EMR-Updates12 27 10-1 2 11

EMR-Updates
December 27th, 2010 – January 2nd, 2011

The Newsletter of the
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.)
1. Cell Phones and Wireless Hazards (William Thomas)

2. Why Did the Russians Ban an Appliance Found in 90% of American
Homes? (Mercola)
3. Wounded By Wireless (YouTube)
4. EMF-Omega News
5. UW Scientist Henry Lai Makes Waves in the Cell Phone Industry (Seattle
Magazine)
6. Autism May Be Linked to Electromagnetic Radiation Levels in the Mother`s
Bedroom During Pregnancy (electromagnetichealth.com)
7. PG&E Smart Mtr Protest Shuts SFD in W. Marin: Two Moms Arrested
(IndyBay)
8. AN EXAMINATION OF THE POTENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF
RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION (House of Commons
Standing Committee on Health)
9. Manmade Problem Turned Deadlier than AIDS - Is There Still Time to
Correct Course? (Dr Mercola)
10. Hackers issue BT Home Hub warning (v3+co+uk.uk)
11. Nintendo Releases Health-Safety Warnings for 3DS (X-bit labs)
12. Funny British Comedy Clip: “My BlackBerry is Not Working!”
(BLACKBERRYCOOL)
13. Wi-Fi Overload at High-Tech Meetings (New York Times)
14. Scientists worry about ocean energy's effect on sea-creature migration
(PHYSORG.com )
15. Mobile phone plans cause a stir (South Norwich News)
16. SOLAR MAX COULD SPELL TROUBLE (Discovery news)
17. Interview Talal Jabari: Full Signal (Next-up)
18. Tensen Family Farm v Consumers Energy Company (First Do No Harm)
19. T-Mobile Tower and Compound (Angela Flynn)
20. Giz Watson Is a Politician Concerned About Exposure to Electromagnetic
Radiation (Giz Watson)
21. Cell Phone Towers Disorient Homer Pigeons (Express Buzz)
22. How to Reduce Magnetic Fields in Your Bedroom (The Dr. Coldwell Report)
23. No Cell Towers Atop Buildings Without PMCs Nod (Times of India)
24. AT&T Releases Anti-texting While Driving Documentary (Engadget.com)
1
25. Ceiling Lights in Minn. Send Coded Internet Data (Yahoo News)
26. T-Mobile Sues John`s Creek Over Cell Tower Denial (North Fulton County
News)
27. Taming the Microwave Dragon (Magda Havas)
28. Culver City Residents Defeat Cell Tower, Declared Victory, Donate
Documents (Sunroom Desk)
29. Italian Company Offers to Install Shark Shields in Egypt (The Voice of
Russia)
30. THE LEGISLATOR’S GUIDE TO WARNING LABELS ON CELL PHONES AND
THE LAYMAN’S GUIDE TO THE SCIENCE BEHIND NON-THERMAL EFFECTS
FROM WIRELESS DEVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE. (The People`s
Initiative)
31. Warning in the User`s Manual of the Android 2.2 Smart Phone (in
Japanese) (Mariko TOYA)
______________________________
1. CELLPHONE & WIRELESS HAZARDS AND RESPONSES
By William Thomas
Did Santa Bring You An iPad?

http://willthomasonline.net/Did_Santa_Bring_You_An_iPad.html
Who Says Wireless Is Dangerous?

http://willthomasonline.net/Who_Says_Wireless_Is_Dangerous.html
You Bet Your Life

http://willthomasonline.net/You_Bet_Your_Life.html
Top Cell Phone Studies

http://willthomasonline.net/Top_Cell_Phone_Studies.html
How To Limit Your Wireless Exposure

http://willthomasonline.net/How_To_Limit_Your_Wireless_Expo.html
Hot Links For Cell Phone & Wireless Info

http://willthomasonline.net/Hot_Links_For_Cell_Phone_And_Wi.html
William Thomas
250-335-2353
http://willthomasonline.net/
______________________________
2. Why did the Russians Ban an Appliance Found in 90% of

American Homes?
By Dr. Mercola (originally posted May 18 2010)
2
By now, you probably know that what you eat has a profound impact on your
health. The mantra, “You are what you eat” is really true.
But you need to consider not only WHAT you buy, but how you cook it.
Eating most of your food raw is ideal. But most of us are not going to be able to
accomplish a completely raw diet, and we’ll end up cooking some percentage of
our food.
Smart food preparation starts with high quality foods and food preparation and
that means saying sayonara to your microwave oven. Need to sterilize a
dishcloth? Use your microwave. But zapping your casserole is a BAD idea
if you are interested in preparing healthy food.
Why the no nukes policy?
When it comes to microwave ovens, the price for convenience is to compromise

your health. In this article, I will review what we know about the effects
microwaves on your food and on your body.
Sad State of Our Soils
Over the past century, the quality of fresh food has declined due to soil depletion,
unsustainable farming practices, overproduction of crops, and the use of
pesticides and herbicides. You can no longer assume you’re getting all of the
vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and phytonutrients you need by eating a multitude
of fresh produce—even if you’re eating organically.
Not surprisingly, a calorie today will provide you less nutrition than a calorie from
100, or even 50 years ago.
Three recent studies of historical food composition have shown 5 to 40 percent

declines in some of the minerals in fresh produce, and another study found a
similar decline in our protein sources.[1]
So now, more than ever, you must be careful to maximize the “bang for your
buck” when it comes to the foods you eat.
3
Research shows that your microwave oven will NOT help you in these efforts—and
in fact will threaten your health by violently ripping the molecules in your food
apart, rendering some nutrients inert, at best, and carcinogenic at its worst.
Convenience Comes at Significant Toxic Threat to You and Your Family
Microwaves heat food by causing water molecules in it to resonate at very high

frequencies and eventually turn to steam which heats your food. While this can
rapidly heat your food, what most people fail to realize is that it also causes
a change in your food’s chemical structure.
There are numerous issues that have emerged since microwave ovens were first
introduced to consumers more than 40 years ago, besides depleting your food’s
nutritional value, which will be addressed a bit later.
The first thing you probably noticed when you began microwaving food was how
uneven the heating is.
“Hot spots” in microwaved food can be hot enough to cause burns—or build up to
a “steam explosion.” This has resulted in admonitions to new mothers about NOT
using the microwave to heat up baby bottles, since babies have been burned by
super-heated formula that went undetected.
Another problem with microwave ovens is that carcinogenic toxins can leach out
of your plastic and paper containers/covers, and into your food.
The January/February 1990 issue of Nutrition Action Newsletter reported the

leakage of numerous toxic chemicals from the packaging of common
microwavable foods, including pizzas, chips and popcorn. Chemicals included
polyethylene terpthalate (PET), benzene, toluene, and xylene. Microwaving
fatty foods in plastic containers leads to the release of dioxins (known
carcinogens) and other toxins into your food. [8] [2]
One of the worst contaminants is BPA, or bisphenol A, an estrogen-like compound

used widely in plastic products. In fact, dishes made specifically for the
microwave often contain BPA, but many other plastic products contain it as well.
Microwaving distorts and deforms the molecules of whatever food or other

substance you subject to it. An example of this is blood products.
Blood is normally warmed before being transfused into a person. Now we know
that microwaving blood products damages the blood components. In fact, one
woman died after receiving a transfusion of microwaved blood in 1991 , which
resulted in a well-publicized lawsuit.
Microwave Radiation Leakage
You may have heard that there is some danger of microwaves escaping from your
microwave while it’s operating. This was more of a risk with earlier models than
with recent ones, which undergo more rigorous testing.
4
Theoretically, there are very small amounts of radiation leakage through the
viewing glass, but the FDA reports these levels are “insignificant” and “well below
the level known to harm people.”
The FDA has been regulating microwave ovens since 1971 through its electronic
product radiation control program, which is mandated by the Electronic Product
Radiation Control provisions of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act[3] .
The FDA limits the amount of microwaves that can leak from an oven throughout
its lifetime to 5 milliwatts (mW) per square centimeter at approximately 2 inches
from the oven surface. Because microwave energy decreases dramatically as you
move away from the source of the radiation, a measurement made 20 inches
from your oven would be approximately one-hundredth of the value measured at
2 inches.[2]
The federal standard also requires all ovens to have “two independent interlock
systems that stop the production of microwaves the moment the latch is released
or the door is opened.”
And a monitoring system is also required, which stops the operation if one or both
interlock systems fail.
You would think, with all these tests and regulations, that you’d be safe. However,
according to Powerwatch, a non-profit independent organization with a central
role in the microwave radiation debate:
“Even when the microwave oven is working correctly, the microwave

levels within the kitchen are likely to be significantly higher than those
from any nearby cellular phone base-stations. Remember also that
microwaves will travel through walls if the microwave oven is against an
inside wall.”
Powerwatch also states that we don’t really know if the current regulations about
leakage are truly safe and recommends ovens be checked at least annually, since
microwave emissions can change with normal use.
You might also consider purchasing a $20 testing device that allows you to check
the radiation in your home.
Make sure that, if you are going to use your microwave for cleaning sponges or
for any use at all, regularly examine the door and hinges to make sure they are
sealing properly. If the door doesn’t close correctly, or if it’s warped, bent, or
otherwise damaged, don’t use it at all!
Since your eyes are known to be particularly susceptible to microwave radiation

(high microwave exposures are known to cause cataracts), I recommend stepping
away from your microwave while it’s in use.
New Study Confirms Microwaves Affect Your Heart
5
A recent study examining the effects 2.4 GHz radiation (which is the frequency of
radiation emitted by Wifi routers and microwave ovens) on the heart was just
completed. The study found “unequivocal evidence” that microwave frequency
radiation affects the heart at non-thermal levels that are well below federal safety
guidelines, according to Dr. Magda Havas of Trent University[4] .
Dr. Havas says:
“This is the first study that documents immediate and dramatic changes
in both heart rate and heart rate variability caused by an approved
device that generates microwaves at levels well below (0.3 percent)
federal guidelines in both Canada and the United States.”
No longer can skeptics claim that microwaves produce no immediate

biological effects at ordinary household levels!
The study will be appearing in a peer-reviewed journal sometime during

the summer of 2010. If you are experiencing rapid or irregular heartbeat,
pain or pressure in your chest, you will want to visit your physician and
share with him or her (second video on this page).
There is also evidence that this same frequency of radiation causes blood
sugar to spike in susceptible individuals and may actually be the cause of
one type of diabetes. For details about this, watch the first video below.
Microwaving Also Zaps the Nutrients Right Out of Your Food
There has been surprisingly little research on how microwaves affect organic
molecules, or how the human body responds to consuming microwaved food.
Wouldn’t you expect that a product that sits in more than 90 percent of kitchens,
as well as practically every break room in the country, would have been
thoroughly investigated for safety?
The handful of studies that have been done generally agree, for the most part,
that microwaving food damages its nutritional value. Your microwave turns your
beautiful, organic veggies, for which you’ve paid such a premium in money or
labor, into “dead” food that can cause disease!
Heating food, in and of itself, can result in some nutrient loss, but using
microwaves to heat food introduces the additional problem of the “microwave
effect,” a phenomenon that will be discussed in detail later.
The majority of studies on microwaves and nutrition were conducted prior to

2000, I suspect because the focus of radiation research of late has shifted toward
a more ominous threat: environmental radiation from electromagnetic devices,
such as cell phones and computers, which has mushroomed into a gigantic cloud
of electrosmog worldwide over the past decade.
6
Nevertheless, some excellent scientific data has been gathered regarding the
detrimental effects of microwaves on the nutrients in your food:
● A study published in the November 2003 issue of The Journal of the Science
of Food and Agriculture[5] found that broccoli “zapped” in the microwave
with a little water lost up to 97 percent of its beneficial antioxidants. By
comparison, steamed broccoli lost 11 percent or fewer of its antioxidants.
There were also reductions in phenolic compounds and glucosinolates, but
mineral levels remained intact.
● A 1999 Scandinavian study of the cooking of asparagus spears found that
microwaving caused a reduction in vitamin C[6] .
● In a study of garlic, as little as 60 seconds of microwave heating was
enough to inactivate its allinase, garlic’s principle active ingredient against
cancer[7] .
● A Japanese study by Watanabe showed that just 6 minutes of microwave
heating turned 30-40 percent of the B12 in milk into an inert (dead)
form[8] . This study has been cited by Dr. Andrew Weil as evidence
supporting his concerns about the effects of microwaving. Dr. Weil wrote:
● “There may be dangers associated with microwaving food… there is a
question as to whether microwaving alters protein chemistry in ways that
might be harmful.”
● A recent Australian study[9] showed that microwaves cause a higher
degree of “protein unfolding” than conventional heating.
● Microwaving can destroy the essential disease-fighting agents in breast milk
that offer protection for your baby. In 1992, Quan found that microwaved
breast milk lost lysozyme activity, antibodies, and fostered the growth of
more potentially pathogenic bacteria[10] .
Quan stated that more damage was done to the milk by microwaving than by
other methods of heating, concluding: “Microwaving appears to be contraindicated
at high-temperatures, and questions regarding its safety exist even at low
temperatures.”
● Another study about breast milk/infant formula by Lee in 1989[11] found

vitamin content becomes depleted by microwaving, and certain amino acids
are converted into other substances that are biologically inactive. Some
altered amino acids are poisons to the nervous system and kidneys.
(Numerous authors mention this study, yet I was unable to find the original
article/study, so I cannot personally validate.)Although many of the above
studies are not new, there is certainly ample evidence that microwaving is
NOT good for your food.
How Your Microwave Actually Heats Your Food
Microwaves are a form of electromagnetic radiation—waves of electrical and

magnetic energy moving together through space. EM radiation ranges from very
high energy (gamma rays and x-rays) on one end of the spectrum to very low
energy (radio waves) on the other end of the spectrum.
Microwaves are on the low energy end of the spectrum, second only to radio
waves. They have a wavelength of about 4.8 inches—about the width of your
head.
7
Microwaves are generated by something called a magnetron (a term derived from
the words “magnet” and “electron”), which is also what enabled airborne radar
use during WWII. Hence the early name for microwave ovens: radar ranges.
A magnetron is a tube in which electrons are subjected to both magnetic and

electrical fields, producing an electromagnetic field with a microwave frequency of
about 2,450 megaHertz (MHz), which is 2.4 gigaHertz (GHz).
Microwaves cause dielectric heating. They bounce around the inside of your oven
and are absorbed by the food you put in it. Since water molecules are bipolar,
having a positive end and negative end, they rotate rapidly in the alternating
electric field. The water molecules in the food vibrate violently at extremely high
frequencies—like millions of times per second—creating molecular friction, which
heats up the food.
If the food or object place in the microwave had no water it would not be able to
have this resonance heating type effect and would remain cool. Or, as
investigative journalist William Thomas[12] calls it, “electrical whiplash.”
Structures of the water molecules are torn apart and forcefully deformed. This is
different than conventional heating of food, whereby heat is transferred
convectionally from the outside, inward. Microwave cooking begins within the
molecules where water is present.
Contrary to popular belief, microwaved foods don’t cook “from the inside out.”
When thicker foods are cooked, microwaves heat the outer layers, and the inner
layers are cooked mostly by the conduction of heat from the hot outer layers,
inward.
Since not all areas contain the same amount of water, the heating is uneven.
Additionally, microwaving creates new compounds that are not found in humans
or in nature, called radiolytic compounds. We don’t yet know what these
compounds are doing to your body.
In addition to the violent frictional heat effects, calledthermic effects, there are
also athermic effects, which are poorly understood because they are not as easily
measured. It is these athermic effects that are suspected to be responsible for
much of the deformation and degradation of cells and molecules. [13]
As an example, microwaves are used in the field of gene altering technology to

weaken cell membranes. Scientists use microwaves to actually break cells apart.
Impaired cells then become easy prey for viruses, fungi and other
microorganisms.8
Another word for these athermic effects is the “microwave effect,” a subject of
controversy that I’ll get into a bit later.
Microwave Sickness
8
When your tissues are directly exposed to microwaves, the same violent
deformations occur and can cause “microwave sickness.”
People who have been exposed to high levels of microwave radiation experience a
variety of symptoms, including:
● Insomnia, night sweats, and various sleep disturbances

