suffering is a radical increase in electromagnetic pollution, or electrosmog, that is engulfing the earth.
In 1982 1 was in my final year of medical school, a promising career ahead of me. For several months I had been having headaches and difficulty concentrating and remembering things. Then, while on a surgery rotation, I suffered crippling pains in my hips, making it difficult to assist in operations. My heart rate slowed to less than 50. One day I collapsed and was unable to get up. My chest hurt, and I could not get enough breath. I was sure I was having a heart attack. During the next two weeks I lost 15 pounds. And I was a slim man to begin with. It wasn't a heart attack, but it was still six months before I could walk up a flight of stairs without becoming short of breath. It was three years before I was strong enough to ski again. It was seven years before I met someone who validated my own experience that being near certain electrical appliances, such as television sets and computers, made me ill, and that staying away from them kept me healthy. However, having discovered how to remain healthy, I gradually found that I was being effectively disabled by my society.
Having stumbled upon an obviously well-kept secret, I researched the world literature on bioelectromagnetics, (or the biological effects of electromagnetism),
and made myself an expert. I learned that electro-cautery machines, used in every modern surgical operation to cut through tissue and to stop bleeding, expose surgeons to much higher levels of radio frequency radiation than is permitted for workers in any industry. I learned that there was a disease thoroughly
described in the Russian and Eastern European medical literature called radiowave sickness, the existence of which was usually denied by western authorities. This description made me remember my `unknown illness', the one that had derailed my medical career. Bradycardia, or a slow heart rate, was said, in these texts, to be a grave sign.
Because there are virtually no workplaces without computers any more, I have not held a job since 1990. I had resigned myself to living on Social Security Disability, and learned, together with other members of a support group I had found, how best to live with my disability. This mostly meant learning to avoid exposure to electromagnetic fields. But in July 1996, to my dismay, I learned that an innovation was coming to my city, which threatened to make it impossible to avoid exposure any more.
At that time, cell phones were still a luxury item that only worked in some locations. People were not accustomed to staying connected whenever they left their home, and even at home most still had a cord, not an antenna, attached to their telephone. Most were not accustomed to holding devices that emit microwave radiation next to their brain. In 1996, the telecommunications industry began a marketing campaign designed to change all that. For Christmas that year, all over the country, digital cell phones were going to be on a lot of shopping lists. And to make them more practical, tens of thousands of antennae were going to be erected on towers, buildings, church steeples and lampposts all over the country before Christmas, and hundreds of thousands more during the next few years.
In response to this emergency, a few friends and I created the Cellular Phone Task Force, and contacted all the public officials we could think of, and the press, to warn them of the danger. But on November 14 1996, Omnipoint, New York City's first digital cellular provider, did open for business, broadcasting from thousands of antennae newly erected on the rooftops of apartment buildings. According to the health authorities, an early flu hit New York City - but not Boston, and not Philadelphia - on about 15 November. The flu was severe and ran a prolonged course, often dragging on for months instead of the usual two weeks.
At Christmas time, the Cellular Phone Task Force placed a small classified ad in a free weekly newspaper. It read: 'If you have been ill since 11/15/96 with any of the following: eye pain, insomnia, dry lips, swollen throat, pressure or pain in the chest, headaches, dizziness, nausea, shakiness, other aches and pains, or flu that won't go away, you may be a victim of a new microwave system blanketing the city. We need to hear from you.' And we did hear from them. Hundreds called, men, women, whites, blacks, Asians, Latinos, doctors, lawyers, teachers, stockbrokers, airline stewards, computer operators. Most had woken up suddenly in mid-November, thinking they were having a stroke or a heart attack or a nervous breakdown, and were relieved to know they were not alone and not crazy.
Later, I analysed weekly mortality statistics, which the Centres for Disease Control publish for122 US cities. Each of dozens of cities recorded a 10-25 per cent increase in mortality, lasting two to three months, beginning on the day in 1996 or 1997 on which that city's first digital cell phone network began commercial service. I published both the raw data and the complete analysis, with graphs. This appeared in No Place To Hide, an investigative journal published by my organisation and I am presently working with scientists in Europe to expand this study to other countries.
I learned that in February 1996, Congress had passed a law prohibiting local governments from denying permits for cell phone antennae because of environmental concerns - so long as they comply with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules. I also learned that the FCC had just issued regulations setting public exposure limits for microwave radiation at levels at least ten thousand times higher than levels which, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, were causing reports of illness from all over the world. Levels that are at least ten thousand times higher than the levels that had forced me to leave behind my home, my family, and my friends, and to run for my life, never to be able to return home again.
The Cellular Phone Task Force, along with over 50 other grass roots organisations and individuals around the US, became involved in a legal challenge of the FCC's absurd standards and its pre-emption of local control. This was taken all the way to the US Supreme Court. Dozens of cities, towns and public officials, including several US senators and representatives, submitted briefs urging the High Court to hear our case. But in January 2001, the Supreme Court, without comment, declined.
You will hear statements by supposed experts - always the same few, in the pay of the telecommunications industry - to the effect that cell phones/cell towers/microwave radiation have been proven safe in countless studies. It is an easy lie, one that the news media have been eager to propagate. Such studies don't exist. Quite the contrary: it has been shown that, just as for X-rays, there is no safe level of exposure to microwave radiation, and it is so easy to demonstrate harmful effects that it takes some skill to design experiments that don't show them. It is harder to show effects today than 10 years ago because now the entire planet is exposed, making it impossible to do experiments with 'unexposed' controls. But most experiments still show effects anyway – effects on heart rhythms, on brain waves, on the blood-brain barrier, on sleep, on the eyes, on the gonads, on the skin, on hearing, on calcium, on melatonin, on glucose, on metabolism, on human well-being. If you look, you will find. Zorach Glaser reviewed over 5,000 such studies for the United States Navy during the 1970s alone. After 1982, the United States ceased funding Glaser's cataloguing work. But the flood of alarming research occurring all over the world continued.
