Category Archives: schools

Wi-Fi: Are you worried about possible health risks?

  • August 25, 2010 3:44 PM
  • By POV


Earlier this month, school administrators in Ontario’s Simcoe County decided not to turn off wireless internet in classrooms despite complaints from parents who suspect their children are being made ill by the Wi-Fi.

There’s a debate in the scientific community about whether radiation from wireless communications could pose health risks. Some studies suggest Wi-Fi may cause neurological and cardiac symptoms, but other researchers insist the concerns are unfounded.

Dan Krewski, director of the McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment at the University of Ottawa, told CBC Radio’s Metro Morning that so far, the medical evidence is reassuring. There have been thousands of research papers on the potential health effects of the type of radiation emitted by Wi-Fi and cellphones, he said, and overall, they show no cause for concern.

A day earlier, British physicist Barrie Trower had shared an opposite view with Metro Morning. Trower, who advised the British Secret Service on the use of microwave weapons during the Cold War, thinks parents are right to worry.

Read more.


Leave a comment

Filed under electromagnetic radiation, electrosmog, EMF, schools, WiFi

Kids, schools and WiFi, not a good combo

“These kids are getting sick at school but not at home.” Parents And Teachers Demanding That Schools Dump WiFi

Seek protection for your Children; you do it at home, why not at School?

Leave a comment

Filed under cancer, cell tower, children, disease, schools, WiFi

EMR-Updates July 28th, 2010

Thank you Paul Doyon for the immense amount of time and energy you voluntarily devote to educating the world …CSea and our readers.


International Coalition for an Electromagnetic-Safe Planet (IC-ESP)

Education! Awareness! Support! Action!

(From denial to acceptance, from ignorance to awareness, from apathy to action, from selfishness to compassion.)

Leave a comment

Filed under awareness, cancer, cell phone, cell tower, children, EMF, EMR, schools, WiFi


The American Trial Lawyer
Is Justice for Sale or Has it Been Bought?

Illusion & Escape by Dr. George Carloenergy-fields-around-planet


The ecological balance of a planet already under siege. It is potentially more serious than global warming – and already claiming lives. So, you say: “If this technology is so dangerous, why isn’t it portrayed that way in the news? Do we not have scientists who study this to make the technology safe? Do we not have regulations and government policing to keep us safe? Do we not have the news media to keep us informed? And do we not have lawyers who will advocate on our behalf to ensure that we are treated fairly?”

Yes, we have all of those protections. But they are not working to protect us. Catastrophic trouble lies ahead if corrective steps are not taken to stem the tide of danger of wireless technology.

How Cell Phones Penetrate

When cell phones were first proposed for consumer use in 1983, the fledgling wireless communications industry convinced the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that pre-market safety testing was not necessary. The rationale: cell phones were like little microwave ovens that operated at power levels too low to cause heating. Thus, because cell phones could not be used to cook food, they were deemed safe by the FDA. This core mistake in1983 became the foundation for a quarter-century public health threat that increases daily.’ By 1993, there were 15 million Americans using cell phones – 25 million people worldwide.

A Florida lawsuit raised public questions about cell phones causing brain cancer, which caught the industry, the FDA, and the media by surprise. This prompted congressional hearings that led to a deal between the cell phone industry and the FDA to research the issue. The supposed goal would be to fill data gaps caused by the 1983 decision to forego pre-market safety testing.

Illustration 1. The degree of penetration of the near-field plume from a cell phone antenna (illustrated in image at left) into the skull varies, based on a number of factors including frequency, wave-length, field-intensity and a person’s age. The MRI models above show radio frequency radiation field penetrations by varying age while other variables are held constant.

Now, fifteen years later, more than 280 million Americans will use cell phone at some point in 2008, with more than four billion users worldwide. The cell phone has become ubiquitous among all demographic groups – including young children.

A cell phone held close to the head (as most are) allows electro-magnetic radiation to penetrate deep into brain tissue. This is where the problem begins. (See illustration I) Indeed, the primary concern 10 years ago was the penetrating near-field plume – the area within six inches of the antenna. However, that concern is now one of many, as ambient radiation has become a very serious problem for those who are electro-sensitive or otherwise symptomatic with conditions involving cell membrane sympathetic stress.