● Headaches and dizziness
● Swollen lymph nodes and a weakened immune system
● Impaired cognition
● Depression and irritability
● Nausea and appetite loss
● Vision and eye problems
● Frequent urination and extreme thirst
There is a good amount of data emerging that people are suffering, to various
degrees, these kinds of symptoms from living next to cell phone towers and other
high-frequency radiation emitting antennas, which emit microwaves around the
clock.
According to Professor Franz Adelkofer, a leading scientist in the area of biological

effects of EMF fields:
“There is real evidence that hyperfrequency electromagnetic fields can

have geno-toxic effects. And this damaged DNA is always the cause of
cancer.
We’ve found these damaging effects on the genes at levels well below
the safety limits. That’s why we think it’s urgent to base our safety limits
on the biological effects, not the thermic ones.
They should be based on biology, not on physics.”
Twenty Years of Russian Research Supports Microwave Concerns
The Nazis are credited with inventing the first microwave-cooking device to
provide mobile food support to their troops during their invasion of the Soviet
Union in World War II[14] . These first microwave ovens were experimental. After
the war, the US War Department was assigned the task of researching the safety
of microwave ovens.
But it was the Russians who really took the bull by the horns.
After the war, the Russians had retrieved some of these microwave ovens and
conducted thorough research on their biological effects. Alarmed by what they
learned, the Russians banned microwave ovens in 1976, later lifting the ban
during Perestroika.
9
Twenty years of Russian research (and German studies as far back as 1942
Berlin) make a strong argument against the safety of microwave cooking.
Their findings led the Russian government to issue an international warning about
possible biological and environmental damage associated with the use of
microwave ovens and other similar frequency electronic devices (e.g. mobile
phones).
I was not able to personally evaluate any of these older bodies of research, since
those documents are now difficult to track down, so I can’t attest to their
methodology or conclusions. All you can do is weigh their findings appropriately,
as best you can.
The Powerwatch article cited above summarizes the Russian research quite well,
which I will duplicate below.
● Russian investigators found that carcinogens were formed from the

microwaving of nearly all foods tested.
● The microwaving of milk and grains converted some of the amino acids into
carcinogenic substances.
● Microwaving prepared meats caused the formation of the cancer-causing
agents d-Nitrosodienthanolamines.
● Thawing frozen fruits by microwave converted their glucoside and
galactoside fractions into carcinogenic substances.
● Extremely short exposure of raw, cooked or frozen vegetables converted
their plant alkaloids into carcinogens.
● Carcinogenic free radicals were formed in microwaved plants—especially
root vegetables.
● Structural degradation leading to decreased food value was found to be 60
to 90 percent overall for all foods tested, with significant decreases in
bioavailability of B complex vitamins, vitamins C and E, essential minerals,
and lipotropics (substances that prevent abnormal accumulation of fat).
I might add that this finding is supported by the 1998 Japanese study by
Watanabe7 about vitamin B12 in milk, cited above.
The Swiss Clinical Study: Hans Hertel
Some fairly compelling evidence supporting the destructive effects of microwaves

comes from a highly cited study by a Swiss food scientist named Hans Hertel. Dr.
Hertel was the first scientist to study the effects of microwaved foods on the blood
and physiology of human beings.
His small study, coauthored by Dr. Bernard Blanc of the Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology and the University Institute for Biochemistry, revealed the
degenerative forces produced by microwave ovens on the foods they cooked.
Dr. Hertel concluded that microwave cooking changed the nutrients in the food,
and that changes took place in the blood that could cause negative health effects.
Hertel’s conclusions were that microwaving food resulted in:

10
● Increased cholesterol levels
● Decreased numbers of leukocytes (white blood cells), which can suggest
poisoning
● Decreased numbers of red blood cells
● Production of radiolytic compounds
● Decreased hemoglobin levels, which could indicate anemia
Not surprisingly, Dr. Hertel’s study was met with great resistance from those with
much to lose.
A gag order against Dr. Hertel was issued by a Swiss trade organization in 1992,
which was later removed in 1998. But an American journalist, Tom Valentine,
published the results of Hertel’s study in Search for Health in the spring of
1992[15] .
The study was not without its shortcomings. It involved only eight participants, of
which Hertel was one. As compelling as his findings were, his methodology did not
stand up to the scientific rigors of the field.
In spite of Hertel’s methodological shortcomings, his findings do raise concerns

about what this form of radiation is doing to your food and should be taken as a
launching point to larger, more robust studies in the future.
Hertel wrote:
“There are no atoms, molecules, or cells of any organic system able to

withstand such a violent, destructive power for any period of time. This
will happen even given the microwave oven’s low power range of
milliwatts.”
And then there is the issue of biophotons.
Possible Microwave Effects on Your Biophotons
Biophotonics is the study, research, and applications of photons in their

interactions within and on biological systems. Much of the work in the area of
biophotons was done in Germany. Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt discusses biophotons in
our 2008 interview.
Biophotons are the smallest physical units of light that are stored in and used by
all biological organisms—including you. Vital sun energy finds its way into your
cells via the food you eat, in the form of these biophotons.
Biophotons contain important bio-information and are very important to many

vital processes in your body. They are partly responsible for your feeling of vitality
and well-being. You gain biophotons by eating foods rich in them, such as
naturally grown fresh vegetables and sun-ripened fruits, which are rich in light
energy.
11
The more light energy a food is able to store, the more nutritious it is.
If the “microwave effect” exists (as you shall see, there is a huge amount of
evidence that it does), then microwaves can potentially destroy biophotons in the
same way that it alters other structures, rendering your food dead and lifeless.
It seems quite plausible that microwaves could disrupt or destroy biophotons,

since they are capable of breaking apart DNA bonds!
As far as I can find, there haven’t been any studies of the direct effects of
microwave radiation on biophotons, but it seems like an important angle of
investigation for the future.
Long-Term Effects of Exposure to Non-Ionizing Radiation
One of the basic controversies about the effects of microwaves centers on

whether or not microwaves exert some sort of force beyond heat, commonly
called “microwave effect” or “athermic effect.”
It is first necessary that you understand the difference between ionizing radiation
and non-ionizing radiation.
There are two basic forms of radiation: ionizing and non-ionizing[16] :
1. Ionizing Radiation: Creates charged ions by displacing electrons in

atoms, even without heat. Examples are radiation emitted from radioactive
substances in rocks and soil, cosmic rays of the sun, and radiation from
man-made technology such as x-rays machines, power stations, and
nuclear reactors.
2. Non-ionizing Radiation: Can change the position of atoms but not alter
their structure, composition, and properties. Examples are visible light,
ultraviolet and infrared waves, waves from radio or television, cellular
phones, microwaves, and electric blankets.
Despite not being able to break atoms apart, non-ionizing radiation (such as
microwaves) CAN cause physical alterations.
For example, sunlight can damage your skin and eyes. Overexposure to radiation
can affect tissues by causing molecular damage, DNA mutations, and other
changes that can lead to cancer.
The serious concern is, with all of this radiation surrounding us from cell and
cordless phones, radio towers, satellites, broadcast antennas, military and
aviation radar, home electronic devices, computers and Internet, we are all part
of an involuntary mass epidemiological experiment, on a scale never before seen
in the history of the human race.
And the truth is that we don’t really KNOW what long term, low-level (but
persistent) radiation does to us—even the non-ionizing type.
12
But here are some of the things we DO KNOW:[17]
● Effects at low levels can be more noticeable than at higher levels.

There is something called a “window effect,” meaning an effect occurring
only at specific frequencies or power densities, but not occurring just above
or below them. A number of studies demonstrate effects of microwave
radiation on blood cells via this phenomenon.
● For a complete discussion of this, you can read Microwaving Our Planet,
written by Arthur Firstenberg, president of the Cellular Phone Taskforce.
● Cindy Sage of Sage Associates, an environmental consulting firm, has
compiled a comprehensive list of studies[18] showing biological effects at
radiofrequency exposure levels far below what would be explainable as
“thermic effects” and well within the range you are commonly exposed to
every day.
● Resonance intensifies biological effect. Resonance occurs when a form
of radiation has a similar frequency as a body part. For example, microwave
frequencies are similar to the frequencies of your brain!
● Studies are typically done for short exposure periods, at higher
intensities. Scientists claim that duration of exposure is equally important
to intensity of exposure, but is often NOT studied, and that long-term, low-
level exposure can have effects equivalent to short-term, more intense
exposure.
● The effects of radiation are cumulative. Your body becomes more
sensitive to it over time.
● There are no longer any control groups, since human beings are all
now exposed to such pervasive radiation.Lack of a control group
makes it even more challenging to conduct meaningful studies.
The point is, standing in your kitchen while your microwave is zapping your
dinner, night after night, will not make you glow in the dark. But over the months
and years, what is the cumulative effect on your body and health?
Why expose yourself to these potential dangers when there are safer alternatives
for cooking available?
Is Microwaving Food Any More Dangerous than Heating it with a Conventional

Oven?
Some experts claim that the effects microwaves have on molecules can all be
explained simply as the “thermic effect” of heating—in other words, microwave
cooking is no more detrimental to food than conventional heating.
They argue that, since microwaves are non-ionizing radiation, then it’s impossible
for them to damage your blood cells, or eradicate the folic acid in your spinach.
Others have proposed there is some sort of “microwave effect” that causes
changes in the molecules in a way that conventional heating does not. For many
years, the party line was that “microwave effect” is a myth.
However, study after study has resulted in evidence to the contrary, showing
effects that cannot be explained away as simple thermal effects.
13
In a letter entitled “DNA and the Microwave Effect”[19] (sourced as Penn State
University, 2001), the author reviews the history of the controversy surrounding
the microwave effect and the research findings to date. He explains that, although
fundamentals of thermodynamics and physics would tell you the microwave effect
is impossible, studies keep turning up evidence of its existence.
Some of the main points made in the letter are the following:
● Microwave heating and conventional heating may appear identical on a

“macro” level, but the two appear very different on a molecular level.
● Microwaves are effective for sterilization, which has been studied for several
decades. There is controversy, however, is about whether it’s the heat they
generate or if it’s something else altogether.
● One scientist (Kakita 1995[20] ) was successful in demonstrating that
microwaves are capable of extensively fragmenting and destroying viral
DNA, something that cannot be accomplished by heating alone.
● Multiple studies offer evidence that there are multiple mechanisms for
breaking apart DNA without ionizing radiation, but no theory currently
exists to explain this phenomenon.
Some scientists are taking advantage of the microwave effect and using
microwaves in the laboratory to greatly accelerate chemical reactions, sometimes
by a factor of a thousand, resulting in the completion of reactions in minutes that
formerly took days or months and a lot of toxic chemicals[21] .
This newly found interest in “microwave chemistry” has spurred skeptic scientists
into taking another look at what microwaves actually do and how they do it.
Sometimes common sense trumps empirical evidence.
The Penn State letter/article said it best:
“…It would seem there is reason to believe that the microwave effect
does indeed exist, even if it cannot yet be adequately explained. What
we know at present is somewhat limited, but there may be enough
information already available to form a viable hypothesis.
The possibility that electromagnetic radiation in the non-ionizing

frequency range can cause genetic damage may have profound
implications on the current controversy involving EM antennae, power
lines, and cell phones.”
Breaking Free of Your Microwave: A Few Basic Tips
Am I asking you to toss your microwave oven into the nearest dumpster?
Not necessarily. It can be a useful tool for cleaning. But if real estate in your
kitchen is at a premium, it should probably be the first thing to go.
14
You really CAN survive sans microwave—people are living quite happily without
one, believe it or not. You just have to make a few small lifestyle adjustments,
such as:
● Plan ahead. Take your dinner out of the freezer that morning or the night before so
you don’t end up having to scramble to defrost a 5-pound chunk of beef two hours
before dinnertime.
● Make soups and stews in bulk, and then freeze them in gallon-sized freezer bags or
other containers. An hour before meal time, just take one out and defrost it in a sink
of water until it’s thawed enough to slip into a pot, then reheat it on the stove.
● A toaster oven makes a GREAT faux-microwave for heating up leftovers! Keep it at a
low temperature — like 200-250 degrees F — and gently warm a plate of food over
the course of 20-30 minutes. Another great alternative is a convection oven. They
can be built in or purchased as a relatively inexpensive and quick safe way to heat
foods
● Prepare your meals in advance so that you always have a good meal available on
those days when you’re too busy or too tired to cook.
● Try eating more organic raw foods. This is the best way to and improve your health
over the long run.
References:
● [1] Davis D R. (February 1, 2009) “Declining fruit and vegetable nutrient composition:
What is the evidence?” American Society of Horticultural Science
● [2] Rust S and Kissinger M. (November 15, 2008) “BPA leaches from ‘safe’ products”
Journal Sentinel Online
● [3] “Microwave oven radiation,” Food and Drug Administration
● [4] Havas M. “DECT phone affects the heart!”
● [5] Vallejo F, Tomas-Barberan F A, and Garcia-Viguera C. “Phenolic compound
contents in edible parts of broccoli inflorescences after domestic cooking” Journal of
the Science of Food and Agriculture (15 Oct 2003) 83(14);1511-1516
● [6] Kidmose U and Kaack K. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica B 1999:49(2):110-117
● [7] Song K and Milner J A. “The influence of heating on the anticancer properties of
garlic,” Journal of Nutrition 2001;131(3S):1054S-57S
● [8] Watanabe F, Takenaka S, Abe K, Tamura Y, and Nakano Y. J. Agric. Food Chem.
Feb 26 1998;46(4):1433-1436
● [9] George D F, Bilek M M, and McKenzie D R. “Non-thermal effects in the microwave
induced unfolding of proteins observed by chaperone binding,” Bioelectromagnetics
2008 May;29(4):324-30
● [10] Quan R (et al) “Effects of microwave radiation on anti-infective factors in human
milk,” Pediatrics 89(4 part I):667-669.
● [11] Lee L. “Health effects of microwave radiation-microwave ovens,”Lancet December
9, 1989 (Article)
● [12] Thomas W. “Cooked” Alive.com
● [13] “Microwave oven and microwave cooking overview,” Powerwatch
● [14] “History of microwave ovens” Green Health Watch
● [15] “Microwave ovens: A danger to your health?” (January 26, 2010) Nutritional and
Physical Regeneration
● [16] Villablanca E (December 19, 2007) “Ionizing and non-ionizing radiation: Their
difference and possible health consequences”
● [17] “Health effects of microwave radiation (Western view)”
15
● [18] Sage C. “Reported biological effects from radiofrequency non-ionizing radiation”
Wave-Guide.org
● [19] Penn State University. “DNA and the microwave effect” posted from MailBag (April
8, 2002)
● [20] Kakita Y, Kashige N, Murata K, Kuroiwa A, Funatsu M and Watanabe K.
“Inactivation of Lactobacillus bacteriophage PL-1 by microwave irradiation” Microbiol.
Immunol. 1995;39:571-576.
● [21] Adams C. (May 6, 2005) “Does microwaving kill nutrients in food? Is microwaving
safe?” The Straight Dope
http://davidbozek.net/2011/01/01/why-did-the-russians-ban-an-appliance-found-in-90-of-
american-homes/
______________________________
3. WOUNDED by WIRELESS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zzRP_J7P-c&feature=related
EMF Exposure Sufferers Tell Their Stories In this press conference.
______________________________
4. EMF-Omega News
Dear Sir, Madam, Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends,
for your information.
Best regards,
Klaus Rudolph
Citizens' Initiative Omega
http://www.next-up.org/Newsoftheworld/OmegaNews.php
http://www.mastsanity.org/health.html
http://weepnews.blogspot.com/search/label/Omega%20News
http://electromagnetichealth.org/category/electromagnetic-health-blog/
Member of the Buergerwelle Germany (incorporated society)
Protectorate Union of the Citizens and Initiatives for the Protection
against Electrosmog
http://www.buergerwelle.de/cms/content/view/57/70/
Cell phones health risks debate continues

http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/stories/1998/
Dr. Henry Lai Makes Waves in the Cell Phone Industry

Taming the Microwave Dragon

16
Smart Meter grid and RFID connection
Endangering nature's GPS

Cellphone towers disorient homer pigeons

T-Mobile Tower and Compound

AN EXAMINATION OF THE POTENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF RADIOFREQUENCY

ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION
Mobile phone mast planned near homes