From the volume of literature I have seen, certain results stand out in my mind.
In the 1960s, Allan Frey was the first to discover that people and animals can hear low-energy pulsed microwaves. He also did some of the earliest work showing how heart rhythms are disturbed by microwaves, and how the blood-brain barrier is compromised, letting large molecules leak across, exposing the brain to potential damage. Ophthalmologist Milton Zaret was the first to describe cataracts caused by low-energy microwaves. Canadians Tanner, Romero-Sierra and Bigu Del Blanco worked with parakeets, chickens, pigeons and seagulls. Birds avoided microwave fields if they could, and collapsed within seconds if they couldn't. Defeathered birds showed no such distress, and these researchers then showed that feathers act as antennae conveying microwave energy to the birds. Thirty years later, Alfonso Balmori Martínez has carefully documented the decline and disappearance of white storks, house sparrows, and free-tailed bats from the vicinity of cellular phone base stations.
The idea that there is an exposure threshold, below which microwave radiation can be considered safe, has been disproven many times over. In Moscow, Igor Belyaev has found resonance effects on bacterial DNA that occur at exposure levels 10,000,000,000,000,000 times less than the average exposure from a cell phone. W Grundler, in Germany, has found effects on the growth of yeast cells, also at near-zero levels of exposure.
In the early 1990s, the government of Switzerland commissioned a study in response to people's complaints of insomnia near the shortwave transmitter at Schwarzenburg. Residents kept sleep diaries and did not know when the transmitter was on or off. The investigators found that the transmitter was disturbing sleep up to several miles away, and because of this finding that particular radio station was permanently shut down.
An early warning radar station was due to be decommissioned at Skrunda, Latvia after the end of the Cold War. Before it was shut down, a coordinated effort was made to determine whether the station had had any environmental effects. Teams of researchers found such effects wherever they looked, even at extremely low levels of exposure: smaller growth rings in trees, premature ageing in pine needles, chromosome damage in cows, decreased memory, attention, learning, and pulmonary function in school children, increased white blood cells in adults, and an altered sex ratio (more girls) in children born during the years of the radar's operation.
In Germany, Wolfgang Volkrodt linked forest die-back to microwave radiation rather than acid rain. Wolfgang Löscher and Günther Käs documented illness in dairy cows caused by cell towers. This included decreased milk production, infertility, abortions, birth deformities, behavioural problems and early death. Autopsies revealed that the cows died of acute circulatory collapse and bleeding from several organs.
In France, Roger Santini has found that the closer people live to a cell tower, the more likely they are to experience dizziness, nausea, memory loss and other neurological symptoms. Claudio Gómez-Perretta has obtained similar results in Spain. The Dutch government sponsored double blind experiments in a laboratory. People exposed to a cell tower signal experienced dizziness, nervousness, chest pain, shortness of breath, numbness and tingling, weakness, and difficulty concentrating.
The late Neil Cherry found that childhood cancer rates in San Francisco were a function of proximity to the antenna-laden Sutro Tower. Olle Johansson and Örjan Hallberg showed that the rise and fall of asthma and certain cancers during the 20th century closely paralleled changes in public exposure to radio waves in every country they looked at. They showed that radio waves are as big a factor in causing lung cancer as cigarette smoking.
The following are urgently needed:
Sanctuaries. Radiation-free zones. Places without radio antennae, cell phone service, or television cable (cable is often a significant source of radiation). These sanctuaries are needed right now, to save lives.
Legal help. Environmental and disability rights attorneys who are able to take on this issue.
Funding for land acquisition and legal expenses.
Volunteer help for phone calling, letter writing, grant writing, and so on.
Keep in mind these two principles:
Distance counts. The power drops off as the square of the distance. Antennae should be few, and as far as possible from people and environmentally
Digital hurts. Digital (pulsed) technology is more harmful at lower levels of power than analog. The mandated replacement of all analog TV, radio, and telecommunications transmissions with digital during the next few years is very dangerous.
Leif Salford's recent work on the blood-brain barrier has verified the earlier work of Allan Frey and others, but with additional, ominous findings. First, sometimes, decreasing the amount of radiation 1,000 times increased the damage to the brain (demonstrating the 'window' effect). Second, animals exposed to a cell phone once for two hours were found to have areas of brain cell death two months later. Salford has called cell phones 'the world's largest biological experiment ever'. His work provides solid support for those who warn that every cell phone call damages brain cells, and that cell phones, like cigarettes, harm both users and nearby non-users. His findings are particularly alarming in light of surveys – by Santini in France, and by Sandström and Mild in Sweden – which include: headaches, migraines, chronic fatigue, agitation, sleep disorders, tinnitus, nervous and connective tissue pains of unexplained origin, and susceptibility to infection. The appeal calls for a massive reduction in exposure limits; no further expansion of cell phone technology; cell phone-and antenna-free zones; a ban on cell phone use by children; and a ban on cell phones and digital cordless phones in schools, hospitals, nursing homes, public buildings and public transportation.
The California Department of Health Services has concluded that, on the basis of a telephone survey, 120,000 Californians - and by implication one million Americans - have left their jobs because of electromagnetic pollution in the workplace. The people who have left their homes for such a reason are not being counted by anyone.