Every cell phone must be connected to a base-station antenna to be functional. Each connection results in a biologically active electromagnetic directional wave, which combines with the waves from other cell phones and wireless devices to form a mesh of information carrying radio waves (ICRW) from which there is little escape for most people. The mechanism of harm perpetrated by ICRWs is biological and therefore carries no threshold for effects – in other words, there is no absolutely safe level of exposure. All cells, tissues and organs in the range of exposure are therefore triggered, and the difference between people who develop symptoms and those who do not is related to factors such as age, state of wellness, gender and genetics.

Peer-reviewed studies from around the world show cell phones and other wireless technologies ranging from WiFi in schools to transmission towers in neighborhoods, cause adverse biological effects and disease. (See Side-Bar I: Key Cell Phone Disease Causation References). ICRW and other types of electromagnetic radiation can act both as direct causes of disease and as indirect antagonists or synergens, facts already known in the scientific community even as more precise scientific information is gathered.

Cause and effect (a pathological mechanism of harm) are now linked. Cumulative science has laid the groundwork to prove medical causation under stringent Daubert standards. Indeed, scientists and clinicians who study the health effects of wireless technology have shifted the debate from whether cell phones cause health problems (they do) to the urgent need for remedies than can control emerging medical problems affecting millions daily. A profound urgency exists because the most vulnerable are precisely the demographic groups most likely to need assistance: the young, the sick, the elderly and the poor.

Epidemiological studies show significant increased risk of benign and malignant brain tumors, acoustic neuroma, and melanoma of the eye and salivary gland tumors after ten years of cell phone use. Some studies suggest that even short-term use statistically increases cancer risk. Neurological disease and autism have also been linked to wireless radiation exposure.

Patients with electro-hypersensit

ivity, for example, cannot work in environments with any type of electromagnetic radiation exposure- areas absent exposure are almost nonexistent. These people have become permanently unemployable. Thus, the effects of cell phone radiation have drifted into areas of fundamental public policy, lifestyle choices, politics, health care, national security and personal economic viability. Some governments around the world-but not ours-have begun to take steps to protect vulnerable populations. (See Side-Bar 4: Governments Recommending Precautions for Mobile Phone Use Among: Young: People)

The tragedy is that most of the suffering is probably avoidable. The problems associated with electromagnetic
radiation health effects have been known for at least three decades, and technological solutions have been available, but not implemented, for at least twenty years. (See Side Bar 5: The Story of J. G. Bradv)

Illustration 2. Disrupted red blood cell intercellular communication occurs within minutes of exposure to Information Carrying Radio Waves. Red blood cells must be able to sense the location of other blood cells to avoid clumping. Slide at left: prior to cell phone exposure – red cells are functional. Slide at right: after five minutes on a cell phone – red cells are clumped and non-functional.

These devastating and far-reaching effects are not accidents of nature. The expanding telecommunications and internet industries have perpetrated a dangerous fraud upon the public, withholding information that would expose the risk that cell phones pose to humans and the environment, and suppressing technologies that arguably are capable of saving lives. The telecommunications and internet industries have enlisted an army of public relations, marketing and defense law personnel to apply their skills learned in the tobacco and asbestos wars to an even greater, more sophisticated ruse: the orchestrated campaign of deception that assures the public that telecommunications technology is safe. The stakes are huge: Unlike workers exposed to asbestos or those who chose to smoke, far greater numbers of Americans are vulnerable to the debilitating and harmful effects of cell phone usage, the extent of which may not be revealed for decades to come. (See Side-Bar 6: The Cell Phone Industry Playbook: Controlling Illusion)

The cornerstone of the industry approach: Remove any reference to detrimental cell phone health effects from the scientific and medical communities, as well as public relations and political arenas. According to the industry playbook, the sole issue is public perception- not about public health and safety, or scientific truth. To achieve that end, the industry had found it necessary to alter scientific facts to suit the desired outcome.

(See Side-Bar 7: Data Manipulation: Thumbs on the Scales of Science)

The science is complex, which helps the industry promoting safety of its products to the layperson.  Professional wordsmiths retained by the industry split hairs over complicated scientific concepts, including differences between thermal and non-thermal mechanisms; biological effects and health effects; replication of studies and corroborative research; and weight of scientific evidence versus proper scientific judgment. Lay journalists cannot hope to investigate such complicated nuances, and public reports of harm are so watered down that readers, listeners and viewers are left with the impression that “the issue is being looked into and so far, there are no problems.” Not surprisingly, consumers continue to buy.