Mobile phone plans cause a stir

Government seeks answers to Akhna antenna

Board of adjustment carries over Colfax cell tower proposal

Norwich community wins phone mast battle

Tensen Family Farm v Consumers Energy Company in Progress

Next-up news Nr 1545

http://www.sharenews-blog.com:8090/helma/twoday/sharenews/stories/3978/
Next-up News Nr 1547

http://www.sharenews-blog.com:8090/helma/twoday/sharenews/stories/3996/
News from Mast Sanity
http://tinyurl.com/2vhcbl6
http://tinyurl.com/aotw3
______________________________
17
5. UW Scientist Henry Lai Makes Waves in the Cell Phone
Industry
UW scientist Dr. Henry Lai never set out to link cell phones to cancer, but his work—and
efforts to discredit him—suggest that he was on to something. Ironically, with funding for
independent research virtually nonexistent, we may never know for sure.
BY: NAOMI ISHISAKA | JANUARY 2011 | FROM THE PRINT EDITION
Image Credit: Hayley Young
A greeting card on bioengineering professor Henry Lai's office wall at the University of
Washington contains this quotation from Ralph Waldo Emerson: "Do not go where the path
may lead; go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
This philosophy could well sum up Lai’s work on the effects of low-level radiation on DNA,
as well as what he believes should be the guiding principle of science: independent
investigation and research leading to discovery for the public good. Yet the soft-spoken
scientist’s steadfast belief in that principle has placed his research at the center of a
persistent global controversy and created powerful enemies that tried to get him fired and
essentially succeeded in drying up the source of funding for the type of research he was
doing.
Lai admits that he was naive. He came to the UW in 1972 and earned a doctorate in
psychology. Two decades later, as a bioengineering researcher, he studied esoteric
scientific topics in relative obscurity. He and a fellow researcher, Narendra “N.P.” Singh,
were looking at the effects of nonionizing microwave radiation—the same type of radiation
emitted by cell phones—on the DNA of rats. They used a level of radiation considered safe
by government standards and found that the DNA in the brain cells of the rats was
damaged—or broken—by exposure to the radiation. Ironically, cell phones weren’t even on
Lai’s mind when he performed the initial studies. Funded initially by the Office of Naval
Research, Lai was investigating how radar, which emits radio-frequency radiation, affects
the health of operators. “We did not really pay attention to the importance of this thing,”
he recalls. But during his research, cell phone giant Motorola Inc. indicated that someone
had told the company about Lai’s unpublished results. Motorola asked to meet with him in
his lab and at a meeting in Copenhagen.
After Lai and Singh’s research finding an effect on DNA was published in 1995, Lai learned
of a full-scale effort to discredit his work. In an internal company memo leaked to
18
Microwave News, a publication that examines health and environmental effects of
electromagnetic radiation, Motorola described its plan to “war-game” and undermine Lai’s
research. After initially accepting industry funding for continued research from the Wireless
Technology Research (WTR) program (created to manage $25 million in research funds),
Lai and Singh wrote an open letter to Microwave News questioning restrictions placed on
their research by the funders. After that, the head of WTR sent a memo asking then-UW
president Richard McCormick to fire Lai and Singh. McCormick refused, but the dustup sent
a clear message to Lai and his colleagues.
“This shocked me,” Lai says, “the letter trying to discredit me, the ‘war games’ memo. As
a scientist doing research, I was not expecting to be involved in a political situation. It
opened my eyes on how games are played in the world of business.”
Thus was launched an epic battle over research and truth. If Lai and Singh were correct
about the potential impact on brain cells from radio-frequency radiation, there could be
billions of dollars on the line for the cell phone industry in potential liability, leading to
significant design changes and lost market expansion.
To the layperson, the science behind Lai’s work, which was largely funded by the National
Institutes of Health, and industry-funded research to contradict it is mind-numbingly
complex. Virtually every assertion of risk has a counterassertion of no risk. For every
independent study showing damage to DNA and memory, there is a study showing the
opposite.
Lai, 61, says this phenomenon could be a direct result of the way science is now funded
around the world. “[The U.S. was on] the cutting edge of this whole area for the last 30
years. [But] right now, we’re the Third World country. We’re not doing research at all,” Lai
says. With government funding all but nonexistent, the bulk of scientific research is funded
by private industry. “The mechanism is funding,” Lai says. “You don’t bite the hand that
feeds you. The pressure is very impressive.”
The massive Interphone study, coordinated by the International Agency for Research on
Cancer and released in May 2010, exemplifies these challenges.
Purported to be the definitive word on cell phone radiation and brain tumors, Interphone
involved 13 countries (all outside the U.S.), $25 million, and thousands of tumor patients
and controls. Conducted over 10 years, the widely anticipated study was supposed to at
last provide clarity on the risks of cell phone use. Yet, once again, the science was divided.
The day after the study’s release, headlines read, “No answer, just fuzz, from cell phone
study,” and, “One conclusion emerges from Interphone study: Controversy will continue.”
Why, after so much money and time, were the data so mixed? Louis Slesin, editor of
Microwave News, says there were a number of problems with Interphone. “When we
started interviewing the protagonists,” he says, “we realized there was a lot of conflict
going on. It was a bitter struggle. It tells you the interpretation of the data is not clear cut
in any way.”
For the purposes of the Interphone study, a person who used a cell phone 30 minutes a
day for more than 10 years was considered to be subjected to heavy exposure. Today,
that level of cell phone use (900 minutes a month) is average. The people defined as the
most heavily exposed in the Interphone study now represent the average user.
To illustrate that point, Elisabeth Cardis, head of the Interphone study, was quoted as
saying, “In my personal opinion, I think we have a number of elements that suggest a
19
possible increased risk among the heaviest users, and because the heaviest users in our
study are considered the low users today, I think that’s something of concern. Until
stronger conclusions can be drawn one way or another, it may be reasonable to reduce
one’s exposure.”
Lai’s frustration with the increasing body of contradictory research led him to do an
analysis in 2006 of the available studies on cell phone radiation between 1990 and 2006,
and where their funding came from. What he found was that 50 percent of the 326 studies
showed a biological effect from radio-frequency radiation and 50 percent did not. But when
he filtered the studies into two stacks—those funded by the wireless industry and those
funded independently—Lai discovered industry-funded studies were 30 percent likely to
find an effect, as opposed to 70 percent of the independent studies.
Lai says that, while his findings highlight the crucial role industry funding plays in scientific
research, the 50-50 split alone should be cause for concern. “Even if you accept all the
industry studies, you still end up with 50-50,” he says. “How could 50 percent all be
garbage? People always start with the statement ‘Hundreds of studies have been done on
this topic, and no effect has been found,’ but this is a very misleading statement. [The
statements] come out from the cell phone industry, and people just use it, like the
American Cancer Society. People haven’t even gone in to look at the real studies and look
at the effects that people have reported. This really worries me, because people come out
and say things without the facts.”
Slesin agrees and says Lai’s work is important for the research that does show effects from
radiation. “[Lai] is one of the most widely cited scientists in this field,” Slesin says.
The American Cancer Society did not reply to requests for an interview. Its official position
on the risks of cell phone use states: “Radio frequency (RF) waves given off by cell phones
don’t have enough energy to damage DNA directly. Because of this, many scientists
believe that cell phones aren’t able to cause cancer. Most studies done in the lab have
supported this theory, finding that RF waves do not cause DNA damage.”
CTIA-The Wireless Association, the cell phone industry trade organization, also declined to
comment for this story, but its website states: “To date, global health organizations
believe that the available scientific evidence does not show that any health problems are
associated with using wireless phones. Many studies of low-level RF exposure, such as that
which occurs with wireless devices, have not discovered any negative biological effects.”
Dr. Beth Mueller, an epidemiologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in
Seattle, acknowledges that there is not strong evidence linking cell phones to brain
tumors. But Mueller warns that the research is difficult and that much more study is
needed. “I think [cell phone radiation] would be important to study. There are no studies I
know of on the possible impact on children and I think it’s something that many people–
including some people here at the Hutch–want to see evaluated. I’m concerned because
children are using [cell phones] a lot. It’s something that should be looked at, definitely.”
Katy Rock would agree. The Kirkland resident is an athletic 31-year-old who began having
headaches in her late teens. “Headaches became an unwelcome fact of life for me in
college,” she says, “at first always after running around on the soccer or lacrosse field. So
I assumed for years that it was due to dehydration/nutrition problems or just being out of
shape. Eventually, they got worse. I started having them with no explainable cause.”
20
It wasn’t until a she had a seizure in 2007 that Rock discovered something was terribly
wrong. The next day, she underwent an emergency double craniotomy to remove a tumor
the size of a small lemon from her right frontal lobe and two tumors the size of large
grapes from her right temporal lobe. A biopsy showed the cancerous tumors had been
growing for about 10 years. A year of chemotherapy followed.
Rock was an early adopter of cell phones. Given a phone as a gift during college in 1997,
she recalls using it about two to three hours a week (about 630 minutes a month). Her
usage increased in later years with a job that required her to be on call. She is right-
handed, and her tumors were on the right side.
Rock, who recently completed her first 5K run in support of Seattle Children’s Hospital’s
Pediatric Brain Tumor Research Guild, would not be surprised to find a link between cell
phones and brain tumors. “When I was in college, I used to charge my cell phone at night,
and the charger cord ran over a leaf of my philodendron plant,” she says. “Over time, the
strip on the leaf where the cord touched turned brown. The small amount of power running
through the cord was enough to kill some cells of the otherwise healthy plant.”
While Rock’s tale is merely metaphorical, its suggestive import is not lost on Devra Davis,
Ph.D., a huge admirer of Lai’s work to raise awareness about the potential hazards of cell
phone radiation. Davis is a longtime toxicologist, public health expert and founder of the
Wyoming-based Environmental Health Trust, a group that provides basic research and
training on environmental health hazards. Davis’ most recent book, released last October,
is Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation. Davis calls Lai a “hero” for his
groundbreaking work. “[Lai] has made a tremendous impact on the field in many aspects.
Not just on the field of DNA, but on the brain, on receptors. In a fair and just world he
would be a serious candidate for the Nobel Prize, because he did foundational research on
the way the body responds to electromagnetic and radiofrequency radiation and because
he persisted in the face of many challenges. He’s been outstanding and indomitable in the
face of opposition that would have overwhelmed most people.”
In her book, Davis describes a disconnect between the general public’s largely
unquestioning acceptance of cell phone radiation and the large body of evidence
suggesting cause for concern. With Lai’s work as her foundation, Davis demonstrates a
pattern of the cell phone industry’s scientific manipulation spanning decades. Davis is
particularly concerned because the rate of cell phone use by children is skyrocketing—with
three out of four 12-year-olds and half of 10-years-olds in the U.S. now possessing a cell
phone. Even more troubling: Lennart Hardell, Ph.D., a researcher in Sweden, found that
those who began using cell phones in their teens (such as Rock) had four to five times the
number of malignant tumors by their late 20s as those who did not use cell hones as
teenagers.
While Davis would argue that there is a proven, causal link between cell phones and
tumors, Lai does not. What he does say is that there is enough reason for concern, and
that a “precautionary principle” should be embraced, as France has done in warning
against cell phone use by children, and as San Francisco has done in mandating
information on “specific absorption rates” of radiation on cell phone packaging.
“European countries generally believe you need some kind of precautionary approach,”
says Lai, who does not own—or use—a cell phone. “What else can we do? Obviously, we
21
don’t know the answer at all. But, then, there is a cause for concern. We need to take
some kind of precautionary action.” For now, however, Lai will continue to do research on
the drug artemisinin—long used by Chinese herbalists—for applications in cancer
treatment, because there is no longer any independent funding available for his research
on the effects of nonionizing radiation.
Meanwhile, Davis, who uses a cell phone but only with a headset or as a speakerphone
(she never keeps it close to her body), hopes that by the time the public realizes the
importance of the path Lai has been on, it won’t be too late. In Disconnect, she wonders
how our grandchildren will answer these questions: “Did we do the right thing and act to
protect them? Or did we harm them needlessly, irresponsibly and permanently, blinded by
the addictive delights of our technological age?”
http://www.seattlemag.com/article/nerd-report/nerd-report
______________________________
6. Autism may be Linked to Electromagnetic Radiation

Levels In Mother’s Bedroom During Pregnancy
Pilot Study Finds Over 20x Higher Microwave Power Density Levels in Mothers’ Sleeping
Locations During Pregnancy
Incidence of autistic babies has increased from 1 in 150 in 2002 to an estimated 1 in 50

babies today. Dr. Dietrich Klinghart, MD, PhD of the Institute of Neurobiology in Seattle
recently conducted a pilot study to assess the potential role of electromagnetic frequencies
in the dramatic rise in autism and other neurological impairments over the past decade.
Various measurements of electromagnetic radiation exposure were assessed in the case of
10 children with neurological impairment, 8 categorized with Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Data was obtained for:
1) Mothers’ Body Voltage in the mothers’ sleeping location during pregnancy;
2) Child’s Body Voltage in current sleeping location;
3) Microwave Power Density in mothers’ sleeping location during

pregnancy(microwatt/square meter); and
4) Child’s Microwave Exposure in current sleeping location.
Data for mothers with neurologically impaired children were contrasted with similar data
for 5 healthy children and their mothers.
The results were as follows:
Body Voltage Levels:
Median Body Voltage Level in Mom’s Bed During Pregnancy*

Value Range
Neurologically Impaired Children 1,872 milliVolts (380-6,040)
22
Healthy Group 224 milliVolts (12-480)
8.4x Higher Body Voltage Levels in Mom’s with

Neurologically Impaired Children
*Note research shoes whatever the Body Voltage of the Mom, it is even higher in the
fetus.
Body Voltage of Child in Current Bed Location

Value Range
Neurologically Impaired Children 1,028 milliVolts (420-4,900)
Healthy Group 120 milliVolts (0-230)
8.5x Higher Body Voltage in Neurologically Impaired

Child’s Sleeping Location
Microwave Exposure:
Microwave Power Density in Sleeping Location

Neurologically Impaired Children-Mom’s Bed mw/sq. meter Range
Exposure In Pregnancy 290 (110-1,710)
Healthy Group 14 (0-67)
20.7x Higher Microwave Power Density in Mom’s Sleeping

Location In Cases Where Children Were Neurologically Impaired
This pilot data strongly suggests that electromagnetic radiation in the sleeping
environment of mothers during pregnancy, as well as electromagnetic radiation in the
sleeping environment of children, may be key undiscovered contributing if not causative
factors in neurological impairments in children, including autism. Given increasing levels of
ambient electromagnetic radiation in modern environments from society’s use of electronic
equipment, wireless technologies, such as cell phones and wireless networks, high
frequency transients on electric lines, and broadband over power lines (BPL), this
association needs immediate further exploration.
Journalists wanting to pursue this story lead can review Dr. Klinghart’s slides from the
Crayhorn medical conference in July 2008 (KlinghardtCrayhonBoulderfest08.pdf) and then
contact him via his assistant at info@klinghardtneurobiology.com.
Philanthropists interested in funding further studies on the connection between autism and
other neurological impairments in children, and electromagnetic fields, please contact us
HYPERLINK “mailto:info@electromagnetichealth.org” info@electromagnetichealth.org to
make arrangements to support worthy research.
Listen to Dr. Deitrich Klinghardt, MD, PhD. on Preconception Medicine
http://electromagnetichealth.org/media-stories/
23
______________________________
7. PG&E Smart Mtr Protest Shuts SFD in W. Marin: Two