'Electrical sensitivity' is a popular, but inaccurate, term for suffering caused by this universal pollutant. The problem is much more widespread than is commonly assumed, and growing daily. By the time people realise that electromagnetic fields are directly causing their pain or illness, their lives are often already ruined. They find that reliable information is hard to come by and harder to understand; that there is little support for them, and no solutions offered; and that when they finally learn what they have to avoid, it is nevertheless impossible to do so.
The highest profile person yet to announce that cell phones, cordless phones and computers make her ill is none other than Gro Harlem Brundtland, a medical doctor, master of public health, former Prime Minister of Norway, and until 2003 the Director General of the World Health Organisation. Yet even so public a figure on the world stage has been unable to draw the world's attention to our collective plight, or in any way slow down the growth of telecommunications, or even to put it on the map as an environmental issue.
This must happen. Too many intelligent, professional, useful people are wandering this country's barren deserts, homeless, ostracized, robbed of their civil rights, with no place to land. Too many have committed suicide because they have lost all hope, have suffered too long, have had to pick up roots and flee for their lives once too often.
Within the telecommunications industry, too many equipment testers, installers, and repairpersons with radiowave sickness are afraid to speak out, or do not even know why they are ill.
So many radars, antennae, and communication devices are being deployed for government, military, emergency, commercial, and personal uses in both the developed and developing worlds, and in space, that there is nowhere left to hide. Even radio astronomers are seriously talking about the far side of the moon as the only place left that is quiet enough, in the radio spectrum, to still be able to see the stars.
Arthur Firstenberg is a founder and director of the Cellular Phone Task Force, a non-profit organisation that disseminates information about electromagnetic pollution and provides advocacy and support for victims of this pollution. He is editor of the Task Force's publication, No Place To Hide, and the author of Microwaving Our Planet:
The Environmental Impact of the Wireless Revolution (1996).
He can be contacted by mail at PO Box 1337, Mendocino, CA 95460,
Click here to view the source article.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Source: ARTHUR FIRSTENBERG / The Ecologist v.34, n.5, 1jun04 Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)Canada Created: 6 Feb 2006|
|Sullivan Heights School - Antenna Stopped|
|Canada||Created: 16 Jan 2006|
In Canada, Sullivan Heights School in Surrey BC has just been granted the escape route after months of heavy pressure from students, parents, teachers and the media.
On February 26, a massive crowd turned out to question the Cellular Industry's representative in the area of health concerns,
Mary McBride of the BC Cancer Society.
The crowd was not convinced it was safe and became quite upset.
On March 13th the school board met during the day and voted on what to do.
The vote was 6 to 1 for breaking the contract with AT&T cellular.
"This is unheard of in the Business world" says board trustee, "but they were generous to the school board and granted the termination of the
contract for a lower then average fee." "An eleventh hour miracle" stated two of the trustees.
Parents were relieved to hear the vote, but showed up at the evening meeting to confirm the stop to the contract.
Many were expecting the announcement of the School Board banning cellular antennas from all Surrey BC Schools, but that announcement
was not made.
The group plans to fight until this is in place.
Information: Robert Riedlinger.
|Source: emfnews canada|
|Cell Phone Grave Dangers|
|Canada||Created: 6 Jan 2006|
Cell Phone Grave Dangers
Though intended for renovations, Chris Anderson would like all visitors to deposit their cellular phones in the cement mixer by his front door. This sounds excessive until you step into Anderson's orchard, where the pegged needle of a shrieking electromagnetic radiation (EMR) meter placed beside a connected cellphone still shows significant exposure 100 feet away. Much to the chagrin of this certified EMR-mitigation specialist, every day some 300 million cell phone users are "reaching out and touching someone you love. Yourself, and anyone else within range of the microwaves emitted by your cell phone."
Mesmerized by magical gadgets, we have yet to count the costs of miniature radio transmitters that are transforming Marconi's invention into new possibilities for portable personal pollution. As entire nations reach for pocket communicators, the explosively emergent $40 billion a year cell phone industry is poised to deliver a "Wireless Revolution" that over the next five years is expected to double the one-billion people connected by telephone lines over the past century.
Silicon sensors are already calling to each other. Soon, countless communicating microchips embedded in everything from bumpers to brooms will be sending streams of encoded electrical energy through glass, steel, concrete, bone and flesh. Exquisitely sensitive to subtle electromagnetic harmonies, human brains and bodies as intricate as galaxies depend on tiny electrical impulses to conduct complex life-processes including the ability to read, recall and respond to these words. Acting as antennas, our anatomies just as easily tune into spurious signals from radio and microwave transmissions. Blake Levitt, author of Electromagnetic Fields, says that when it comes to cellphones, "a worse frequency could not have been chosen for the human anatomy."
As cell phones conquer consumer minds and markets, researcher Carolanne Patton notes that "the brain reaches peak absorption in the UHF bands, right where cellular telecommunications operate." British military scientists have discovered that cellphone transmissions disrupt the brain sites for memory and learning, causing forgetfulness and sudden confusion.
Other studies show that electromagnetic signals from cellular phones reduce the ability to concentrate, calculate and coordinate complicated activities such as driving a car. Startled by $4 billion a year in extra claims among cellphone-wielding drivers, North American insurers did a double-take that found simply juggling `cell phones is not causing a 600% increase in accidents over other drivers busy shaving, applying makeup, tuning radios, taming pets, making out, pouring coffee, retrieving dropped cigarettes, talking and gesturing to passengers, or actually steering the vehicle.
Instead of just another dangerous distraction, tests conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy found that using a cell phone severely impairs memory and reaction times. "Hands-free" mobile speaker-phones cause even more crashes because they typically emit 10-times more brainwave interference than handheld units.