The industry’s most obvious motivation is to maintain sales, as companies work on narrow profit margins. A one or two percent reduction in market share can devastate the bottom line of even the largest players. Raising the specter of health risks would obviously be bad for business.

Moreover, cell phone leaders must now confront another challenge: the insurance carriers’ decision to exclude health risk claims from product liability policies marketed to the wireless industry. Beginning in 2002, major insurers excluded health risks from cell phone usage as a covered loss under policies sold to the industry. (See Side-Bar 8: Chronology of Key Cell Phone Personal Injury Litigation).

Insurers are well aware of potential losses associated with ongoing product liability and personal injury litigation against the cell phone industry, as well as claims of injured workers. (See Side-Bar 9: Workers’ Compensation Cases; Side-Bar 10: Key Legal Precedents)

Wireless companies want to avoid exposure as target defendants, preferring to blend into the burgeoning information technology and internet industries. In 1999, the main cell phone industry trade association, the Cellular Telephone Industry Association, changed its name to the Cellular Telephone and lnternet Association, allowing companies such as Microsoft and Apple to join. In 2005, mobile telephone entities moved into the entertainment industry – exemplified by the joint venture between Sprint and the Disney Corporation that brought Disney into the ranks of wireless signal carriers. Cafe companies such as Starbucks Coffee and Panera Bread have formed wireless lnternet partnerships with industry leaders. These moves have diluted the potential liability for cell phone companies. These actions were intended to reduce the potential exposure of cell phone companies, and have spawned an institutional arrogance reflecting an apparent belief in their own invincibility.

However, it remains to be seen whether Microsoft, Apple, Disney, Starbucks and others will agree to carry the burden of the industry’s self-inflicted liability. Another part of the corporate strategy encourages manipulation of the consumer market, such as the effort to convince parents and teachers that WiFi wireless access at school will improves education – with no evidence These companies prey on ill or poorly informed consumers to support the claim. Ironically, the pathology associated who can be swayed by unscientific and improbable personal with ICRW is consistent with learning deficiencies linked testimonials and other wild claims about miracle cures.  Cell phones as personal safety devices also fraud perpetrated by these ‘helpful’ companies is a selling point, despite the absence of data proving ing to public health as the ruse promoted by the wireless that any personal security provided by cell phones out- weighs the associated health risks.

Manipulating science for profit is not new to the wireless industry. A gamut of marketing companies and other
“grass roots” participatory businesses sell numerous products, including pendants and stick-on tabs, with unsupportable claims to protect consumers against the dangers of cell phones and other electro-magnetic radiation emitting devices.

The science of prevention and therapeutic intervention regarding cell phone-related diseases is still in its infancy, but one aspect is abundantly clear: no panacea yet exists to address the problem. Recent studies indicate that desperate consumers are being deceived to purchase bogus protective devices that not only give a false sense of security, but also improper use of sham products and may lead to serious disease relapses.  Because these businesses are person to person, they escape regulation by the Federal Trade Commission or other agencies.

Thus far, the cell phone industry has avoided accountability for the health and environmental damages caused by their devices and supportive infrastructure, leaving the injured without recourse. The system is not working.

Because the FDA granted the industry a variance on the requirement for premarket safety, it is unlikely that that the FDA will take further steps at protecting the public. Moreover, with respect to radiation-emitting devices, the FDA has very narrow regulatory authority: they can require pre-market testing; they can pursue post-market surveillance; they can ban products if post-market surveillance identifies problems. With upwards of 280 million Americans using cell phones, a cell phone ban is politically infeasible.

Consumers cannot look to the FDA, which is not directly involved in the safety regulation of cell phones at all. What about the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)?

The wireless industry controls it. The revolving door between the FCC and the wireless industry has not stopped. Indeed, both industry and the FCC cite the lap between the two as a major reason for the tremendous growth and “success” of the wireless communications. They look after each other’s back.