Moms Arrested
by J Hart
Wednesday Dec 29th, 2010 1:35 PM
Point Reyes Station, CA- Two mothers from West Marin County were arrested this morning
after PG&E ordered Sheriffs deputies to clear the two out of the way as a group of
concerned residents gathered on Sir Francis Drake Blvd. in Inverness Park to deny access
to PG&E’s ‘smart’ meter contractors Wellington Energy.
640_img_0248.jpg
24
original image ( 1280x960)
According to Elizabeth Whitney, a local who was present at the scene, “there was a group
of about two dozen residents blocking about ten Wellington Energy trucks on Sir Francis
Drake Blvd this morning. After some indecision and confusion amid stopped traffic, sheriffs
deputies arrived on the scene. Under the direction of the sheriffs, eight of the trucks
cooperated in making U-turns and turning back while the group stepped aside. The
remaining two trucks lingered at the location (in front of a local delicatessen) in
conversation with the locals but then turned toward Inverness unexpectedly and caused
the protest group to resume their blockade. Two local mothers were arrested and taken
into custody for failure to disperse. Sir Francis Drake Blvd. is the only access to Inverness
and the incident took place in Inverness Park, two miles south of the town."
Residents are reacting in part to numerous reports of people getting sick from the high
intensity microwave radiation pulses from the new meters. Wireless impulses from the new
meters radiate 24 hours a day and are approximately 2-3 times the intensity of a cell
phone according to independent experts. Cell phones are increasingly being linked to brain
tumors, and other health problems. Despite widespread calls for a moratorium until
assurances can be made about the meters’ safety, PG&E- with the help of the industry
backed CA Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)- continues to force the meters onto homes
and businesses, even while a state-ordered investigation into ‘smart’ meter health impacts
is under way. The utility has been refusing to remove meters that are making people sick,
despite more than 2000 health complaints to the CPUC.
PG&E and its subcontractors Wellington Energy have been using more aggressive
installation tactics, and according to locals, appear to be almost waging war on its
customers. "Why are they in such a hurry? If this technology is safe and their goal is to
reach out to the customer and listen to their concerns, then why are they trying to install
smart meters as fast as possible in West Marin? Why aggressively roll out a technology on
an unwilling customer base, it just doesn't make sense in terms of their PR." Said Scott
McMorrow of Inverness.
According to Katharina Sandizell of Point Reyes Station, a mother of two, and one of the
women who was arrested this morning, "PG&E is using shock and awe tactics on it's
customers. Smart meters are being installed without public consent, without even
knocking on doors to check if it's safe to turn off the electricity. They are rolling over civil
liberties and getting these things installed as quickly as possible so that people don't have
time to consider the implications or ask questions. If they have nothing to hide, then
what's the rush?"
"We will continue to risk arrest to protect our children, our community, and our civil
liberties...the only way that I know to stop installation of smart meters is to put a body
between the installer and the meter, and I will continue to do this until I don't have to
anymore. But I would rather be at home with my daughter" said Miss June of Inverness, a
working mother who was also arrested today.
More background information:

http://stopsmartmeters.org
§
25
by J Hart Wednesday Dec 29th, 2010 1:35 PM
640_img_0249.jpg
§
26
640_img_0250.jpg
§
27
640_img_0252.jpg
§
28
640_img_0258.jpg
§
29
640_img_0259.jpg
§
30
640_img_0261.jpg
§
31
640_img_0274.jpg
§
32
640_img_0267.jpg
§
33
640_img_0262.jpg
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/12/29/18667766.php
______________________________
8. AN EXAMINATION OF THE POTENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS

OF RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION
34
Introduction
In recent years, public concerns have been raised regarding the potential negative
health impacts of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation emitting devices, such as
microwaves and wireless phones.[1] On March 30, 2010, the House of Commons Standing
Committee on Health (hereafter the Committee) agreed to conduct a study examining this
issue. During the course of its study, the Committee held three hearings where it heard
from a variety of witnesses, including: government officials, interested stakeholder groups
and scientific experts. This report summarizes testimony from these hearings, as well as
written submissions received by the Committee. Finally, it also identifies ways in which the
federal government could take further action in this area.
Background Information
A. Electromagnetic Radiation[2]
Electromagnetic radiation is defined as waves of electric and magnetic energy that are
transmitted through space and travelling at the speed of light. The area where these
waves are found is called an electromagnetic field (EMF), which is made up of both an
electric and a magnetic fields. Electric fields are created from static electrically charged
particles. If these electrically charged particles are put into motion through a conductor,
magnetic fields are then also created from the resulting electric current. For example,
plugging in an electric appliance will create an electric field; however, it is only when the
appliance is turned on and electricity flows that a magnetic field is then also created.
Electromagnetic radiation is measured in units of wavelength and frequency. The

wavelength is the distance that a wave travels in one cycle and is measured in meters. The
frequency is measured by the number of cycles per second and the unit of measurement is
the Hertz (Hz). One cycle per second equals one hertz. The frequency of the wave is
inversely related to its length: the higher the frequency, the shorter the wavelength.
B. Sources of Electromagnetic Radiation[3]
Electromagnetic fields are present everywhere in our environment and are produced
by both man-made and natural sources. For example, the main source of electromagnetic
radiation is the sun, while other man-made items—such as hairdryers, electrical ovens,
fluorescent lights, microwave ovens, stereos, wireless phones and computers—all produce
electromagnetic fields of varying intensities.
C. The Impact of Electromagnetic Radiation on the Human Body
The electromagnetic spectrum arranges electromagnetic radiation according to its

frequencies and impact on the human body. The electromagnetic spectrum is divided into
two main categories: ionizing and non-ionizing frequencies. Electromagnetic radiation with
low frequencies ranging up to 300 gigahertz (GHz) are called non-ionizing, meaning they
do not breakdown chemical bonds in biological tissue, including DNA, which is the building
block of genetic material in the body[4]. However, non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation
with low frequencies do produce electrical currents within the human body that could
result in increases in body temperature.[5] Increases in body temperature resulting from
35
electromagnetic radiation are referred to by scientists as “thermal effects”.[6] For
example, radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic radiation that usually ranges from 30
kilohertz (kHz) to 300 GHz are able to induce electrical currents within the human body,
which can produce a range of effects such as heating and electrical shock, depending on
their amplitude and frequency range.[7] RF fields are mainly used in telecommunications,
such as mobile phones and other home appliances, such as microwaves. Microwave
electromagnetic radiation is considered by scientists to be a subset of radio frequency
fields.[8]
It is important to note that some scientists have found that long-term exposure to low
level RF electromagnetic radiation could potentially provoke biological and chemical
changes within cells that could negatively influence people’s well being.[9] These biological
responses occur at the cellular level and do not involve heating. Scientists refer to them as
“non- thermal effects” of RF and microwave electromagnetic radiation.[10]However, these
biological and chemical changes may not necessarily translate into adverse health
effects.[11]
Meanwhile, extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic radiation, which has a

frequency of less than 100 kHz, is also able to induce electric currents within the human
body, but these induced currents are lower than the electric currents found to be naturally
occurring in the human body and therefore do not result in thermal effects.[12] However,
strong ELF electromagnetic radiation can produce nerve and muscle stimulation.[13] ELF
electromagnetic radiation can originate from electrical wiring in buildings, electrical
appliances and power lines.
Finally, electromagnetic radiation with very high frequencies and short wavelengths is
able to produce enough energy to cause ionization, that is, it is able to breakdown
chemical bonds in biological tissue, including DNA.[14] The boundary between ionizing and
non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation is the frequency of visible light, which ranges
between 430 and 750 terahertz (THz).[15] Once electromagnetic radiation reaches a
frequency higher than 750THz, it is then capable of breaking chemical bonds in biological
tissue. Ionizing radiation can range in frequencies from 756 THz to 4.61 exahertz (EHz).
Sources of ionizing electromagnetic radiation include ultraviolet light, X-rays, and gamma
rays. Excessive exposure to these sources can cause serious adverse health effects in the
human body, such as cancer. Consequently, exposures to these levels of electromagnetic
radiation are restricted both in Canada and internationally.
Table 1—Select Radiation Emitting Devices on the Electromagnetic Spectrum[16]
Electromagnetic Spectrum Radiation Emitting Device Frequency in Hz[17]
Extremely Low Frequency Power Lines 50/60 Hz
Radiofrequency Microwave Ovens 0.010 GHz to 300 GHz
36
Radiofrequency Mobile Phones 800 MHz to 2 GHz
Radiofrequency Mobile phone base stations 1.8 GHz
Extremely High Radiofrequency X-ray Machines 1EHz
D. The Regulation of Electromagnetic Radiation Emitting Devices in Canada
Guidelines determining acceptable amounts electromagnetic radiation for safe human

exposure are designed to prevent negative health consequences due to thermal effects.
The impact of electromagnetic radiation on the human body is measured by the Specific
Absorption Rate (SAR), which measures the amount of heat produced in the human body
as a result of exposure to radiofrequency fields.[18] It is defined as the rate of energy
absorption per unit mass and is expressed in units of watts per kilogram (W/kg). The
internal SAR cannot be measured directly in the body, but is estimated by theoretical
calculations.
The Government of Canada is responsible for setting the limits for safe human
exposure to electromagnetic radiation from radiofrequency emitting devices in order to
protect the health and safety of Canadians. Under the Radiation Emitting Devices Act,
Health Canada is responsible for regulating radiation emitting devices.[19] The safety
limits that Health Canada has set for safe human exposure to RF electromagnetic radiation
is in the frequency range of 3 kHz to 300 GHz.[20] This limit is referred to as Safety Code
6 and results in an average SAR of 0.08 W/kg, which is deemed safe for all members of
the population including the elderly, individuals with health concerns, children and
pregnant women.[21]
Industry Canada is responsible for regulating radio-communication in Canada,

including authorizing the installation of radio-communication towers and sites and the
approval of RF equipment such as cell phones and assessing their compliance with their
standards.[22] Industry Canada derives this authority from the Department of Industry
Act, as well as the Radiocommunications Act, which specifically provides the authority to
approve antenna supporting structures.[23] Industry Canada has chosen the RF exposure
standard developed by Health Canada in Safety Code 6 as its basis for the regulation of
mobile phones, base stations, Wi-Fi technologies and other radio-communication
transmitters.[24]
What the Committee Heard
A. The Development and Implementation of Safety Code 6
37
The Committee heard from Health Canada officials that Canadians are protected from
harmful exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation through Safety Code 6,
which establishes the safe limit for human exposure to electromagnetic radiation from
various devices.[25] The Committee heard that Safety Code 6 is developed through a
thorough review process that includes an evaluation of scientific evidence and literature on
the effects of radio frequency radiation on biological systems.[26] According to officials,
this review process is consistent with guidelines provided by the World Health Organization
for the development of health-based electromagnetic frequency standards.
During the course of its review, Health Canada examines scientific evidence from
animal, cell culture and epidemiological studies carried out worldwide.[27] Officials further
clarified that it examines studies that focus on both the thermal effects of electromagnetic
radiation, as well as those that examine non-thermal effects occurring at the cellular
level.[28] In addition, the Committee heard that Health Canada has conducted its own
studies on this topic, which have been published in peer-reviewed journals. In its
evaluation of the existing data, Health Canada considers the quality of the individual
studies, as well as the consistency of observed effects across laboratories. The Committee
heard that while this review process was last conducted in 2009, Health Canada continues
to review the scientific literature on an ongoing basis.
Based upon this scientific review process, Health Canada has determined that human
exposure to RF electromagnetic radiation in the frequency range from 3 kHz to 300 GHz is
safe.[29] Officials articulated that this limit is well below the threshold for any potential
harm and it was designed to provide protection to all age groups, including children, if
exposed on a continual basis. They further noted that in the development of Safety Code
6, models of children’s bodies and brains were used to examine the potential effects of
radiation exposure on tissue similar to that of a child’s, as studies cannot be directly
conducted on children due to ethical reasons.[30] Finally, officials articulated that these
exposure limits are comparable to those in other jurisdictions, including the United States
and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, a standard
adopted by most European countries.[31]
While Health Canada is responsible for the development of Safety Code 6, the
Committee heard that Industry Canada is responsible for its implementation with regards
to the regulation of portable radio-communication equipment, such as cell phones, as well
as antenna towers and their surroundings.[32] In order to ensure that portable radio-
communications are in compliance with the standards established through Safety Code 6,
Industry Canada requires that they be certified by accredited bodies.[33] Once the
equipment is on the market, Industry Canada continues to test individual units of these
models to ensure that they continue to meet Safety Code 6 standards.
The Committee heard from Industry Canada officials that a licence is required for the
establishment of all new antenna installations.[34]Industry Canada will only issue a licence
if emissions from an antenna in areas accessible to the public are within the limits of
Safety Code 6. Furthermore, the measurement of emissions also takes into account the
cumulative effects of other antennas in the vicinity. Once a tower is operational, it remains
a condition of its licence under the Radiocommunication Act to respect these limits at all
times.[35] The Committee also heard that Industry Canada continues to perform audits
and tests on antenna installation sites after licensing to ensure that they remain compliant.
38
Finally, the Committee heard that both Health Canada and Industry Canada work
together to produce documents for Canadians concerned about RF exposure.[36] They
have produced a document entitled, “Frequently Asked Questions on RF Energy and
Health”[37] in order to address various questions related to RF exposure, as well as a
handbook and numerous information sheets related to wireless communication and
health.[38]
B. Concerns Raised by Witnesses Regarding Safety Code 6
Some witnesses appearing before the Committee were of the view that limits
established by Safety Code 6 were not stringent enough to protect Canadians from
potential negative health impacts of long-term exposure to RF electromagnetic
radiation.[39] According to some scientists appearing before the Committee, the findings
of their research indicated that there were non-thermal biological effects resulting from
exposure to RF electromagnetic radiation that was below the frequency limit established by
Safety Code 6. In their view, these biological effects could result in negative health
outcomes for humans, and in particular children.
For example, one scientist appearing before the Committee conducted a study which
found that electromagnetic radiation produced from mobile phone handsets had resulted in
a 60% reduction in insect reproductive capacity.[40] The scientist further indicated that
these findings were in line with other studies that had reported DNA damage in
mammalian cells and subsequent links to human infertility. Other scientists outlined
studies that had found other potential negative health outcomes as a result of exposure to
electromagnetic radiation, such as links between cell phones and the development of brain
tumours among children, and links between cordless DECT phones and affects on the heart
such as arrhythmia and tachycardia.[41] These scientists further articulated that many of
the studies demonstrating that long-term exposure to low level radiofrequencies had not
resulted in negative health outcomes had been funded by the wireless industry; and
therefore, more publically funded studies examining the health impacts of electromagnetic
radiation were necessary.[42]
Another witness appearing before the Committee articulated that in his view, the
science behind the development Safety Code 6 did not take into account the interaction
between electric currents naturally occurring in the human body and the RF
electromagnetic radiation resulting from the environment.[43] He articulated that he
presented his findings to Health Canada and Industry Canada, but found that they were
not taken seriously.[44]
The Committee also heard from community organizations representing parents who
were concerned about their children’s exposure to RF electromagnetic radiation in schools
and the environment from Wi-Fi and wireless telephone base stations.[45] These
organizations articulated that both adults and children in their communities had
experienced symptoms of headaches, sleep disturbances, problems with concentration,
dizziness and heart irregularities. They further attributed these symptoms to exposure to
Wi-Fi and wireless telephone base stations, a condition called “electromagnetic
sensitivity”.[46] They articulated that governments and industry should recognize
“electromagnetic sensitivity” as an illness.[47] In addition, the Committee received
numerous letters from interested individuals describing similar symptoms which they
attributed to their exposure to cell phones, Wi-fi and wireless telephone base stations.
39
These individuals also requested that “electromagnetic sensitivity” be recognized as an
illness.
Based upon these concerns, these scientists and community organizations argued that
Health Canada should take a precautionary approach to human exposure to RF
electromagnetic radiation.[48] In their view, a precautionary approach is a public policy
approach for risk management of possible but unproven adverse health effects.[49] The
precautionary principle is applied when there is only some evidence and that evidence
remains inconclusive.[50] According to these witnesses, in practice the application of the
precautionary principle in relation to human exposure to electromagnetic radiation means
that there should be a reduction of the exposure limits set out in Safety Code 6.[51]
Witnesses recommended that exposure limits in Canada be reduced to levels outlined in
the Bioinitiative Report of one tenth of a microwatt per centimetre squared or 0.614 volts
per meter.[52]
However, the Committee also heard from other scientists who were of the view that
there was significant evidence to support the current guidelines for exposure to
electromagnetic radiation under Safety Code 6, therefore lower levels were
unnecessary.[53] They pointed out that since World War II, thousands of studies had been
undertaken on the bioeffects and potential health risks related to electromagnetic
radiation, which includes over 1,200 studies examining electromagnetic radiation from
mobile phones.[54] According to these witnesses, this literature had been authoritatively
reviewed in the last two years by: the World Health Organization, the Ireland Expert Group
on Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields, the European Commission, the United States
National Research Council Expert Panel, the Royal Society of Canada and the Committee
on Man and Radiation. In their view, these authoritative reviews have concluded that there
is no compelling body of evidence of adverse health effects associated with
electromagnetic radiation at levels below internationally accepted limits.[55]
However, these scientists also pointed out that there were certain gaps in the existing
literature related to long-term low-level exposure and brain functions and reproductive
outcomes, as well as the effects of long-term exposure among children using mobile
phones.[56] They consequently recommended that more long-term studies were
necessary, as well as continuous review of the scientific literature. Furthermore, they
suggested that while they supported the existing guidelines, individuals who did have
concerns could take individual measures to limit their exposure, such as limiting their use
of mobile phones.[57]
Wireless industry stakeholders appearing before the Committee also supported the
need for long-term studies in order to ensure the long-term safety of their products.[58]
However, they also noted that a restrictive precautionary approach to electromagnetic
radiation could have potential negative impacts as well. For example, they suggested that
if Canada’s safety guidelines were stricter than international guidelines, manufacturers
would have to produce special phones for Canada, which in turn would drive up costs.[59]
Furthermore, they articulated that restrictive approaches to electromagnetic radiation
emitting devices failed to take into account the benefits that they provided to society: over
half of 911 calls are made through cell phones.[60]
In responding to concerns raised by witnesses, Health Canada officials indicated that

they agreed that long term studies on the effects of low level electromagnetic radiation, as
40
well as ongoing review of the scientific literature were necessary.[61] However, they
articulated that from their point of view a precautionary approach towards exposure to low
levels of electromagnetic radiation was unnecessary as there was a significant body of
scientific evidence available supporting Safety Code 6.[62] They further emphasized that a
precautionary approach was only undertaken by the department when limited scientific
evidence was available.[63] In addition, they pointed out that the studies that Health
Canada had reviewed regarding electromagnetic sensitivity had failed to establish a causal
relationship between the symptoms experienced by study participants and electromagnetic
radiation, but further research was necessary in this area.[64] Finally, officials from Health
Canada expressed their willingness to work with individuals, communities and school
boards to address their concerns regarding exposure to electromagnetic radiation.[65]
Committee Observations and Conclusions
During the course of its study, the Committee heard from several witnesses, including
department officials, that Canadians were protected from excessive exposure to RF
electromagnetic radiation by Safety Code 6, a standard developed by Health Canada
through a rigorous review of the extensive available scientific evidence. The Committee
also heard that Canadian standards were in line with those in other jurisdictions, as well as
recommendations provided by international bodies, such as the World Health Organization.
However, the Committee also heard that some studies had found that there were negative
health effects resulting from exposure to low levels of radiofrequency electromagnetic
radiation. It also heard that there were gaps in the scientific literature related to children’s
exposure, effects on brain function and possible effects on reproductive capacity.
Moreover, the Committee heard that long-term studies on the effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation were necessary, as well as ongoing review of the scientific
literature. Finally, the Committee also heard from witnesses that more publicly funded
studies examining the health impacts of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation were
necessary. The Committee therefore recommends that:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Government of Canada consider providing funding

to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research in support of
long-term studies examining the potential health impacts of
exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation.
2. Health Canada request that the Council of Canadian