For all drivers dialing out on their cell phones, University of Toronto investigators report that the heightened probability of cracking up your car persists for up to 15-minutes after completing a call. That's comparable to the risk of crashing while driving dead drunk exclaims Dr. Chris Runball, chairman of the B.C. Medical Association's emergency medical services committee. Reeling from "dial-a-collision" costs, the government of British Columbia may join England, Spain, Israel, Switzerland and Brazil in restricting or banning the use of cell phones by drivers.
In New Zealand, cellphone towers are prohibited on school property because of possible health effects. But Health Canada regulations ignore the hidden hazards of cell-wrenching cellphones, which send pulsed signals through the skull in a process one expert likens to "jackhammers on the brain." "Safety Code 6" looks only at microwaves burning skin. "Basically, Health Canada claims if it can't cook you, it can't hurt you," says Walter McGinnis. "It's like saying cigarettes aren't dangerous unless they burn you."
One of a handful of licensed electricians who understand electromagnetic fields well enough to eliminate them from household wiring, McGinnis has been testing EMFs and collaborating with fellow testers and researchers for nearly a decade. In Victoria, where he has helped residents defeat six cellphone towers, there was dancing in the streets after Microcell Connexions withdrew its application to erect a microwave transmission tower against the Wishart Elementary School fence in the spring of 1998. Microcell spokesman Colin McCrae points out that emissions from the company's towers carry about the same energy as a 50-watt lightbulb well within federal guidelines.
This is hardly reassuring, retorts the former president of the Wisehart parents advisory council. Tania Berenuik observes that Health Canada "also told us thalidomide, asbestos and the blood supply were safe." Carrying similar risks of long-term lethality, and strangely just as legal, cellphone addiction mirrors the prestigious early allure of smoking as well as an immensely profitable industry's steadfast denial of risk and responsibility. As poisonous as cigarette smoke and even harder to corral, the cellphone's "second-hand" microwave and to bystanders particularly children riding in cars that transmit amplified cellphone signals through their steel structure. Reporting the conclusions of a 12-person British study team, scientist Sir William Stewart told London's Financial Times that "children may be more vulnerable because of their developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues of the head and a longer lifetime of exposure."
Roger Coghill became a long-standing advocate for health warnings to be affixed to cell phones after this biologist found that cellphone transmissions damage the ability of white blood cells to ward off infectious disease by disrupting the immune system's electromagnetic communications. Dr. Neil Cherry has measured accelerated aging, increased cell death and cancers caused by radio frequency microwaves from cellphones and their relay towers. With the brain's electro-chemical communications repeatedly zapped by lightning-like cellphone pulses, this Ph.D. biophysicist warns that headaches, fatigue, lethargy, nausea, dizziness, depression, arteriosclerosis and even Alzheimer's can result from frequent or prolonged calls on cell phones.
"There is also a higher incidence of cardiac problems," Cherry comments, "in terms of the timing function in hearts. You get more heart attacks and more heart disease - it has now been shown in many studies." The biophysicist from Lincoln University in Christ Church, New Zealand has also found that cell phones can murderously modify moods. In brains and bodies seriously derailed by tiny imbalances in trace minerals and hormones, depression, suicide, anger, rage and violence can result when calcium and serotonin levels are disrupted by cellphone transmissions.
In 1995, Cell phone sales in North America exceeded the birth rate.
Hired by the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association to condone cellphones, public health scientist George Carlo found that rare tumors on the outside of the brain are more than doubled among cell phone callers particularly on the right side of the head where `phones are usually held. Carlo told ABC's "20/20" that cell phone causes genetic damage that leads to cancer. Warning of "the potential for a global health disaster," ABC recommended "prudent avoidance" of cellphones after finding that every cellphone they lab-tested exceeded the Federal Communication Commission's standards for EMF absorption rates. EMF researcher Dave Ashton cautioned 20/20 viewers that because cellphones constantly search for the nearest repeating tower, "long-term damage comes from cell phones in the stand-by mode." Cell phone "shields" and headsets "cannot adequately address these problems," Ashton added.
Dr. Carlo later told London's Express newspaper that cellphones cause genetic damage following a dose-response curve. That is, the more a person uses a cell phone, the more cellular destruction and health risks they incur. Cell phone-confused cells can go crazy, Carlo cautioned. Experiments on captive animals show that this cumulative DNA damage is passed on to succeeding generations.
Addicted as we are to a culture of convenience, we forget how inconvenient it is to contract cancer. An Adelaide Hospital study confirmed Carlo's conclusions after finding B-cell lymphomas doubled in mice within 18 months of one-hour daily exposure to power densities experienced by a cellphone user. B-cell lymphomas are implicated in 85% of all cancers.
READY OR NOT
As magazine-size "cellular" relay antennas hidden in church steeples and rooflines keep popping up just about everywhere, more and more communities are declaring their airspace a "No Fry Zone". But in Canada, where cell phone towers come under federal jurisdiction, municipalities are only "advisers' to a process in which no permits are required to erect transmitter towers deemed necessary for "national security." Cellphones do save a lot of lives. FCC Chairman William Kennard reports that every day more than 98,000 people make 911 calls from wireless cell phones.
Many more lives are involuntarily imperiled by non-emergency calls. Pat Irwin was working in a Colwood health food store when she noticed a truck unloading metal framework. The next morning, a new cellphone tower was ready to add its emissions to another BC Tel tower already operating down the street. There had been no announcement, no public hearings just a quiet notification to the municipality that a tower was going up, literally overnight.
The intruder radiated for a month when Irwin felt her immunity dropping. She wondered if other changes in her energy and menstrual cycle were "not from the moon or something that I ate."