In a recent cell phone-brain cancer suit in the District of Columbia Superior Court, the FCC entered an amicus brief in support of the cell phone industry’s motion for dismissal. The FCC had never before become involved in state or federal court proceedings regarding cell phone dangers; the amicus brief signals a new level of bold interference by the federal agency to advance the agenda of an industry it is suppose to oversee. Further, the cell phone industry routinely misrepresents as safety standards” the
emission guidelines for wireless radiation promulgated under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and administered through the FCC. The FCC has no safety authority. Thus, no safety standards exist to protect consumers from the dangers of cell phones and other wireless devices.

To date, the cell phone industry has responded to litigation by raising the shield of federal preemption, preventing fact finders from hearing scientific and medical causation testimony based on data generated after 1999. “IN the ABSENCE of sound FEDERAL GUIDELINES or vigilant regulation, LITIGATION is the ONLY option to COMPENSATE victims and deter the continued disingenuous and DANGEROUS behavior of the WIRELESS industry.”

In matters of public policy involving consumer protection, litigation and legislation has sometimes lagged in addressing rapid technological advances. Such is the case with wireless technology. To date, remedial options short of these “last resorts” have failed.

For half a century, questions have been raised about the safety of wireless devices, and for the past fifteen years, the debate has occurred in public. The passage of time has only exacerbated the public health threat, as exposure to dangerous electromagnetic fields has dramatically increased the risks with no corresponding mitigation. Instead, many consumers now face mounting medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering attributable to wireless technology.

In the absence of sound federal guidelines or vigilant regulation, litigation is the only option to compensate victims and deter the continued disingenuous and dangerous behavior of the wireless industry. Medical science supports personal injury litigation for cell phone-related brain tumors, parotid gland tumors, acoustic neuroma, eye cancer, neurological disorders, electro-hypersensitivity and autism.

Product liability actions will achieve several goals: compensate injured consumers; stop detrimental industry practices that victimize consumers; and put an end to fraudulent promotion of products that do not protect consumers from various types of electromagnetic radiation.

In addition to compensating victims, there is an urgent need to apply political pressure to the legislative and executive branches of government, which will result in long term solutions that ensure the health and safety of future generations. Laws should be enacted to place health warnings on cell phones and wireless devices, as well as warning signs in public spaces that carry WiFi and other wireless signals.

The Telecommunications Act must be amended to include victims’ compensation provisions; incentives for the development and commercialization of technologies to promote users from harmful electromagnetic radiation; and civil rights provisions to promote environmental and health risk protection for homeowners in communities where cell phone base stations and other wireless infrastructure are constructed.

The mobile telephone industry has been successful in manipulating scientific data, public opinion and public
information to protect their interests, promote the unbridled sale of their technologies and create the illusion of safety – all to the detriment of public health.

Here is how they do it.

Public relations “hit squads’ are permanently in place in trade associations and corporate offices to monitor scientific, medical and consumer information for consistency with industry i n t m s .

When “problems” are identified, the public impact of detrimental information is altered first through public statements and written press.  The media are ‘managed’ by advertising dollars. Second level ‘management’ is achieved through control of scientific research and scientific organizational channels.

Key watch words that signal industry manipulation:

o Expert panel reports say.. …
o Third party opinions are….
o The ‘weight of scientific evidence indicates …..
o The studies need to be ‘replicated’ before …..
o The ‘safety guidelines’ are being met
o More research is needed before.. …
o Scientists around the world agree that …..
Industry institutions collaborates:
o The Word Health Organization
o The American National Standards Institute
o The IEEE – Institute for Electronics and Electrical
o The International Commission on Non-Ionizing
Radiation Protection
o The American C a m M i y
o The Bioelectromagnetic Society – BEMS
o The Federal Communications Commission
o The Food and Drug Administration

Industry consultants who publicly support industry
o Dr. William Balky – Exponent Consultants
o Dr. Linda Erdreich – Exponent Consultants
o Dr. John MwMer – University of Wisconsin
o Dr. Mickwl Repachioli – University of Rome (Italy)
o Dr. Bernard Veyret – University of Bourdeax (France)
o Dr. Michael Thun – American Cancer Society
o Dr. Joseph Roti Roti – Washington University (St. Louis)
o Dr. John Boice – International Epidemiology Institute
o Dr. h d o Vmchia – International Committee on Nonionizing
Radiation Protection

Studies funded by the mobile phone industry are more than six times more likely to find “no problem” than studies funded by independent sources. This difference is statistically significant – suggesting the occurrence is not by chance. The following is an example.