Academies or another appropriate independent institution
conduct an assessment of the Canadian and international
scientific literature regarding the potential health impacts of
short and long-term exposure to radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation, which would include an
examination of electromagnetic sensitivity and a comparison
of public policies in other countries governing exposure to
radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation; and report on its
findings.
41
3. Health Canada and Industry Canada develop a
comprehensive risk awareness program for exposure to
radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, which would
include Health Canada making public in an accessible and
transparent way all the studies and analyses undertaken by
the Department on the impact of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on human health, as well as the
provision of information promoting the safe use of wireless
technologies.
4. Health Canada and Industry Canada offer to provide

information, including awareness sessions on exposure to
radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation.
5. Health Canada ensure that it has a process in place to

receive and respond to reports of adverse reactions to
electromagnetic radiation emitting devices.
[1] World Health Organization, WHO Backgrounder: Electromagnetic fields and

Public Health Cautionary Policies, March 2000,http://www.who.int/docstore/peh-
emf/publications/facts_press/EMF-Precaution.htm.
[2] Unless otherwise noted, this section is drawn from: University of

Ottawa/RFcom.ca, Frequently Asked Questions, http://www.rfcom.ca/faq/
answers.shtml#q8.
[3] Unless otherwise noted, this section is drawn from: WHO, What are
electromagnetic fields, http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/print.html.
[4] University of Ottawa/RFcom.ca, Frequently Asked Questions,

http://www.rfcom.ca/faq/ answers.shtml#q8.
[5] Government of Canada, Wireless Communication and Health: An Overview,

http://www.ic.gc.ca/antenna.
[6] Ibid.
[7] University of Ottawa/RFcom.ca, EMF Primer,

http://www.rfcom.ca/primer/index.shtml.
[8] Ibid.
42
[9] WHO, What are electromagnetic fields?, http://www.who.int/peh-
emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/print.html.
[10] Government of Canada, “Wireless Communication and Health: An

Overview,” http://www.ic.gc.ca/antenna.
[11] WHO, What are electromagnetic fields?, http://www.who.int/peh-

emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/print.html.

[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Jcmiras.Net_01, “The boundary between Ionizing and Non-ionizing

Frequency,” http://www.jcmiras.net/jcm/item/82
[16] This table is based upon information provided in the following document:
University of Ottawa/RFcom.ca,”Frequently Asked Questions,”http://www.rfcom.ca/faq/
answers.shtml#q8 and University of Ottawa/RFcom.ca, “EMF Primer,”
http://www.rfcom.ca/primer/index.shtml.
[17] One cycle per second equals one hertz; one kilohertz (kHz) equals 1,000
Hz; one megahertz (MHz) equals one million Hz; one gigahertz equals one billion Hz; one
terahertz equals 1012; Hz; and one EHz equals 1018 Hz .

[19] Radiation Emitting Devices Act, R.S., c.34 (1st Supp.), s.1.
[20] Health Canada, Health Canada’s Radiofrequency Exposure Guidelines,

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/radiation/radio_guide-lignes_direct-eng.php.
[21] University of Ottawa, Frequently Asked Questions,

http://www.rfcom.ca/faq/answers.shtml#q8.
[22] Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association, Connecting

Canadians: Wireless Antenna Towers Siting in Canada, June
2008,http://www.cwta.ca/CWTASite/english/pdf/CWTA_Connecting09_08.pdf, p.14 and
p. 20.
43
[23] Ibid, p. 14.
[24] Ibid, p. 21.
[25] House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, Evidence, April 27,

2010, No. 12, 3 rd Session of the 40th
Parliament,http://www2.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Committee/403/HESA/Evidence/EV44671
40/HESAEV12-E.PDF
[26] Ibid.
[27] Ibid.
[28] House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, Evidence, October 28,

68/HESAEV34-E.PDF

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.

68/HESAEV34-E.PDF.

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.

90/HESAEV13-E.PDF.
[33] It is important to note that Industry Canada officials did not specify which
accredited bodies were providing certification of portable radio-communication
equipment.

44
90/HESAEV13-E.PDF.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid.
[37] Industry Canada and Health Canada, “Frequently Asked Questions on RF

Energy and Health” http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/faq-energy-
health.pdf/$FILE/faq-energy-health.pdf.
[38] Ibid.

90/HESAEV13-E.PDF.
[40] Ibid.

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.
[42] Ibid.

68/HESAEV34-E.PDF.
[44] Ibid.

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF and House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, Evidence,
October 28, 2010, No. 34, 3 rd Session of the 40th
68/HESAEV34-E.PDF.
[46] Ibid.
45
40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.
[48] Ibid.

68/HESAEV34-E.PDF.
[50] Ibid.

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.

90/HESAEV13-E.PDF.
[53] Ibid.

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.
[55] Dr. Riadh Habash, “Potential Impact of Electromagnetic Radiation on

Human Health,” Brief submitted to the House of Commons Standing Committee on
Health.
[56] House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, ”Evidence,” 29 April,

90/HESAEV13-E.PDF.
[57] Ibid.

46
40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.

90/HESAEV13-E.PDF.

40/HESAEV12-E.PDF.

68/HESAEV34-E.PDF.
[62] Ibid.
[63] Ibid.
[64] Ibid.
[65] Ibid.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=4834477&Language=E
&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&File=27
______________________________
9. Manmade Problem Turned Deadlier than AIDS - Is There

Still Time to Correct Course?
Posted By Dr. Mercola | December 28 2010

Animals in factory farms are given doses of antibiotics -- both to keep them alive in
stressful, unsanitary conditions, and to make them grow faster. The practice leads to new
strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, such as the now-widespread form of staph (MRSA)
known as ST398.
Federal regulators have in the past refused to release estimates of just how much
antibiotics the livestock industry uses. But recently the FDA released its first-ever report
on the topic. And the amount? Twenty-nine million pounds of antibiotics in 2009 alone.
According to Grist:
47
"[T]he Animal Health Institute, a veterinary-drug trade group, estimated total use in
livestock at 17.8 million pounds. The industry has been clinging to that number ever since
... [T]he industry figure is woefully off -- about 40 percent lower than the real one."
Sources:
Grist December 10, 2010
FDA 2009 Summary Report: Antimicrobials Sold or Distributed for Use in Food-
Producing Animals
Dr Mercola’s Comments
MRSA ST398, also known as "the pig strain" of MRSA, was first discovered in pigs and pig-
farm workers in the Netherlands in 2004. Since then, this livestock MRSA strain has spread
across Europe, Canada and the United States, causing both mild and life-threatening
infections, and has even been found in retail meat in Canada.
This livestock-acquired strain of MRSA (ST398) adds to an already troubling situation.
The human community-associated strain of MRSA, USA300, already affects close to
100,000 people a year in the US, and caused 18,600 deaths in 2005 alone. To put that
number into perspective, HIV/AIDS killed 17,000 people that same year.
What's worse, it appears the various MRSA strains can be transmitted from humans to
animals and vice versa, putting the health of both humans and animals (including pets) at
ever increasing risk.
According to a 2009 University of Iowa study, 70 percent of hogs and 64 percent of
workers in industrial animal confinements tested positive for the antibiotic resistant strain
of MRSA. The study pointed out that, once MRSA is introduced, it could spread broadly to
other swine and their caretakers, as well as to their families and friends.
Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) is another antibiotic-resistant bacteria that has
killed both people and swine.
But what has spawned these deadly superbugs?
Agricultural Antibiotic Overuse has Created New Hard-to-Eradicate Human

Diseases
It's important to realize that antibiotic-resistant disease like MRSA is a man-made

problem, created by the excessive use of antibiotics. Medical overuse of antibiotics is one
aspect, but the greatest, and most hidden, factor is the excessive use of antibiotics in food
production.
Chickens, cattle and hogs are fed antibiotics, not to treat disease, but to make them grow
faster, which increases profit margins for livestock producers.
It's been unclear just how many antibiotics were really used in the manufacturing of our
food—until now.
48
According to the first-ever report by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on this
subject, factory farms used a whopping 29 million pounds of antibiotics in 2009 alone.
Back in 2001, a report issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists estimated that the non-
therapeutic livestock use of antibiotics accounted for 70 percent of the total antibiotic use
in the US, and when all agricultural uses were considered, they estimated the share could
be as high as 84 percent!
Clearly, agricultural antibiotic use is the smoking gun in the battle against antibiotic-
resistant superbugs.
But what can YOU do about it?
Choose Your Foods Wisely
Granted, conventional medicine still needs to curtail its prescriptions for antibiotics, but
even if you use antibiotics judiciously you're still exposed to great amounts of antibiotics
from the foods you eat.
This is one of the primary reasons why I ONLY recommend organic, grass-fed, free-range
meats or organic pasture-raised chickens, as non-medical use of antibiotics is not
permitted in organic farming. (That, plus the fact that they are far superior to farm-raised
meats in terms of nutritional content, which I'll discuss below).
Reduced Antibiotic Use in Farming PROVEN to Reduce Human Disease
Studies have shown that when you reduce the use of antibiotics in meat production,
human disease caused by antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria is significantly reduced as
well.
For example, once Australia banned the use of fluoroquinolones in all food animals, only
two percent of Australian patients tested positive for the drug resistant strain of
Campylobacter jejuni (a leading bacterial cause of food-borne illness that has exhibited
drug-resistant strains), whereas the prevalence of drug resistance can be as high as 29
percent in countries that allow the use of fluoroquinolone.
And, according to a 2006 study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, bacteria
from conventional chicken, and people who ate the chicken, became resistant to Synercid
(a strong antibiotic used to treat antibiotic-resistant bacteria) more often than the bacteria
found in antibiotic-free chicken, or in vegetarians.
In fact, the study found it was rare to find drug-resistant bacteria among antibiotic-
free chicken, while the majority of bacterial isolates from conventional poultry
were resistant.
49
The study indicated that the use of antibiotics in poultry (in this case the antibiotics were
used to promote growth) may harm humans' health in the long-term.
Still, the US meat industry is extremely resistant to the idea of getting rid of these drugs,
and I don't think we'll see any major change in this area until or unless laws are enacted
to curtail its use.
Until then, it's up to you to make up your own mind about what you want to buy...
The Superior Health Benefits of Organic Meats
There are many reasons to go organic when it comes to meats.
Many people do not realize that aside from the antibiotic problem, conventional livestock
feed is also laced with pesticides, which may then be transferred to you. In fact,
conventionally-raised, factory-farmed beef is a primary source of both antibiotics and
pesticides!
So, if you're short on cash and want to get the biggest bang for your buck, opt for organic
beef over organic vegetables.
In addition to being free of hormones, antibiotics and pesticides, grass-fed animals also
produce meat that is nutritionally far superior to their factory-farmed counterparts.
For an excellent in-depth look at how commercial beef is really raised, please read
California rancher Dave Evans' article "Better Beef," published in the March 2008 issue of
Best Life magazine.
As for the nutritional differences, grass-fed beef is lower in fat than regular beef and, more
importantly, contains three to five times more conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), a fatty acid,
than grain-fed animals.
CLA provides a number of excellent health benefits, including:
● Fighting cancer and diabetes
● Helping you lose weight
● Increasing your metabolic rate, a positive benefit for promoting normal thyroid
function
● Helping you maintain normal cholesterol and triglyceride levels
● Enhancing your immune system
If you don't purchase safe meat from our store, nor have access to a local farmer, farmer's
market, or CSA program, I would encourage you to search for grass-fed beef ranchers in
the United States that can ship good quality meats right to your door.
50
Over and Beyond Antibiotic-Resistance...
Last but not least, let's swing back to the overuse of antibiotics in medicine for a moment.
Because in addition to promoting antibiotic-resistant disease, the use of antibiotics will also
have the immediate health effect of killing off all the healthy, beneficial bacteria in your
body as well.
This too can have a significant, detrimental impact on your health.
As an adult, you have three to four pounds of beneficial bacteria and yeast living within
your intestines. These microbes compete for nutrients from the food you eat. Usually, the
strength in numbers that beneficial bacteria enjoy both keeps the ever-present yeasts in
check and causes them to produce nutrients such as the B vitamins.
However, every time you swallow antibiotics, you kill these beneficial bacteria within your
intestines. When you do so, you upset the delicate balance of your intestinal terrain.
Yeasts grow unchecked into large colonies and take over, in a condition called dysbiosis.
Yeasts are opportunistic organisms. This means that, as your intestinal bacteria die, yeasts
thrive, especially when their dietary needs are met.
Using their tendrils (hyphae), yeast can literally poke holes through the lining of your
intestinal wall, which results in a syndrome called leaky gut. In addition, parasitic yeasts
can also cause you to change what you eat by causing "cravings" for carbohydrates like
sugar, pasta and bread, for example.
So, it should come as no surprise that weight gain counts as one of the telltale signs of
antibiotic damage and subsequent yeast overgrowth.
By altering the normal terrain of your intestines, antibiotics can also make food allergies
more likely. An array of intestinal disorders can ensue, as well.
Sadly, many doctors dismiss the connection between their patients' intestinal disorders
and the drugs they themselves prescribed. So, beware, and always make sure to
repopulate your gut with a high quality probiotic every time you use an antibiotic.
The prevalence of antibiotics in the meats you eat could potentially also contribute to this
intestinal imbalance, making organic, grass-fed meats all the more appealing.
______________________________
51
10. Hackers issue BT Home Hub warning
v3+co+uk.uk 17 Apr 2008
Ethical hacking group GNUCitizen.org has warned that the default settings on one of the
UK's most widely used wireless routers is leaving customers open to attack.
The group showed in a blog posting that the BT Home Hub, the wireless router supplied to
BT Broadband customers, uses algorithms that make the device easy to crack when in
default mode.
Using reverse-engineering techniques the group said that the hub's Wired Equivalent
Privacy (WEP) keys can be predicted in just 80 guesses, but had decided against making
its automated guessing program publicly available.
GNUCitizen's findings appear to confirm long-term concerns about the security of the WEP
encryption protocol.
"It is quite likely that the bad guys can break into your network if you are using the default
encryption key. Our advice is to use WPA rather than WEP and change the default
encryption key now," GNUCitizen said.
Responding to the criticisms, BT denied that real-life users of the device were in any
serious danger of hack attacks.
The bad guys can break into your network if you're using the default encryption key
GNUCitizen
"It is important to realise that, although it has been possible to demonstrate a scenario
where the hub may be vulnerable, we do not believe it is something that should affect the
majority of BT customers in real life," the company said in a statement.
BT, which has published details on how to more effectively secure the router, said that
other operators supplying the Thomson-manufactured device were also affected by the
issue.
______________________________
11. Nintendo Releases Health-Safety Warnings for 3DS