Irwin also seemed more irritable after her central nervous switchboard began receiving round-the-clock cellphone calls. With cellular relay towers in Kansas and Oklahoma being shut down because they interfered with passing aircraft, Irwin sensed how the same transmissions plucked her own electrical circuitry, inflicting a "chronic edginess" that "twangs human nerves." Sleep disorders, she learned, are common among people exposed to high levels of electromagnetic pollution.
After several other women in the same business centre reported similar symptoms, Irwin quit her job. "I saw it as something that was there to stay and I'd be daily exposed to it over a long period of time," she told Alive. "All this stuff is what we're playing with on a daily basis, and we don't know the long-term health effects."
Implying recognized hazard, cell phone companies such as B.C.'s FIDO insist that the new digital phones operating at 1/50 the power of older analog models are safer. But there is nothing "safe" about the new 1.9 gigahertz broadcasting frequency. Much like a boxer taking repeated blows to the head, rapidly pulsing cellphones signal permanent brain damage. A study by Dr. Peter Franch found unequivocally that "cells are permanently damaged by cellular phone frequencies." This cellular damage, Franch noted, is maximized at low dosage – and "inherited unchanged, from generation to generation."
Attempting to explain a 25% increase in asthma and a 5% increase in asthma-related death rates throughout rapidly "mobilizing" metropolitan Sydney, Franch found that the production of histamine, which triggers bronchial spasms, is nearly doubled after exposure to mobile phone transmissions. Cellphones also reduce the effectiveness of anti-asthmatic drugs, and retard recovery from illness.
Katharina Gustavss, a certified Building Biology consultant with 25 years experience, explains that CDMA's 217 Hz spikes are very close to the frequencies of human cell membranes. Gustavss accompanied a Microcell technician to the Colwood microwave relay tower Irwin and others had complained about. When he waved a spectrum analyzer, Gustavss checked the display and saw "pretty scary" energy spikes. "What's that?" she asked the tech. "I've never seen that before," he told her. It turned out that this cellphone tower tester only set his meter to an averaging mode. Switching to "real time" froze the readings at "scary" maximum output levels.
How dangerous are cell phones? "The risk is extremely high," declares Dr. Cherry. "There are 66 epidemiological studies showing that electromagnetic radiation across the spectrum increase brain tumors in human populations. Two of those studies are for particular brain tumors from cell phones."
Cherry says that because cancer takes decades to develop, it will be another 10 or 20 years before "mobiles" manifest a big bonanza in brain tumors. But he adds, we're already seeing "acute effects that are noticed within minutes of using a cell phone."
After two minutes' conversation, a cell phone's digitized impulses disable the safety barrier that isolates the brain from destructive proteins and poisons in the blood. Professor Leif Salford, the neurologist who carried out the research for this finding, informed the Daily Mail: "It seems that molecules such as proteins and toxins can pass out of the blood, while the phone is switched on, and enter the brain. We need to bear in mind diseases such as MS and Alzheimer's which are linked to proteins being found in the brain."
DANCING WITH THE TELECOMONSTER
If you must pack a cell phone, treat it like a loaded pistol. Keep it turned off. Don't carry it near ovaries, testicles, or the heart. For partial protection, buy an antenna shield. Limit calls to one-minute, six to 10 minutes a month. Never fire off a cellphone with children anywhere in sight.
A better bet is to facilitate the growth of organic telephone networks with lots of fibre. Instead of more microwave towers, "We should be wiring up our cities with fibre-optic cables to provide Internet, fax, telephone, radio and television at very high quality," Cherry urges, "rather than saturating our cities with the microwave, radiowave and low frequency signals all the time."
When it comes to cells, consciousness and cell phones, every call is collect. How can convenience count more than cancer? What is gained by being in constant contact with disembodied voices, while being "out of touch" with the friends and neighbours around us? Are we comfortable having our location traced by monitoring authorities?
Unless we start voting with our wallets, consumer complacency could prove as species-limiting as corporate cynicism. "Microwave frequencies are the same as those used in radar and your microwave oven," says Florida cellphone tower opponent Joe Chwick. "You wouldn't think of sticking your head in the oven, but there is no hesitation to putting the cell phone to your ear."
Having somehow survived three-million years of evolution without them, many contemporary hominids claim they cannot live without them. But can exquisitely sensitive electromagnetic beings live with cell phones – and the cell phone towers their signals ride in on? Like polyethylene food and water containers, plastic cookers and coffeemakers, microwave ovens and petroleum-powered brilliantly beguiling inventions we have to let go. Would hanging up on such an intrusive and hazardous addiction be so terrible?
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Article by Will Thomas. 181205|
|Canada Health Official Warns Consumers to Limit Cell Phone USE|
|Canada||Created: 20 Nov 2005|
Canada Health Official Warns Consumers to Limit Cell Phone USE
Canada Health Official Warns Consumers to "Limit Cell Phone Use" Especially by Children
Long-term phone risks aren't yet known, says agency head WHO conference looking at global `precautionary' approach
The country's top public health officer says Canadians should consider moderating their use of cellphones - and their children's - until science overcomes
nagging uncertainties about long-term health effects.
Dr. David Butler-Jones, in opening remarks yesterday to a three-day conference hosted by the World Health Organization, told more than 100 academics,
public health officials and scientists from around the world that constantly changing technology has created a moving target, leaving scientists playing a game
"Our technology has passed our ability to understand what biological effects are positive or negative," said Butler-Jones, who heads the new Public Health Agency of Canada, often described as the Canadian equivalent to the United States Surgeon General.