In 1995, a young epidemiology student was working as an assistant to a senior scientist when their organization was contracted by an independent group to conduct a case-control study of brain tumors and cell phone use. When the lead investigator passed away before the study was completed, the work continued with the student and was completed in the fall of 1998. The results were peer-reviewed and the report submitted  in compliance with the research contract revealed a statistically significant doubling in risk of rare neuro-epithelial brain tumors among cell phone users.

Between 1999 and 2000, the student forged a relationship with a cell phone industry epidemiologist who had been hired to assist in ‘peer review’ of studies prior to publication.

In late 2000, a paper describing the case-control study was submitted to the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). In that paper, three cases of cancer that had been part of the previous analyses had been eliminated. That change in the number of cancer cases included in the study – a breach of the protocols that had been in place since the study began in 1995 — eliminated the statistical significance
of the link between brain tumors and cell phones.

In the original peer-reviewed report, he also detailed a statistically significant correlation between the side of the head where tumors were located and the side of the head where people reported using their cell phones. Another study from Sweden that same year showed a similar significant risk increase with ipsilateral phone use. The new finding was very damaging to the mobile phone industry, especially since there was another corroborative study. With the three cases of cancer eliminated the statistically significant correlation between the side of the head where the phone was used and the side of the head where the tumor was located also conveniently disappeared. The peer-reviewers at JAMA had no way of knowing about the data manipulation.
In the end, manipulated data were published in a highly reputable peer-reviewed journal. The industry was able to use the paper as a public relations tool. Today, the paper remains prominent in the data package the industry uses advance its position that cell phones pose no health risk.

1 Comment

Filed under awareness, cancer, cell phone, economy, global warming, media, pollution, public safety, schools, USA, WiFi

A worrisome situation, at Brock University, St Catharines Ontario, Canad

A worrisome situation , at Brock University, St Catharines Ontario, Canada

The main University Administration building sits high on top of the Niagara Escarpment and the top of the building is the highest place in that area. Because of this high position, the building is a handy (but unsafe) location to place radio antennas and cell phone antennas. Unfortunately, because of all these antennas, the electro magnetic radiation on the campus is very high, which leads to serious concerns for the safety of the staff and students.

The message below is from Dr. David Fancy, a faculty member at Brock.

Martin Weatherall
Hello all,

Well, we’ve made some progress here at Brock. The attached report from the Brock University Joint Health and Safety Committee EMF subcommittee was supported unanimously by worker and management members alike at the last full JHSC meeting. It was adopted unanimously as a motion, one that the administration must now act on.  One of the members of the subcommittee is the university’s vice-president academic, and is a research scientist himself.

This report and motion represents gradual progress, because the removal of the Brock communications towers and the over 50 broadcast antenna on them is not mandated (antenna sited within 100 meters of residences, classrooms, and offices). However, it does put into significant question the safety of the existing Health Canada guidelines. I’ve been working through the union executive, of which I am a member, to now send more thorough information about current scientific literature and policy initiatives/options out to our membership. I’m working with the other unions on campus to send out materials to their memberships as well.

This represents a crack in the wall and, as far as I know, it is the first time a Joint Health and Safety Committee for an organization (one that employs thousands of people and is part publically funded) has taken this kind of precautionary step towards EMF. We can promote this as a ‘first step’ model for JHSCs or their equivalent all across the country. Please circulate widely and encourage other union Health and Safety representatives to contact me with advice on how to work with their unions and management.

It’s been four years and many meetings in the making, and there’s much work yet to do towards establishing exposures here that respect what the scientific literature is telling us are risk levels, but: we’re getting somewhere. The EMF issue remains an ongoing one here and the subcommittee has had its initial one year mandate extended indefinitely to review ongoing developments on the issue.


Jonathan Neufeld
Tom St. Ivany
Brock Joint Health and Safety Committee
February 2 2009

The EMF/Radiofrequency Subcommittee of the Brock University Joint Health and Safety Committee comprised of Gerry Boily, David Fancy, and Greg Finn has reached consensus on how to best advise the wider Committee regarding the issue of EMF/Radiofrequency on campus.  The Subcommittee recognizes that there is no international scientific consensus on the safety or lack of safety to human health of levels of radiofrequency exposure to which faculty and staff at Brock may be exposed during the course of their regular working activities.