X-bit labs by Anton Shilov 12/28/2010
Nintendo has issued a list of health-related safety warnings for its upcoming 3DS video
game console, the world's first portable system with autostereoscopic 3D screen. The
company claims that children under six should not use the console, whereas gamers, who
wear glasses may not see stereo effect.
Nintendo advices all the users to make breaks every 30 minutes so to avoid eye fatigue
while playing in stereo-3D (S3D) mode. The company also warns game developers about
"extreme" eye fatigue during S3D game design process. The company claims that the eye
fatigue is naturally lower when playing in 2D mode, but still advices its customers to make
breaks every hour.
52
Vision of children under the age of six is in the developmental stage. Since stereo-3D
effect is brought by showing different images for left and right eyes, it has a potential
impact on the growth of children's eyes. Nintendo recommends to switch 3D effect off for
young children and those, who wears glasses. Parents may even lock S3D effects by a
special pin code. In fact, eyes are organs that develop for a very long time, up to the age
of 25 in some cases. As a result, the S3D effects may be unsuitable even for adults, not
only for children or teenagers.
"If your physical condition worsens or you become ill, please stop playing at once," stated
Nintendo.
Nintendo 3DS features a 3.53” autostereoscopic 3D top screen with 800x240 resolution
(400 pixels for each eye) and a 3.02” bottom touch screen with 320x240 resolution. It has
three 0.3MP cameras – one inner and two outer – to deliver the stereo-3D effect and take
stereo-3D pictures. It includes a motion sensor, a gyro sensor, Wi-Fi 802.11b/g/n
controller, a Slide Pad that allows 360-degree analog input and so on. The device also has
a special slider that can increase, decrease or disable stereoscopic 3D (S3D) effect. The
3DS comes in form-factor that is similar to the predecessors and is fully compatible with
Nintendo DS titles. The console uses DMP Pica 200 graphics processor. As announced
previously, it will have a slot for SD cards as well as support cartridges for previous-gen
DS systems.
Nintendo will release 3DS first in Japan on the 26th of March, 2011, at the price of ¥25
000 ($299), which is higher than the price of Sony PlayStation Portable in the U.S. (PSP-
3000 costs $169, PSPgo costs $249) as well as Nintendo DSi ($149).
______________________________
12. Funny British Comedy Clip: “My BlackBerry is Not

Working!”
BLACKBERRYCOOL
http://www.blackberrycool.com/2010/12/21/funny-british-comedy-clip-my-blackberry-is-
not-working/
______________________________
13. Wi-Fi Overload at High-Tech Meetings

The New York Times By VERNE G. KOPYTOFF. Published: December 28, 2010
53
SAN FRANCISCO — Internet entrepreneurs climb on stage at technology conferences and
praise a world in which everyone is perpetually connected to the Web.
But down in the audience, where people are busy typing and transmitting this wisdom,
getting a Wi-Fi connection is often downright impossible.
“I’ve been to 50 events where the organizer gets on stage and says, ‘It will work,’ ” said
Jason Calacanis, chief executive of Mahalo, a Web search company. “It never does.”
Last month in San Francisco at the Web 2.0 Summit, where about 1,000 people heard
such luminaries as Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Julius Genachowski, chairman of the
Federal Communications Commission, and Eric E. Schmidt of Google talk about the digital
future, the Wi-Fi slowed or stalled at times.
Earlier this year, Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, had to ask the audience at his
company’s developer conference to turn off their laptops and phones after his introduction
of the iPhone 4 was derailed because of an overloaded Wi-Fi network.
And few of Silicon Valley’s technorati seem willing to forget one of the biggest Wi-Fi
breakdowns, on the opening day of a conference in 2008 co-hosted by the technology blog
TechCrunch. It left much of the audience steaming over the lack of Internet access. The
next morning, the organizers — who included Mr. Calacanis — clambered onto the stage to
apologize and announce that they had fired the company that installed the Wi-Fi.
Technology conferences are like revival meetings for entrepreneurs, deal makers and the
digitally obsessed. Attendees compulsively blog, e-mail, text and send photos and video
from their seats.
Some go so far as to watch a webcast of the event on their laptops rather than look up at
the real thing right in front of them. Nearly all conferences make free Wi-Fi available to
keep the crowd feeling connected and productive.
The problem is that Wi-Fi was never intended for large halls and thousands of people,
many of them bristling with an arsenal of laptops, iPhones and iPads. Mr. Calacanis went
to the extreme at the Web 2.0 Summit by bringing six devices to get online — a laptop,
two smartphones and three wireless routers.
54
He explained — while writing e-mails on his laptop — that as a chief executive and
investor, he needed dependable Internet access at all times. “You’ve still got to work,” Mr.
Calacanis said.
Wi-Fi is meant for homes and other small spaces with more modest Internet demands,
says Ernie Mariette, founder of Mariette Systems, which installs conference Wi-Fi. “You’re
asking a technology to operate beyond its capability.”
Conference organizers and the Wi-Fi specialists they hire often fail to provide enough
bandwidth. Many depend on the infrastructure that the hotels or convention centers
hosting their events already have in place.
Companies that install Wi-Fi networks sometimes have only a day to set up their
equipment in a hall and then test it. They must plan not only for the number of attendees,
but also the size and shape of the room, along with how Wi-Fi signals reflect from walls
and are absorbed by the audience.
“Every space is different and every crowd is different,” Mr. Mariette said.
What is good enough for a convention of podiatrists is woefully inadequate for Silicon
Valley’s connected set.
“I’ve been to health care conferences where no one brings a laptop,” said Ross Mayfield,
president of the business software company Socialtext and a technology conference
regular.
Technology conferences are an anomaly. Some regulars joke, perhaps accurately, that the
events are host to more Internet devices per square foot than anywhere in the world. All
too often, the network freezes after becoming overwhelmed with all the nonstop
streaming, downloading and social networking.
That was what happened this year at the RailsConf, a software conference in Baltimore,
when attendees caused Wi-Fi gridlock by tuning in to a webcast of an unrelated event
across the country. Nearly everyone, it turned out, wanted to watch Apple’s live unveiling
of the iPhone 4, the very one that fell victim to a Wi-Fi crash.
Adding more Wi-Fi access points does not necessarily fix the problem, Mr. Mariette said. In
fact, doing so may make the situation worse by creating more interference.
To avoid Wi-Fi gridlock, conference organizers sometimes ask attendees to turn off
electronics they are not using and to refrain from downloading big files. Cooperation is
generally mixed, however.
Last year, an attendee at Web 2.0 Expo in New York was so desperate to get online that
he offered to pay Oren Michels, chief executive of Mashery, a Web services company, to
share his mobile Internet connection. MiFi, as the device is called, enables users to create
mini-Internet hot spots using a mobile carrier’s network, not conference Wi-Fi.
“He said, ‘Can I give you 20 bucks for access?’ ” Mr. Michels recalled. “It was just some
random person sitting next to me.”
Even if Wi-Fi devices are not connected to the network, they constantly emit signals that
create background noise, sometimes until it becomes impossible to get online. IPhones
and most BlackBerrys, along with certain laptops, are more susceptible than other devices
because they operate on 2.4 GHz, a part of the spectrum that offers only three channels.
55
The Wi-Fi curse also extends to tech industry press conferences. Google, for instance, once
held a press day at its headquarters in Mountain View, Calif., during which the Wi-Fi failed
for several hours, although it was restored during the event’s final minutes. The flub did
not exactly build confidence that Google and its partner, EarthLink, could deliver on their
plans — since abandoned — to blanket San Francisco with free Wi-Fi.
______________________________
14. Scientists worry about ocean energy's effect on sea-

creature migration
PHYSORG.com December 28, 2010 By Les Blumenthal, McClatchy Newspapers
Without maps or GPS, great white sharks travel thousand of miles roundtrip from
California to Hawaii or Australia to South Africa. Sea turtles hatched on the
beaches of Florida travel the currents of the North Atlantic Gyre to Europe, Africa
and South America before heading home.
And in one of the most mysterious and epic journeys of all, salmon from the streams and
rivers of the Pacific Northwest head to sea and swim into the far reaches of the North
Pacific before returning to spawn.
Scientists increasingly believe these marine creatures and others use the earth's magnetic
fields to navigate vast distances.
But as the search for green energy turns to the oceans, there are concerns that tidal and
wave-powered generators, and the cables that bring their electricity to shore, could
interfere with the internal compasses of sea creatures.
The fear isn't that the fish and other marine life will get chewed up in revolving turbine
blades or other machinery. It's that the generators and the cables to shore produce
electromagnetic fields that could interfere with their natural guidance systems, which use
the earth's magnetic fields. In addition, there are some worries the machines may produce
a low-level hum that interfere with such marine mammals as whales.
"Before we put these power generating devices in the water, we need to know how they
will affect the marine environment," said Andrea Copping an oceanographer with Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory's Marine Sciences Lab in Sequim, Wash.
Though the Europeans are far ahead, Copping said widespread commercial development of
generating stations using tidal and wave power may be 10 years off in the United States.
Even so, projects have begun, and the Northwest has become a center for their
development.
The Snohomish Public Utility District has received a $10 million grant from the federal
Energy Department install two tidal turbines in Admiralty Inlet west of Whidbey Island in
Puget Sound. The current through Admiralty Inlet can flow at up to 8 knots, or 9 miles per
hour.
56
The 400-ton tidal turbines resemble fans and will sit on platforms 200 feet deep. The
turbines will generate enough electricity to supply 700 homes.
Several years ago, Tacoma Power explored placing tidal generators in the Tacoma Narrows
in southern Puget Sound. The Navy also has explored the possibility of placing generators
in the Sound. Tacoma Power decided not to proceed with a pilot project, and the Navy
project is on hold, Copping said.
Off the Oregon Coast, a company has a license to move forward with a commercial scale
wave project, Copping said. The waves along the coast of Washington state and Oregon
are considered among the best energy producing waves in the world as they roll in from
the deep Pacific.
The Northwest Power Planning Council has estimated that wave-powered generators off
the coasts of Washington State, Oregon and northern California eventually could produce
50,000 megawatts of electricity, roughly the output of 50 nuclear power plants.
In addition to the Northwest, possible sites are being studied off Hawaii, in Alaska's Cook
Inlet and off Florida and Maine. There is a study underway on installing hydrokinetic
turbines in the Mississippi River near Baton Rouge, she said.
Along the shores of Puget Sound, Copping and her colleagues at the Marine Sciences
Laboratory are trying to determine exactly what effect electro-magnetic fields may have on
salmon, Dungeness crab, halibut and American lobsters.
"We picked EMF (electromagnetic fields) because there is no scientific literature," she said.
In the lab, two specially designed coils each containing 200 pounds of copper wiring have
been wrapped inside what looks like window frames. When electricity is fed into the coils,
an electro-magnetic field is created with a magnetic flux roughly the power of a small bar
magnet. Aquarium tanks filled with marine species are placed near the coils and scientists
study their reaction when the coil is energized.
Different marine species have different ways of detecting the earth's magnetic field to
navigate and even to track prey.
Sharks have little black pores near their snouts that are filled with a conductive jelly-like
substance and serve as external magnetic receptors, said Stephen Kajiura, an associate
professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University. Sharks
can even determine when they are moving north and south or east and west. Rays have a
similar detection system.
Turtles have magnetic receptors connected to their central nervous system.

"This mechanism allows them to have long ocean migrations in an environment where
everything is blue, there are no landmarks and you can't tell east from west and north
from south," Kajiura said.
Lobsters, crabs, tuna and other species are thought to have similar guidance systems.
Salmon may have some type of chemicals in their brains that detect the earth's magnetic
fields, though Kajiura and Copping cautioned that more research is needed to be certain.
57
"We are not sure about salmon," Copping said. "No one has ever been able to show how
they navigate back to their streams."
Kajiura has studied how underwater electric cables can affect a shark's behavior. The
cables can create electromagnetic fields.
"Sharks will bite at them (the cables), thinking they are prey," he said. "It's not a new
phenomenon. The cables may very well produce magnetic fields that could disrupt
behavior."
Copping said some preliminary results from her lab's experiments should be available in
the coming weeks.
"We won't have definitive answers, but we should know whether it is a problem or not,"
she said.
Both Copping and Kajiura said it was important to have some scientific answers to
questions regulators are sure to ask.
"It's coming so fast, regulators are asking questions we don't have answers to," said
Kajiura. "It would be nice to have some baseline research before we move ahead."
(c) 2010, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

Visit the McClatchy Washington Bureau on the World Wide Web
athttp://www.mcclatchydc.com.
______________________________
15. Mobile phone plans cause a stir

Dec 29, 2010, 15:58pm By Claire Wood
It’s emerged that a company wants to build a telecommunications base station in a church
on Park Lane.
58
Some local people are angry that they haven’t been properly consulted.
Telefonica O2 and Vodaphone want to put 3 antennas within St Peter’s Methodist Church
on the corner of Park Lane. These antennas would form a new telecommunications base
station improving the network shared between the two mobile phone companies.
Consultation letters were sent out just before Christmas with a deadline of 28th December
to send in any comments. Rachel Hall, who lives on Avenue Road, has delivered a copy of
the letter to 150 homes in the area, encouraging people to oppose the plans: “The effects
of mobile phone masts are unproven and open to interpretation but I don’t want my
children or my local community to be under that risk. We have a pre-school and 3 schools
in our near vicinity and some of you may remember the fight against a mast at Heigham
Park not too long ago. ”But the church may step in to prevent the plans. Reverend Helen
Freeston from St Peter’s Methodist Church has moved to reassure people that she won’t
allow this to go ahead: “The church will not be having any antenna on its premises. The
church is too concerned about its local community. That’s the point of our existence.”
Despite the fact that St Peter’s Methodist Church would benefit to the tune of thousands of
pounds a year, the church treasurer, Tony Davies, said: “It’s very unlikely to go ahead.
Personally I think there is absolutely no proof of any danger at all, but the fact that people
worry that it’ll lower house prices and it makes them unhappy, that’s not what the church
is about.” He added a final decision would be taken by the Church Council who meet in
January: “The money would be extremely useful. As some people have pointed out, we all
use our mobile phones.”
A Methodist Church on Bowthorpe Road removed a transmitter because it caused so much

concern among local people.
WFS Telecom Ltd, an agent working on behalf of O2 and Vodaphone, have around 20 sites
across Norwich they are interested in setting up similar base stations in to improve
network coverage.
______________________________
16. SOLAR MAX COULD SPELL TROUBLE
Discovery news Wed Dec 29, 2010
59
THE GIST
● The sun goes through moments of calm and tempest, usually on an 11-year
cycle.
● Static discharges and geomagnetic storms on the sun can disrupt electronics.
● The latest prediction suggests 2013 will be the maximum phase of the solar
cycle.
The coming year will be an important one for space weather as the sun pulls out of a
trough of low activity and heads into a long-awaited and possibly destructive period of
turbulence.
Many people may be surprised to learn that the sun, rather than burn with faultless
consistency, goes through moments of calm and tempest.
But two centuries of observing sunspots -- dark, relatively cool marks on the solar face
linked to mighty magnetic forces -- have revealed that our star follows a roughly 11-year
cycle of behavior.
The latest cycle began in 1996 and for reasons which are unclear has taken longer than
expected to end.
Now, though, there are more and more signs that the sun is shaking off its torpor and
building towards "Solar Max," or the cycle's climax, say experts.
"The latest prediction looks at around midway 2013 as being the maximum phase of the
solar cycle," said Joe Kunches of NASA's Space Weather Prediction Center.
But there is a prolonged period of high activity, "more like a season, lasting about two and
a half years," either side of the peak, he cautioned.
At its angriest, the sun can vomit forth tides of electromagnetic radiation and charged
matter known as coronal mass ejections, or CMEs.
This shock wave may take several days to reach Earth. When it arrives, it compresses the
planet's protective magnetic field, releasing energy visible in high latitudes as shimmering
auroras -- the famous Northern Lights and Southern Lights.
But CMEs are not just pretty events.
60
They can unleash static discharges and geomagnetic storms that can disrupt or even knock
out the electronics on which our urbanized, internet-obsessed, data-saturated society
depends.
Less feared, but also a problem, are solar flares, or eruptions of super-charged protons
that can reach Earth in just minutes.
In the front line are telecommunications satellites in geostationary orbit, at an altitude of

36,000 kilometers (22,500 miles) and Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites, on which
modern airliners and ships depend for navigation, which orbit at 20,000 kilometers
(12,000 miles).
In January 1994, discharges of static electricity inflicted a five-month, 50-million-dollar

outage of a Canadian telecoms satellite, Anik-E2.
In April 2010, Intelsat lost Galaxy 15, providing communications over North America, after
the link to ground control was knocked out apparently by solar activity. Intelsat appears to
have regained some control of the satellite, but it's too early to tell if it will be fully
operational again.
"These are the two outright breakdowns that we all think about," said Philippe Calvel, an
engineer with the French firm Thales. "Both were caused by CMEs."
In 2005, x-rays from a solar storm disrupted satellite-to-ground communications and GPS
signals for about 10 minutes.
To cope with solar fury, satellite designers opt for robust, tried-and-tested components
and shielding, even if this makes the equipment heavier and bulkier and thus costlier to
launch, said Thierry Duhamel of satellite maker Astrium.
Another precaution is redundancy -- to have backup systems in case one malfunctions.