"What would be the message? The message would be that moderation is a good thing," he said in an interview after his presentation.
"Talking for two hours every night on cellphones, would I advise that?
No." Butler-Jones said use of the devices in childhood could also have an impact on obesity and the way children interact socially with family and friends.
His comments, the first he has publicly made on possible health risks related to cellphones, follow a weekend Toronto Star investigation into the wireless industry's new marketing focus on children and what some scientists view as potential health effects that might take decades to prove or disprove as a
Among the new crop of child-targeted phones already on store shelves or on their way are devices branded with such popular images as Barbie, Disney characters and Hilary Duff.
The conference, held in partnership with the University of Ottawa, is looking at the merits of what's often called a "precautionary approach" to public health policy.
The idea is to develop an international framework that member countries can adopt in cases of scientific uncertainty about potential health risks, such as cellphone frequencies or radiation from power lines.
"It's just good public hygiene to be precautionary," said Dr. Michael Repacholi, head of the radiation and environmental health unit of the World Health
Organization. "Is there something we should be saying that we're not?"
Health Canada has remained quiet on the issue of children and the potential health risks of cellphones even as several European health experts and authorities have issued precautionary statements and messages to parents.Magda Havas, a professor of environmental studies at Trent University who has studied the impact of low frequencies on human health, said many in the scientific community outright dismiss studies that have shown biological effects on lab animals
and cell cultures, effects that may hint at possible health risks.
"I think once again the health authorities aren't looking at the science, the same way they didn't with tobacco and asbestos," she said at the conference yesterday. "My concern is that this is actually going to hurt the cellphone industry. If they don't clean up their act ..., they're going to produce a generation that's
so sensitive to these frequencies they won't be able to use the product."
She said evidence is already growing that certain people have "electrical hypersensitivity."
Joel Tickner, a research professor at the University of Massachusetts Lowell and an international expert on the precautionary approach, was scheduled to
speak at the conference but backed out, saying the agenda has been watered down.
"Precaution is controversial; the cellphone industry doesn't want to hear about it," said Tickner, adding the industry doesn't want to be constrained from
marketing its products. "As long as there's uncertainty in the science, we wait and don't do anything, which is unfortunate."
Peter Barnes, chief executive of the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association, says his industry's products are safe, and no links have been
proven between the devices and health effects. He says all cellphones sold in Canada "meet or exceed" all emission standards set by Industry Canada,
which acts on the guidance of Health Canada experts.
The overwhelming majority of readers who contacted the Star in connection with the series said Health Canada should publicly state the potential risks
o Canadians, and industry should back off from its new marketing focus on children.
"Health Canada's minister and bureaucrats should be in the business of protecting the health of us taxpayers who pay their salaries rather than nesting in the
hip pocket of the cellular communications industry, whose primary business is selling mobile phones," said Jane Holmes, who lives in Brighton, Ont.
Peterborough resident Matt Keefer said the wireless industry is "crossing the line" by marketing to children.
"Government needs to step in and protect the interests of our youngsters by making it illegal for companies to qualify them as consumers."
By TYLER HAMILTON AND ROB CRIBB STAFF REPORTERS
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Sounding Circle: 16 Jul 2005 @ 06:32, by Raymond Powers The Toronto Star July 12, 2005|
|WHO may be criminally liable for offences in the countries that follow the guidelines on electrosmog|
|Canada||Created: 11 Nov 2005|
World Health Organization - WHO writes off electro-smog victims
Is "dirty electricity" in your own suburban dream home making you ill?
According to PooBahs at the World Health Organization, you’ve only come down with "Idiopathic Environment Intolerance" (IEI).
Summer smog visible on the skyline over cities like Toronto and Los Angeles provides a perfect seasonal soapbox for headline hungry politicians.
No politician or environmental activist is doing anything about the electricity pollution that an increasing number of people say is making them ill, and certainly
WHO, which last week held a workshop on "Electrical Hypersensitivity", in Prague, Czech Republic wrote off global victims of electricity pollution and electrosmog–and included a recommendation advising governments to "discourage measurement in homes".
If electrosmog is not creating problems for human health, then why would WHO discourage measurement of electric magnetic fields in homes?
Retired Toronto police officer Martin Weatherall, who suffers from an illness he believes was brought on by electricity pollution, says WHO may someday be found "criminally irresponsible" in writing off the victims of electrosmog.
Weatherall, who works on behalf of other victims of electricity pollution, has dispatched a letter to WHO Director General Lee Jong Wok, included here:
10 November 2005
Director-General Lee Jong-wook
World Health Organization Headquarters
Avenue Appia 20
1211 Geneva 27
I have recently read the document entitled "WHO Workshop on Electrical Hypersensitivity, Prague, Czech Republic, October 25-27, 2004.
Working Group Meeting". I am now writing to advise you how disappointed I am with some of the recommendations. In particular, I am referring to the recommendations on page 8 under the headings Information for the General Public and Advice to Governments, both of which include the point:
"discourage measurements in homes".
This advice to the General Public and to Governments is so completely contrary to sensible thinking and so fundamentally wrong that the World Health Organization may be criminally liable for offences in the countries that follow these guidelines. I base this statement on my own experience and situations
where I have had personal involvement.
If the WHO is considering only simple EMFs as being the cause of many people’s illnesses, the WHO is quite wrong. A better way to describe the real problem is "electrical pollution" or "electrosmog".
1. Electromagnetic fields
2. Electrical fields
3. Ground current electricity
4. Dirty electricity on the power distribution systems
5. Broadcast signals from a variety of different sources, including cellular telephones, radar and wireless devices.
If the WHO is not willing to consider how all of these problems interact and cause health problems, the WHO will fail to diagnose the true cause of many severe illnesses and will fail in its duties to the world population.