In view of this lack of scientific consensus, the Subcommittee advises that the wider Committee recommend the minimum level of precautionary action to be taken in such a circumstance: namely, that Brock faculty and staff be alerted via whatever means the Committee deems appropriate that:

1) the JHSC has been investigating this issue on their behalf;

2) that this investigation has resulted from the fact that there is no international consensus on the matter; and

3) that faculty and staff are encouraged to inform themselves further on this matter should they be concerned.

The Subcommittee does not advise supplying the community with a web resource on the issue at this time. The Subcommittee does not advise embarking on any testing of levels of radiofrequency on campus at this time.  Additionally, the Subcommittee advises that its mandate be extended by calling for it to reconvene annually:

1) to track any developments on this issue;
2) to determine whether there is a need for a web resource on the issue for the community; and
3) to discuss whether there is a need for testing of radiofrequency levels to be done on campus.

There are no dissenting opinions or additions accompanying this recommendation.

Note: The Subcommittee met five times during the past year, most recently on January 30th. The meetings were not minuted. Members of the Office of Environment Health and Safety were active participants in a number of the meetings. John Hay, Community Health Sciences, presented his opinions to the Subcommittee during the fourth Subcommittee meeting in late fall 2008.

Dr. David Fancy
Department of Dramatic Arts
Brock University
St Catharines
L2S 3A1
905-688-5550, ext 3584

Leave a comment

Filed under EMF, schools

Electric Fields (EMF / ELF) Can Kill

Overhead Power Lines and Electric Fields Can Kill

phone-company-poles-wiresPerhaps the most dangerous, damaging form of pollution facing Americans every minute of every day is invisible, soundless, and cannot be touched or felt. It is electromagnetic field radiation (EMF) and it is emanating from virtually every single electrical appliance, computer, electric wire, and especially high voltage lines (overhead and buried), which are carrying current. EMF is specifically causing cancer in children and in older adults and may be triggering countless other immune deficiency and psychological diseases and disorders in anyone in close proximity. Make no mistake about it: electric fields are bad news for your health and can be killers.

The government of Sweden funded an official, massive study of the effects of electric fields from overhead power lines on 500,000 people over a period of 25 years and found overwhelming evidence that electric fields generated cancer in children at 4 times the normal rate and tripled the rate in adults. Sweden lists electromagnetic fields (EMF) as Class 2 Carcinogens, right along with tobacco.

As far back as 1979, University of Colorado epidemiologist Nancy Wertheimer, Ph.D., firmly established a connection between low-voltage power lines in residential neighborhoods and instances of childhood leukemia. Her study showed that children living near these ordinary backyard variety power lines had three times the likelihood of developing childhood cancer. Larger gauge, high voltage transmission lines pose a much greater danger than typical backyard lines. Since then, many other studies have confirmed her findings and substantiated the link between 60hz AC electromagnetic radiation and increased risk of leukemia, lymphomas, and cancer of the brain and nervous system. Many scientists warn people not to live within 200 yards of high voltage power lines. Of 35 international research studies on electric field radiation, 33 established a conclusive link between brain tumors, leukemia, and other forms of cancer.

Scientists in Russia have done more studies on EMF than any other country and for decades have been reporting that electric fields cause high blood pressure, chronic stress effects, immune system dysfunction, changes in white and red blood cell counts, increased metabolism, chronic fatigue disorders, and headaches.

In 1990, The American Journal of Epidemiology published a study on the use of electric blankets which demonstrated “a quadrupling in the risk of brain tumors among children whose mothers slept under electric blankets during the first trimester of pregnancy.”

Other studies report a clear linkage between EMF exposure and illnesses such as immune disorders, brain wave modification, and many other serious physical and psychological abnormalities and deficiencies.

60hz Alternating Current (AC)

Our electricity is primarily derived from 60hz AC which create an EMF that penetrates every cell in the body. The primary health risks caused by EMF’s result from the conversion of AC electricity into a DC pattern of energy. The actual conversion of AC electricity into DC is primarily accomplished by the use of transformers and electric motors.