On Earth, power lines, data connections and even oil and gas pipelines are potentially
vulnerable.
An early warning of the risk came in 1859, when the biggest CME ever observed unleashed
red, purple and green auroras even in tropical latitudes.
The new-fangled technology of the telegraph went crazy. Geomagnetically-induced
currents in the wires shocked telegraph operators and even set the telegraph paper on
fire.
In 1989, a far smaller flare knocked out power from Canada's Hydro Quebec generator,
inflicting a nine-hour blackout for six million people.
A workshop in 2008 by US space weather experts, hosted by the National Academy of
Sciences, heard that a major geomagnetic storm would dwarf the 2005 Hurricane Katrina
for costs.
Recurrence of a 1921 event today would fry 350 major transformers, leaving more than
130 million people without power, it heard. A bigger storm could cost between a trillion
and two trillion dollars in the first year, and full recovery could take between four and 10
years.
61
"I think there is some hyperbole about the draconian effects," said Kunches.
"On the other hand, there's a lot we don't know about the sun. Even in the supposedly
declining, or quiet phase, you can have magnetic fields on the sun that get very
concentrated and energized for a time, and you can get, out of the blue, eruptive activity
that is atypical. In short, we have a variable star."
______________________________
17. Interview: Talal Jabari Full Signal
62
-click-
- Full Signal, outline :
Talal Jabari, a Palestinian-American who has worked as a journalist, producer and

creator of audio effects, has recently made his début as director with the film Full
Signal, which won the prize for best documentary at the Myrtle Beach International
Film Festival in December 2009.
As the number of people using mobile phones continues to grow, more and more
base stations are being installed to meet the demand. Faced with the mounting
conflict over the damaging health effects of artificial electromagnetic fields from HF
microwave radiation, and the drop in property values where phone masts have
been set up, the phone networks have found an emergency solution by disguising
relay antennas in real or artificial trees, fake chimneys, etc. But however they try to
hide it, this is the most serious worldwide health scandal in the beginning of the
21st century.
Full Signal gives the chance to speak out to scientific experts working on the health
problems arising from mobile phone and phone mast radiation, also to
campaigners battling against the presence of relay antennas in residential areas, to
the electrosensitive (EHS), to government health authorities and to lawyers, who
are obtaining more and more favourable verdicts in cases brought against the
phone companies.
Through interviews with a widely representative range of people, this documentary
highlights a growing awareness in the international community, who are finally
beginning to pay attention to the problems arising from the proliferation of relay
63
antennas, and becoming concerned about the now proven health hazards arising
from this new form of serious environmental pollution.
http://www.next-up.org/Newsoftheworld/Full_signal.php#1
______________________________
18. Tensen Family Farm v Consumers Energy Company

MPSC Case No 16129
Please carefully read the excellent linked letter from Prof. Don Hillman. It is further
evidence about harm being caused to people and animals by electrical companies more
concerned about profit, than health and safety. It was sent in response to another recent
story about ground current, linked below. Our thanks go to Prof. Hillman for his continued
concern and all his extensive efforts to try and ensure a safe electrical system in North
America. (Martin)
Re: Owen Veterinarian Fights Over Electrical Pollution (

http://firstdonoharmblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/owen-veterinarian-fights-xcel-
energy.html )
"Dr. Pamela Jaffke and her cat Magic are likely victims of the Collusion and Conspiracy
involving Utilities and PSC that were revealed and are contained in a letter to the
Governor-Elect, Mr. Richard Snyder of Michigan, attached. This is a matter of public
record, testimony was given in hearings at the Michigan Public Service Commission MPSC
Case No. U-16129, Tensen Family Farm v Consumers Energy Company".
Don Hillman, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Department of Animal Science (Dairy)

Michigan State University,
750 Berkshire Lane
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
donag1@aol.com
______________________________
19. T-Mobile Tower & Compound
Another excellent letter, (written by Angela Flynn) was used as testimony in a recent cell
phone tower hearing. Thanks Angela.
Planning and Zoning Commission

Carroll County Government
225 N Center Street
Westminster, MD 21157
410-386-2145
888-302-8978
fax 410-386-2120
Dennis E. Wertz, Chairman
64
Charles M. Chadwick, Vice Chairman
Melvin E. Baile, Jr.
Alec Yeo
R. Wayne Barnes
Richard S. Soisson
Cynthia L. Cheatwood
December 21, 2010
Re: a. S-09-024 - Condon Property T-Mobile Tower & Compound - Owner: John Condon;
Developer: T-Mobile Northeast LLC; located on the north side of Old Liberty Road, east of
Salem Bottom Road; Tax Map 67, Block 2, Parcel 635; E.D. 9
Dear Planning and Zoning Commissioners,
I write to express my opposition to the proposed cell tower base station at S-09-024 -
Condon Property on Old Liberty Road
I am a health advocate and work on the issue of non ionizing radiation exposure in the
radio frequency (RFR) band. I have a personal stake in this work, as I am one of the
growing numbers of people who have become functionally impaired due to prolonged
chronic exposure to RFR from a base station near to my home. I am aware that the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA) prohibits the consideration of environmental
concerns in the siting of base stations, if, the RFR emissions are under the FCC Safety
Standard. However, the TCA does not prohibit the consideration of a loss of property
value, and, as many people perceive that there is a loss of property value due to the
negative health impact from the exposure to the RFR from cell towers it is incumbent upon
the Commissioners to be informed of these impacts.
Additionally, while there is cell phone coverage in this area, T-Mobile claims this tower is
necessary to provide cell phone coverage along MD Route 26 and to the interior of people’s
homes. Neither of these is true.
It is important to point out that the use of cell phones while driving is considered
distracted driving and studies show that it is as bad as drunk driving. The Department of
Transportation (DOT) says, we heard America’s call to end the dangerous practice of
distracted driving on our nation’s roadways. Distracted driving is a serious, life-threatening
practice and we will not rest until we stop it … The message is simple – Put it down! .
(http://www.distraction.gov/ )
In Maryland, there is a handheld ban for all drivers; a ban on all cell phone use (handheld
and hands-free) for novice drivers; and, a ban on texting for all drivers.
No Telecom company should be promoting cell phone coverage for drivers as this
encourages unsafe driving practices.
Winfield has an estimated 348 residents. Of these, close to 250 have signed a petition
against the cell tower. If the remainder of the people must have better coverage in their
homes they can purchase their own femtocell. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femtocell)
This would be the far better option rather than unnecessarily exposing all Winfield
residents to the RF radiation emitted by the transmitters on cell towers.
65
The proposed 120 foot tower would be in close proximity to South Carroll High and
Winfield Elementary schools. Children are more susceptible to environmental toxins,
absorb more RFR into their bodies and face longer cumulative exposure than adults. This
greater danger is being taken seriously by many scientific and governmental agencies.
In April 2009, the EU Parliament adopted a resolution on health concerns associated with
RFR, which includes criteria for setting up Cell Towers. They state: “In this context, it is
important to ensure at least that schools, nursery schools, retirement homes, and health
care institutions are kept clear, within a specific distance determined by scientific criteria,
of facilities of this type.”
(http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2009-
0216+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN )
In January 2008, the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of
Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering, issued a report saying that we do not
know enough about the potential health risks of long-term exposure to RF radiation from
cell phones, cell towers, television towers, and other components of our communications
system. The scientists emphasized, in particular, the unknown risks to the health of
children, pregnant women, and fetuses as well as of workers whose jobs entail high
exposure to RF radiation. The report states:
“Wireless networks are being built very rapidly, and many more base station antennas are
being installed. A crucial research need is to characterize radiated electromagnetic fields
for typical multiple-element base station antennas and for the highest radiated power
conditions with measurements conducted during peak hours of the day at locations close
to the antennas as well as at ground level.” (http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12036.html )
Jason Campbell, senior development manager for T-Mobile, USA, reports that the RF
radiation levels from this cell tower will be 100 times lower than the FCC standards. This
means the estimated RFR level will be 10 microwatts per centimeter squared (µW/cm2).
This is the maximum allowable RFR exposure level in Russia, China, Switzerland, Italy and
Monaco. The level claimed by Campbell may not take into account additional transmitters,
which will further increase the RFR levels. In addition the reflective and amplifying nature
of RFR in the environment may lead to localized RFR hot spots that exceed the estimated
levels.
The wide variance in RFR exposure limits around the world is due to the fact that some
countries, such as the United States, dismiss non-thermal biological effects from RFR
exposure. The limits only protect against thermal heating. Many countries have lower
limits that factor in the non-thermal cumulative effects, which have been shown to occur
at levels thousands of times lower than the thermal effects.
According to Norbert Hankin, an environmental scientist in the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency’s Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, who has studied the effects of RFR
for 33 years, the FCC's standards are "thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, non-
thermal exposure situations…Therefore, the generalization by many that the guidelines
protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified.
”http://americanassociationforcellphonesafety.org/uploads/noi_epa_response.pdf
66
The BioInitiative Report, published in 2007, provides detailed scientific information on
health impacts when people are exposed to EMF/RFR hundreds or even thousands of times
below the limits currently established by the FCC. The authors reviewed more than 2000
scientific studies and reviews, and concluded that the existing public safety limits are
inadequate to protect public health. Their conclusion is that: From a public health policy
standpoint, new public safety limits, and limits on further deployment of risky technologies
are warranted based on the total weight of evidence. Their recommendation is to set an
exposure standard of 0.1 microwatt per centimeter squared (µW/cm2) limit. This is
10,000 times lower than the FCC standard of 1,000 µW/cm2 and 100 times lower than T-
Mobile's estimation of the RFR levels from the proposed cell tower.
(http://www.bioinitiative.org/ )
The non-thermal biological effects of RFR have been documented by the international
scientific community and the military since the 1950s. As Dr. David Carpenter, Director of
the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany, State University
of New York, lead author of the BioInitiative Report, Advisor to the President's Cancer
Panel and the Executive Secretary of the New York Power Lines Project, coveys quite well
in his report Setting Prudent Public Health Policy for Electromagnetic Field Exposures:
"Clear evidence has emerged from animal and cell culture studies that [RFR] has biological
effects. Furthermore, such effects occur at intensities commonly experienced by humans.
We know a number of ways in which EMF's alter cell physiology and function.
Electromagnetic fields affect gene transcription, induce the synthesis of stress proteins,
and cause breakage of DNA, probably through the generation of reactive oxygen species.
Changes in the blood-brain-barrier and in calcium metabolism have been demonstrated for
various RF frequencies.and such effects occur at exposures that do not cause significant
heating. Any one of these actions might be responsible for the carcinogenic and/or neuro-
degenerative actions of EMF's[RFR]." (http://www.scribd.com/doc/4090137/Setting-
Prudent-Public-Health-Policy-for-Electromagnetic-Field-Exposures )
In addition, 10 out of the 14 peer-reviewed epidemiological studies analyzed, and

conforming to the specified WHO/ICNIRP standards of scientific quality, including their
assessment criteria of consistency and replication found significant increases in ill health
effects. Included in this database are only those studies that are about cell tower
exposures. (Kundi, 2008 at the London EMF International Conference). Populations close
to cellular antennas show an increase in the effects of ill health in those closest to the
antennas with the risks factors dropping off as distance and RFR levels decrease.
Symptoms ranged from sleep disturbances to breast and brain cancers.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TBB-4VRWNH1-
2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000
050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=b22f07bbd6f4e2076bdc07dbc4e94
df6 )
Cell towers should not be placed near our homes and schools. As public officials you have
a legal and moral duty to educate yourselves on this matter and to base your decisions on
all of the information regarding negative health impacts from exposure to the radio
frequency radiation from wireless communication transmitters and their subsequent
negative impact on property values. And, in fact, if you go to this web site – No Cell
Tower in Our
Neighborhoodhttp://sites.google.com/site/nocelltowerinourneighborhood/home/other-
communities-saying-no - you will see some of the hundreds of communities, organizations,
municipalities, school parents, individuals and residents who are opposing cell towers and
67
are fighting off wireless facilities in their neighborhoods, including my local high school,
Walt Whitman in Bethesda, Md.
Angela Flynn
5309 Iroquois Road
Bethesda, MD 20816
201-229-0282
angelaflynn80@msn.com
Member of Wireless Radiation Alert Network

Board Member of Center for Safer Wireless
CELL TOWERS AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS – LIVING WITH RADIOFREQUENCY
RADIATION
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24352550/Cell-Tower-Rpt
______________________________
20. Giz Watson Is A Politician Concerned About Expossure to

Electromagnetic Radiation
Exposure to radiation
Giz is concerned about the long-term health effects of radiation from

telecommunication facilities.
It is known that radiation of this type has both thermal and non-thermal effects on human
and animal cellular function. At closer distances to the source of radiation, heating occurs
in the body. At greater distances when heating is no longer detectable, non-thermal
cellular effects still occur.
Very little is currently known about the nature of non-thermal effects from RF EME. These
are not covered by the Australian Radiation Protection Standard. This standard only
protects against a limited range of short term and thermal effects of radiation.
Giz hads advocated on behalf of constituents who were worried about negative long-term
impact on human health through exposure to continual low level electromagnetic radiation
from base stations. Whilst the actual RF EME readings were lower than the ACMA allowed
national limits Giz did not consider this as an adequate assurance of the long-term safety
of telecommunication facilities.
While it is not possible to demonstrate health risks at levels of exposure similar or lower
than those provided by ACMA, it is equally impossible for a carrier to demonstrate at this
time that long-term exposure to RF EME from base stations is safe.
68
The outcome of long-term exposure, including at low levels such as those currently
emitted from local base stations, is still unknown. A 2005 study by Dr Bruce Hocking of
Monash University found that children living within 7 miles of TV and FM broadcast
towers, which are very similar to telecommunication towers, had more than twice the rate
of leukaemia as children living outside the area.
Applying the precautionary principle therefore requires the highest standards of impact
mitigation to protect community values.
Giz advocates for erecting base stations away from residental properties. She also
requests further research to be undertaken by independent bodies.
Good links
● WA Planning Commission on Mobile phone towers