In the WHO document, the working group has chosen a description other than electro hypersensitivity and has called the illnesses "Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance’ (IEI). My description is a little more simple to understand and is more to the point — "electrical and radio frequency radiation poisoning".
The persons that you refer to as IEI suffer their illnesses only after being exposed to dangerous levels of electrical pollution.
They have been poisoned, possibly by one of the above named toxic ingredients, but it is more likely that a mixture of two or more elements caused their
It is totally irresponsible for the WHO to discourage the testing of homes of persons suffering from EMFs and other forms of electrical pollution.
Severe suffering and even death may result for those who do not get help. The WHO should reverse the current recommendations, and advise complete
and thorough testing of victims’ homes and, possibly, their workplaces. It is very important to identify and quantify the reasons why so many people are
being made sick by electrical pollution. Missing any one of the above "ingredients" of electrical pollution may fail to find the real reason for a victim’s sickness
and cause further suffering and danger. If several new viruses were causing death and suffering throughout the world, surely the WHO would not simply
say to Governments - "do not try to identify them". Why, then, has the WHO ignored the significant health damage already occurring in many countries
because of electrical pollution? Is the WHO going to wait until a catastrophic amount of harm is visible to all the population, before taking action?
My own situation is an example of the need to identify and measure the different elements of electrical pollution.
Considerable ground current electricity was found inside my home even when all of the electricity was disconnected.
High electrical fields were located throughout the basement and on the telephone lines.
Electromagnetic fields covered the whole house and were particularly high at the outdoor drilled water well.
Various low and high frequencies were located on the electricity flowing through the house.
I suffered a variety of very adverse health symptoms and developed prostate cancer within one year of living at my home.
My wife and I have been unable to live in our own house for ten months now, and we have been forced to find alternate accommodation because the
electrical utility company has refused to correct problems with their distribution system.
Canadian health care and government authorities have failed to provide any meaningful assistance or advice about our electrical pollution problem.
Without the assistance of an electronics expert who provided detailed measurements, I would not have known what was causing my illness and would
have probably continued to grow increasingly ill.
Your recommendations enable governments and utility companies to continue their bad and dangerous practices, while at the same time leaving sufferers helpless to correct their situations.
Within the last few weeks, I have been involved in three situations where the measurement of victims’ homes resulted in the discovery of dangerous electrical pollution that was causing serious illness. In a rural house northwest of Toronto, a wireless plug-in telephone jack was causing massive amounts of high frequency radiation inside the home. After the wireless jack and other problematic items were unplugged, a female occupant of the home reported a drastic improvement to her health. She was able to walk properly, climb stairs, and sleep all night, which she had not been able to accomplish previously.
She also reported that she was no longer experiencing many severe migraines, only "normal" headaches.
Only the use of special instruments located the problematic devices that were causing so much harm.
Upon request, I recently attended in Toronto at the apartment of a woman who was disabled by electrical pollution.
A defective fluorescent light fixture in the apartment below seemed to be the cause of very high levels of EMFs that were emanating from the kitchen floor.
In the bedroom of the same apartment, near to the place where the victim’s head lies when she is sleeping, a very high amount of high frequency radiation
was discovered coming from the wall.
The problem was eventually located in the next apartment, where an almost new wireless telephone was found to be the source of extremely high amounts
of radio frequencies.
This was a problem even when the telephone was not in use, and simply resting in its cradle.
Only careful testing with a variety of different sensitive instruments managed to locate these very serious electrical pollution problems.
Unfortunately, the victim is so electrically hypersensitive that she still suffers greatly.
In her previous efforts to get help from doctors, she had been referred to psychiatrists and had not been provided with any meaningful help.
The WHO recommendations actually encourage this type of treatment by failing, as an organization, to explore the connection between electrical pollution
and sickness, and by advising physicians not to search for causal factors when treating victims. Furthermore, the WHO undermines the serious nature of
this problem by advising governments that there are no grounds to use IEI as a diagnostic classification.
In a different situation, in a rural home located west of Toronto, I found another wireless telephone that was producing and transmitting very high levels of
high frequency radiation, but only when the telephone was turned on and in use.
The victim complained of tinnitus, severe ear pain in the area where the receiver was normally held against her head, and severe pain linked to her neck
In the short amount of time since this problem was identified and she stopped using the wireless phone, the victim has reported that her injuries have
improved by fifty percent.
In the workplace of an assistant professor at a Canadian University, extremely high levels of ground current electricity were located flowing through his office. He has developed such severe sensitivities to the electrical pollution, that he cannot work in that office and is experiencing great difficulty finding a place to live where he does not feel ill. A university office tower located near his office houses many different broadcast and cell phone antennae. Amongst the workers in the top floors of that tower, there are several persons who have developed cancer.
In each of these situations, it was difficult to locate and identify the cause of the harm. Even simple EMF measurements, which you discourage, would have
been inadequate. The victims would have continued to be harmed, their quality of life would have been degraded, and their lives would have been at risk.
If the WHO continues with its recommendations to discourage the measurement of homes, you will be ensuring that many people will suffer, become ill, and possibly die, and that the real causes of their sicknesses will not be identified by health authorities.
There are clear signs that electrical pollution is becoming a major health problem throughout the developed world. The recommendations from this working
group will ensure that the WHO stays "willfully blind" to the causes of what appears to be a major environmental disaster.
This health threat is so significant that the WHO should give it highest priority. Instead, your feeble response to date is compromising the safety of those you should be protecting.