Overhead power lines and ‘step-down’ transformers present the biggest dangers to the average citizen. Step-down transformers look like large metal canisters and are found hanging on many utility poles and are commonly seen throughout residential neighborhoods. Electric motors are found everywhere from vacuum cleaners to hair dryers to refrigerators.

In the U.S., the EPA states that an electromagnetic field of only one milligauss is the maximum safe level of exposure. However, some Russian researchers assert that an electric field of only 1/1000th milligauss should be the maximum permissible exposure.

By these standards, we are all in big trouble. We are exposed to EMF 24 hours a day from electric shavers (14-1600 milligauss), hair dryers (3-1400 milligauss), electric blankets (extremely dangerous), TV’s, stereos, VCR’s, radios, computers, copiers, toasters, ovens, electric heaters, all electric appliances, microwaves, lamps, fluorescent lighting, dimmer switches, home and office wiring, electric toothbrushes, and waterbed heaters (all of which use AC to DC conversion for their operation). Many of these electronic devices are used intermittently and that is why consistent exposure to overhead high voltage power lines is considered the most dangerous of all.

There is also major electric field and extreme low frequency radiation (ELF) of many kinds being emitted from military installations, industrial machines, TV and radio transmitters, microwave transmission systems, cellular phones, high voltage power lines, and dozens of other sources. In fact, we live in a virtual fish bowl of radiation; a chaos of random photon bombardment which affects every living cell of the human body.

The Vulnerable Human Body

Human beings are, in reality, bio-electric machines usually operating at between 2 and 12 hz. Normal household current is 60hz and is completely incompatible and disruptive to the body’s natural electric frequency range, neural transmission system, and its sensitive neuro-chemical equilibrium. 60hz electromagnetic radiation penetrates the entire body and brain 24 hours a day.

Each cell in the body contains positive and negatively charged elements that are kept in a delicate balance on the inside and outside of the cell wall. Electromagnetic, ELF, and microwave radiation disorders and disrupts this critical balance and plays havoc with the millions of electrical impulses that the body uses to regulate all cellular activity. The random and unorganized photons radiating from these fields also act as electromagnetic ‘free radicals’ which are often stored in cells as significant electrostatic charges which can cause major dysfunction at the cellular, molecular, and atomic levels.

Have you ever been in a car and driven under a high voltage power line and had your radio sound drowned out by static electricity? The human body takes the very same kind of punishment in the car, home, and office from the numerous sources of electric radiation which abound everywhere. And speaking of cars: many of them produce electric field radiation in the area of the front seat which can be two to three times stronger than EMF from some home appliances.

The reports of death and disease caused by electric field exposure are prolific; 11 of 65 workers on the first floor of a telephone company developed cancer from the electric field generated by a mass of electrical equipment housed in a room adjacent to their office; a San Francisco elementary school had 22 cases of cancer among the staff who worked in the front of the building near with overhead high voltage lines and four pole-mounted transformers outside; and clinical research showed human cancer cells in a lab experiment exposed to 60 hz (household variety) electric fields proliferated and within one week were cloning six times as fast as normal.

Furthermore, UCLA studies showed that electric field radiation on animals caused changes in the firing rate of brain cells, changes in their EEG’s and lowered behavior scores on repeat testing; permanent changes in learning ability have been documented. Short term memory impairment has been reported on subjects exposed to common 60hz fields and an American study showed a 300% increase in brain tumors in children whose mothers used electric blankets during pregnancy. Even many police departments have banned the use of hand-held radar guns because of the proven link between long term EMF exposure from these devices and cancer among police officers who use them.

The Bedroom Is Often the Most Dangerous Place In the Home

A good night’s sleep. For many, it has been years since they have been able to use that expression. Tired of laying awake nights? Tired of waking up ‘half-dead’ in the morning? Tired of taking sleeping pills and tranquilizers to sleep? If so, you are not alone. There are from 20-70 million chronic insomniacs in the U.S. and millions more who sleep poorly.

After a rough night of tossing and turning, the gritting and grinding of teeth, having nightmares, sweating, suffering through muscle cramps and spasms, millions of these people will get up and drag themselves through the day in near exhaustion, working at levels far below normal efficiency. Lost productivity in the U.S. from poor sleep runs into the billions. And how many accidents on the road are caused by fatigue and poor sleep?

Many researchers and scientists now feel that electromagnetic field radiation, both from within and without the bedroom, is the single biggest factor in poor sleep. And poor health. Look around your bedroom. Is there a clock radio on the nightstand near your pillow? A tv? A stereo? Do you see an electric blanket? Are there high voltage power lines with close to your residence? All or any of these electric sources can ruin your sleep and can substantially increase your risk of developing cancer and any number of diseases, both psychological and physical.

While you sleep, your body relaxes and is unconscious. In this state of vulnerability, research indicates you are 100-150 times more open to the damage of electromagnetic radiation that when you are awake. Children are often up to 1,000 times more sensitive to these fields when they are asleep. That TV screen in your bedroom will radiate energy all night…even after it has been unplugged. It can take hours or even days for the built-up voltage in the television to dissipate.

The worst of all electrical bedroom appliances
are clock radios, electric alarm clocks, electric blankets, and waterbed heaters. Scientists have established that a simple clock radio or electric alarm clock on the night stand near your head can radiate an electromagnetic field into your brain and body that can cause very serious problems health problems.

Electric blankets radiate fields over 70,000 times higher than normal acceptable levels. If you insist on using an electric blanket, warm your bed and then unplug it before you retire for the night. Do not leave it plugged in while you sleep, even if it is turned off. Outside high voltage power lines continually radiate EMF 24 hours a day.

A Siege of Electromagnetic Radiation

Ever since Thomas Edison energized the first electric power plant in 1882, humanity has made ever increasing use of electricity. The result is that we now live in a sea of dangerous and deadly electromagnetic radiation that we cannot sense and has never before existed on the earth. This massive onslaught of new radiation is causing stress, disease, and other harmful and destructive effects the world over by interfering with the most basic levels of the body¹s cells and especially the human brain.

Specifically, the human brain (and the brains of all living things) evolved and has been regulated over a period of 3 billion years by the earth’s naturally-occurring narrow band of extreme low frequency radiation, commonly known as ELF. Throughout history, this narrow range of frequency occurred only in the 1-30 Hertz range and was produced by the natural resonance of the earth’s surface. The only other electromagnetic radiation of any magnitude was in the 1,000 HZ range which is produced during lightning discharges in storms. The remainder of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum was empty. There was nothing there!

It does not require great insight to realize that the vast new spectrum of electromagnetic radiation that has been unleashed on humanity in the last 100 years is overwhelming, highly-destructive, and disruptive on a scale unprecedented over a period of 3 billion years (the potential use of electromagnetic radiation to control and influence the psychological behavior and health of human beings has not been lost on the military-industrial complex either. But that¹s another story).

In summary, the research done in the common 60hz range (household current) has demonstrated repeatedly that electromagnetic radiation can cause serious, sometimes fatal disease, major psychological and physical stress, and changes in hormones, body weight, and blood chemistry. EMF-induced decreases in immune competency alone have contributed to a wide range of illnesses and psychological disorders that have resulted in vast suffering, loss of productivity, and shortened lives. The current epidemic of numerous degenerative diseases including cancer and leukemia and other immune dysfunctions is not purely coincidental and often relates directly to the catastrophic effects of uncontrolled electromagnetic radiation in our ever-declining environment.

In the summer of 1996, a U.S. Federal Court ruled that citizens may not bring suit against electric power companies over electromagnetic radiation emissions.


Filed under cancer, children, schools

Another Country banned cell phones in schools

Tajikistan bans mobile phones from schools
Wed Mar 11, 2009

DUSHANBE (Reuters) – The Central Asian state of Tajikistan on Tuesday banned mobile phones from all schools and universities in a bid to boost education.

“This measure has been taken in order to improve the quality of teaching at schools,” deputy Dodikhudo Saimutdinov said after a vote in parliament.

Offenders, including those who carry phones without using them, will be fined.

Although Tajikistan is considered Central Asia’s poorest nation, 3.2 million out of 7 million Tajiks use mobiles.

President Imomali Rakhmon has earlier introduced uniforms at schools and universities and barred students from going to schools in their own cars.

(Reporting by Roman Kozhevnikov; Writing by Olzhas Auyezov)

Leave a comment

Filed under cell phone, schools