In conclusion, I recommend that the health dangers of electrical pollution be brought to the attention of all governments and health authorities throughout the
Also, thorough and complete testing of victims’ homes should be recommended to governments, health authorities and health care professionals, so that
the electrical pollution harming citizens can be identified. Only by this means will the WHO be able to properly recognize the real causes of these illnesses
and be in a position to make recommendations for a safer world environment in the future.
Cc Mr. Dave Stetzer, Electrical Specialist & Consultant, Wisconsin, U.S.A.
Dr. David Fancy, Director - Safe Wireless, Electrical and Electromagnetic Policies.
Dr. Magda Havas, Environmental and Resource Studies Program, Trent University.
Canada Free Press founding editor Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the media.
A former Toronto Sun and Kingston Whig Standard columnist, she has also appeared on Newsmax.com, the Drudge Report, Foxnews.com,
and World Net Daily. Judi can be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org. You can read your Letters to the Editor here.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Judi McLeod. Thursday, November 10, 2005|
|Childhood Cancer Survivors Face Social Challenges|
|Canada||Created: 6 Oct 2005|
Childhood Cancer Survivors Face Social Challenges
A new study finds children who survive cancer have about twice the rate of educational and social problems compared to children without a history of cancer.
The study, published in the October 15, 2005 issue of CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society, finds children with brain tumors,
neuroblastoma, or leukemia and children treated with cranial radiation therapy (CRT) are at greatest risk for educational difficulties and social isolation.
As therapies for childhood cancers have become more complex and aggressive, children have benefited with increased cure rates and longer survival.
Increasingly, researchers are studying the long-term outcomes of these treatments and unearthing troubling findings for these children's development.
Though studies are small and limited to leukemias and central nervous system tumors, the findings suggest increased risk of some secondary cancers and decreased quality of life and psychosocial adjustment.
In the first large Canadian study of the long-term effects of childhood cancer and its treatments on survivors' educational and social development,
Maru Barrera, PhD, from The Hospital of Sick Children in Toronto, Canada, and her colleagues surveyed the parents of 800 still school age cancer survivors
and 923 age- and gender-matched cancer-free subjects (controls).
The researchers found that survivors had more difficulties in school and suffered more often from social isolation. Academically, 46% of survivors
reported academic problems compared to only 23% of controls. Compared to controls, cancer survivors more often repeated a grade (21% vs. 9%);
attended learning disability (19% vs. 7%) or special education programs (20% vs. 8%). Children with brain cancers, leukemia, and neuroblastoma and those treated with CRT or combined CRT and intrathecal methotrexate (IT MTX) were more likely to report educational difficulties.
Socially, cancer survivors reported no close friends (19% vs. 8%) and less often used friends as confidants (58% vs. 67%). Children with brain tumors
were more likely to report difficulties with friendships.
Children with leukemia or neuroblastoma are also at greater risk for social adjustment difficulties, which has not been previously reported.
Also previously not reported, children treated with CRT alone were at greater risk of developing social problems.
Dr. Barrera concludes, "Child and adolescent survivors of childhood cancer were more likely to experience educational difficulties and less likely to have
close friends or use friends as confidants than population controls of the same age and gender."
The authors conjecture that "the poorer social and educational outcomes of the survivors are the result of a multitude of disease, treatment and situational
Barrera M, et al. Educational and Social Late Effects of Childhood Cancer and Related Clinical, Personal and Familial Characteristics. CANCER;
Published Online: September 12, 2005 (DOI: 10.1002/cncr.21390); Print Issue Date: October 15, 2005.
SOURCE: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: DGNews HOBOKEN, NJ -- September 9, 2005 --|
|WHO study examines cellphone risks to kids|
|Canada||Created: 19 Jul 2005|
While cellphones are increasingly popular among kids, some scientists worry the devices are a health risk to them.
The World Health Organization is completing a massive study to see if there's a link between cellphone use and brain cancer and other ailments.
Cellphones emit electromagnetic radiation.
Their design requires them to be held tight to a person's head.
Scientists are concerned that childrens' skulls are thinner and their brains are still developing.
Therefore, the risk of electromagnetic energy damaging their brains could be greater than the risk for adults.
There are ways to reduce the risk, said a WHO spokesman.
"With respect to children, WHO recommends that children should use hands-free headsets," said Mike Repacholi.
"I have a headset, actually," one youngster told CTV News. "I use it when I'm biking."
"It's a decision for them and their parents to make together," said Peter Barnes of the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association about cellphones and kids.
Barnes said if children limit their cellphone use to an hour per day, there should be no problems.
One reason for concern is that the wireless industry is increasingly targeting children, coming out with Barbie or Hello Kitty-themed products.
The Canadian research team contributing to the project has access to the phone records of cancer patients - and some of them are kids.
"And if we're looking at chronic diseases like cancer, because they are exposed at an earlier age, they have a greater opportunity for that effect to manifest itself," said Daniel Krewski, who added there is no evidence so far that kids are at risk.
Globally, the wireless industry predicts 1.6 billion cellphone customers in 2005. About 15 million Canadians are believed to use them.
The cellphone industry in this country claims to employ 25,000 and generate about $10 billion in annual business.
"Given the immense numbers of users of mobile phones, even small adverse effects on health could have major public health implications" the WHO said.
Kids and cancer aren't the only focuses of the study, which will also look at conditions like memory loss and other decline in mental functioning.
The study is also examining the questions of whether people can safely use cellphones while driving and how much they interfere with medical devices.
The report should by completed by year's end.
With a report from CTV's Rosemary Thompson.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: CTV.ca News Staff|
|«First ‹Previous Page 40 of 40 |