● Environmental safety concerns
● ACMA - Mobile base stations and EME fact sheet
● ACMA - EME and health
● ARPANSA - Radiation protection
● Local Council Initiatives on EME in USA
http://giz-watson.net/node/90
______________________________
21. ‘Cellphone towers disorient homer pigeons’
Express News Service
First Published : 27 Dec 2010 03:33:19 AM IST
Last Updated : 27 Dec 2010 08:24:26 AM IST
CHENNAI: Even as pigeon-racing finds more patronage in the city, urbanisation has begun
to pose new threat to mankind’s oldest messengers — the homer pigeons — as more and
more cellphone towers sprout in the city.
Pigeon lovers contend that the mushrooming cellphone towers across the State, and
especially in Chennai, are making the birds lose their biggest asset — quickly reaching a
place. Homer pigeons, a pedigree known best for its ability to spot its home and reach it at
the quickest, have also become victims to the bane of urbanisation, said Sankaralingam,
president, Chennai Homer Pigeons Association.
“Homer pigeons usually take only 45 seconds to fly a kilometre. Cellphone towers hamper
their flight, forcing them to take a more elaborate route, thereby impairing their
69
advantage of reaching a place at the fastest. “Earlier, before the advent of cellphones, if I
liberated 100 pigeons in my Kodungaiyur neighbourhood, all would return home in a
couple of minutes. Recently, many pigeon fanciers noted that their birds took a longer
time to reach short distances. Discussion showed that this phenomenon occurred in places
where cellphone towers were coming up,” he explained.
Now, only about 70 of 100 pigeons were able to traverse the same distance within the
given time-frame, he said. There is also a study that suggests that pigeons, which fly
using the earth’s magnetic field, are getting confused by signals from cellphone towers.
At an event held to distribute prizes for pigeon-racing earlier this year, Mayor M
Subramanian observed that pigeons and sparrows were becoming difficult to spot in the
city owing to urbanisation.
http://expressbuzz.com/cities/chennai/‘cellphone-towers-disorient-homer-
pigeons’/234584.html
______________________________
22. How to Reduce Electromagnetic Fields in Your Bedroom
Periodically during the past few decades a story about the adverse health effects of
electromagnetic fields (EMF) or electricity has made a small splash in the public
media. These stores are quickly discounted as being untrue or hypochondriac in
nature. And yet, these stories and case studies continue to emerge As reported in
one publication, "In one pooled study that combined nine well-conducted studies
from several countries, including a study from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a
twofold excess risk of childhood leukemia was associated with exposure to magnetic
fields above 0.4 µT. In another pooled study that combined 15 studies, a similar
increased risk was seen above 0.3 µT."i
In yet another study, "A questionnaire survey of 2,072 people in California found
that the prevalence of ES [electro¬sensitive] within the sample group was 3.24%
with ES being defined as "Being allergic or very sensitive to getting near electrical
appliances, computers, or power lines" (Levallois 2002, response rate 58.3%). A
similar questionnaire survey from the same year in Stockholm County (Sweden),
found a 15% prevalence of ES amongst the sample group, with ES being defined as
"Hypersensitivity or allergy to electric or magnetic fields" (Hillert 2002, response
rate 73%)."ii
In addition, there is now a plethora of products that are making claims of

"protection," "shielding," or "reduction" of exposure to EMF. There is no magic pill or
70
product that can protect us, and though it is true that some of the products are
effective, none of them address all of the issues. And in fact, if misused, they can
exacerbate the situation.
The general public is often overwhelmed with the technical terms and the
complexity, so the tendency has been to simply ignore the issue Though the
majority of the general public believes there is some risk in using a cell phone,
people continue to use it because it is convenient. Just as people know that "fast
food" is not healthy, the convenience trumps the risk. What the general public does
now know is that the largest risk to EMF may not be the cell phone (though it is bad
there as well), but within their bedroom. At night our bodies recuperate from the
daily onslaught of stress, our cells and organs detoxify and replace themselves. If
this process is interrupted because our cell membranes are in constant stress, then
healthy cells can be damaged iii, iv, while unhealthy cells (infections, mutations,
neural disorders)v,vi can proliferate. For example, several individuals link Lyme
disease to electromagnetic exposure as follows:
"Nodular, discoid morphoea-like, and widespread cutaneous fibroses in chronic

Borrelia infection may be provoked by trauma, surgery or electromagnetic
radiation."vii
"Just as Lyme Disease sufferers using rife technology experience herx reactions
following treatment sessions, it is feasible that people with EMF [electromagnetic
fielci] sensitivity are experiencing the effects of electromagnetic fields on
undiagnosed infections in their body "viii
"Based on the growing consensus that Lyme Disease is often misdiagnosed and is
spreading rapidly, it seems possible that EMF [electromagnetic field] sensitivity may
in fact be due to undiagnosed Lyme Disease or similar infection. According to one
author, the problem of EMF sensitivity has grown to epidemic proportions. Further
evidence supporting this hypothesis is that many people who suffer from EMF
sensitivity have lots of other health problems that suggest infection."ix
Research has established that our bodies communicate first bio-electrically and then
bio-chemicallyx.
In nature there are many electromagnetic fields that have no adverse effect on our
bodies, That is because natural fields are either temporally constant (same
frequency) or spatially constant (same shape), but not both. On the other hand,
manmade signals by necessity for communication are both temporally and spatially
constant. According to Dr. Carlo, with prolonged exposure, these constant signals
can cause the protein vibratory receptors located on our cell membranes to go into
resonancexi
Once in resonance, the cell must determine whether the "signal" is a biological
communication or a foreign invader. If the latter, as is the case with all man made
signals, then the cell will react by going into sympathetic lock in order to protect the
cell from this perceived invasion. Sympathetic lock prevents the cell from taking in
nutrition and releasing toxins.
71
This cell membrane reaction triggers a cascade of events that can then manifest
itself in a variety of symptoms and diseases starting with compromising the immune
system. According to Dr. Becker, "it is well-established that exposure to any
abnormal electromagnetic field produces a stress response. If the exposure is
prolonged, the stress-response system becomes exhausted, and the competency of
the immune system declines to below normal. In such a state, animals and humans
are more susceptible to cancer and infectious diseases."xii
Note that though the discussion here is about healthy cells, other cells within our
bodies, such as viruses and bacteria, will also respond as if under attack and
proliferate in order to survive.
So how does one protect themselves and their family? The answer is by Creating
Sleeping Sanctuaries Read on to find the steps to take to identify and remove as
much of this "electrosmog" from their bedroom as possible. In a recent article in the
Townsend Letter, the "Guided Digital Medicine Management of Lyme Disease
consists of four main components:" of which "Component #4 addresses blocks and
potential blocks to the treatment: diet, reduction of electromagnetic pollution,
emotional stress, etc."xiii
CREATING A SLEEPING SANCTUARY - LIMITING THE ELECTROSMOG
The ultimate goal is to expose the body to as natural a background as possible.

Unfortunately, in most living environments this will require some type of protection as the
external environment is also polluted. However, we find by far that the indoor pollution
(that within your control) is quite often much higher than the external environment.
Step 1: Magnetic fields
Magnetic therapy has been established as a well-known treatment, especially for those
with inflammation; however, chronic exposure nightly can cause problems. Magnetic fields
have a direct impact to the intercellular gap junction communication.xiv
Magnetic fields are caused whenever there is an unbalanced flow of current. They cannot
easily be shielded and will penetrate through walls, floors and ceilings. Thus, the best
advice is to first determine if you have them and then distance yourself from them.
Sources:
● Digital clocks with displays (move at least 6ft from bed)

● Appliances (refrigerators, TVs, stereos, air conditioning units) - should not be within
6ft of sleeping area - this includes the adjacent room or room above or below)
● Breaker/Fuse boxes - should not be within 6ft of sleeping area - this includes an
adjacent room
● Wiring errors - this requires you to investigate with a Gaussmeter. You can buy an
inexpensive Gaussmeter and then survey your sleeping area. Levels above 1 mG are
considered too highxv
Step 2: Electric fields
72
Electric fields are present whenever there is something nearby that is energized or "hot."
Electric fields have a beginning and an end, and therefore, there are ways to shield from
these. Because of the orthogonal magnetic field component of electric fields, it is
suspected that the biological interaction of electric fields also occurs at the intercellular gap
junctionxvi One of the critical elements of exposure to electric fields is the reduction of
melatonin.xvii
The biological effects of such have been attributed to neurological and malignant growth
effects within the bodyxviii
Sources:
● Wiring in the walls and wall outlets that are within 6ft of the bed - turn these off at
night by flipping the circuit breaker, or install a demand switch that leaves them off
unless needed
● Electrical appliances, such as lamps, extension cords, alarm clocks or radios - do not
use these at night, if you need something near your bed, use a battery-powered
device
Step 3: Radio frequency fields
This category includes everything that is used for wireless communications, from radios, to
TV's, to cell phones, to wireless internets. Human bodies are not designed to live within a
world with elevated radio frequency signals; yet we have created such an environment.
Long-term exposure to low levels of RF can cause sympathetic lock of cell membranes and
tile consequential cascade of cellular dysfunction.xix
Sources:
● Turn OFF all wireless devices at night. If you need something at night, don't use
devices that are wireless.
● Examples of wireless devices that are often found in bedrooms, that should not be
present - cordless telephones, RF baby monitors, and wireless speakers. Of these, the
cordless phone base appears to have the worst biological impact as many of them
transmit a signal 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week.
● Avoid any wireless device that is digital. There are baby monitors available that are not
digital.
● Protection from external RF sources can best be done by erecting a canopy made from
RF reflective material over the bed. Films and fabric on windows may also be effective,
but quite often the signal is also penetrating through the walls, floors or ceilings.
Step 4: Static Magnetic fields
Metal bedsprings often have residual magnetism, either from when mined or due to
repetitive compression over time Though magnetic therapy can be beneficial, constant
exposure to magnetic field anomalies can reduce the production of red blood cells and
disturb the REM sleep.xx And as with electric fields, static fields can also reduce
melatoninxxi
73
Sources:
● Replace any bed where a liquid-filled compass slid slowly over the bed has a needle
deflection
● Note that cribs with metal are especially susceptible to this.
http://thedrcoldwellreport.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-to-reduce-electromagnetic-fields-
in.html
______________________________
23. No cell towers atop buildings without PMC's nod
Radheshyam Jadhav, TNN, Dec 23, 2010, 05.33am IST

PUNE: Housing societies allowing the installation of cellphone towers atop their terraces
without the Pune Municipal Corporation's (PMC) permission will have to face the music.
The civic body has woken up to the dangers of such cellphone towers only now and warned
housing societies of the damage they can cause to the structural stability of the building.
There are over 2,000 cellphone towers in the city and the civic body has no record of how
many are legal.
In Chennai, at least one such tower has collapsed, while in Mumbai there has been some
study to monitor the disadvantages of electromagnetic radiation emitted by these towers.
The civic body has launched a drive to remove the illegal cellphone towers in the city.
Additional city engineer Vivek Kharwardkar said, "Till recently, there was a court case
pending in this matter. Now the high court has ordered the PMC to initiate action. The civic
body will give individual hearing to every company and after listening to their versions, the
PMC will take necessary action."
He said that no company or housing society should erect a cellphone tower without the
civic body's prior permission. "Before erecting such towers, it is necessary to check the
structural stability of the building according to the Development Control (DC) rules and
Maharashtra Regional Town Planning (MRTP) Act, 1966. We will take immediate action
against the service providers who have erected illegal towers defying all rules and have
caused damage to the structural stability of the building," said Kharwadkar.
The civic body has observed that housing societies giving permissions to service providers
to erect towers for a rent. In upmarket areas like Kothrud, they command Rs 1 lakh as
rent. "If required, we will question the office-bearers of housing societies," said
Kharwadkar.
Recently, the standing committee of the civic body had ordered the civic administration to
file criminal cases against companies that have erected illegal hoardings and mobile towers
in the city. With a rising number of service providers coming to Pune, the PMC faces a
challenge to regularise the setting up of cellphone towers, said Kharwadkar.
Statistics in the Economic Survey of Maharashtra for 2009-10 shows that the number of
cellphone users in the state have increased significantly in the last three years.
74
In 2006-07, 2.26 crore people used cellphones. In 2009-10, the number shot up to 6.42
crore. The survey states that the number of cellphone users per lakh population in 2009 in
the state was 57,973. The tele-density (number of telephones per hundred population) for
the quarter ending in December 2009 is 47.89 per cent for all India while for Maharashtra
it was as high as 57.98 per cent.
The state has not yet framed rules for setting up of cellphone towers. In the recently
concluded winter session of the state assembly, the state government announced that it
would collect feedback from concerned departments to frame comprehensive rules and
regulations for installation of cellphone towers by service providers in the state.
A multi-member committee, set up on March 20, 2010, under the additional secretary
(health) to study the effects of the electro-magnetic rays given out by cellphone towers
had recommended various measures including framing of rules and regulations. The
committee submitted its report to the government on August 6.
Chief minister Prithviraj Chavan conceded that the government has received several
complaints about unauthorised cellphone towers were encroachments and caused revenue
loss to the state.
Chavan had said, "The urban development department (UDD) issued an order on July 4,
2005, under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning (MRTP) Act, 1966,
providing for a Rs 50,000 deposit, a premium on the cabin area and a fee of Rs 10,000 per
mt of the tower installed by the cellphone service provider."
No legal standing
The towers are declared as illegal as the companies had either failed to submit a report
about the "structural stability" of the building on which the towers were erected, or had
not installed red warning beacons atop the towers, or the building was not of the
stipulated height.
The norms say that companies should submit a copy of the completion certificate of the
building on which the tower is to be erected; a report by a licensed structural engineer,
certifying the structural stability of the tower; and a no-objection certificate (NOC) from
the housing society
Read more: No cell towers atop buildings without PMC's nod - The Times of India
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/No-cell-towers-atop-buildings-without-PMCs-
nod/articleshow/7147516.cms#ixzz1Esw9WCsx
______________________________
24. AT&T releases dramatic anti-texting while driving

documentary
By Joshua Topolsky posted Dec 27th 2010 12:33PM
75
We're not sure how many more times it must be said, but seriously people -- stop texting
on your cellphone while operating a gigantic vehicle at high speeds. If you're not already
convinced that driving a car and trying to tap out a message on a tiny keyboard (or
heaven forbid, no keyboard at all) is a poor match, perhaps the short documentary AT&T
has just released will convince you otherwise. The carrier is launching a campaign geared
towards teens over the holidays leading up to New Year's Eve in the hopes that the youth
of the world will be slightly less sure of their invincibility -- at least where car driving and
text messaging is concerned. Sure, the video (located after the break) borders on
sentimentality at times, but we'll take a little heavy-handedness over the injury or death of
human beings simply because someone couldn't wait to tell someone else that they'd be
there soon. Trust us, your friends aren't that worried about punctuality.
Phone
Arena
AT&T
______________________________
25. Ceiling lights in Minn. send coded Internet data
By CHRIS WILLIAMS, Associated PressMon Dec 27, 9:56 am ET
ST. CLOUD, Minn. – Flickering ceiling lights are usually a nuisance, but in city offices in St.
Cloud, they will actually be a pathway to the Internet.
The lights will transmit data to specially equipped computers on desks below by flickering
faster than the eye can see. Ultimately, the technique could ease wireless congestion by
opening up new expressways for short-range communications.
76
The first few light fixtures built by LVX System, a local startup, will be installed Wednesday
in six municipal buildings in this city of 66,000 in the snowy farm fields of central
Minnesota.
The LVX system puts clusters of its light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, in a standard-sized light
fixture. The LEDs transmit coded messages — as a series of 1s and 0s in computer speak
— to special modems attached to computers.
A light on the modem talks back to the fixture overhead, where there is sensor to receive
the return signal and transmit the data over the Internet. Those computers on the desks
aren't connected to the Internet, except through these light signals, much as Wi-Fi allows
people to connect wirelessly.
LVX takes its name from the Latin word for light, but the underlying concept is older than
Rome; the ancient Greeks signaled each other over long distances using flashes of sunlight
off mirrors and polished shields. The Navy uses a Morse-coded version with lamps.
The first generation of the LVX system will transmit data at speeds of about 3 megabits
per second, roughly as fast as a residential DSL line.
Mohsen Kavehrad, a Penn State electrical engineering professor who has been working
with optical network technology for about 10 years, said the approach could be a vital
complement to the existing wireless system.
He said the radio spectrum usually used for short-range transmissions, such as Wi-Fi, is
getting increasingly crowded, which can lead to slower connections.
"Light can be the way out of this mess," said Kavehrad, who is not involved in the LVX
project.
But there are significant hurdles. For one, smart phones and computers already work on
Wi-Fi networks that are much faster than the LVX system.
Technology analyst Craig Mathias of the Farpoint Group said the problems with wireless
congestion will ease as Wi-Fi evolves, leaving LVX's light system to niche applications such
as indoor advertising displays and energy management.
LVX Chief Executive Officer John Pederson said a second-generation system that will roll
out in about a year will permit speeds on par with commercial Wi-Fi networks. It will also
permit lights that can be programmed to change intensity and color.
For the city, the data networking capability is secondary. The main reason it paid a
$10,000 installation fee for LVX is to save money on electricity down the line, thanks to
the energy-efficient LEDs. Pederson said one of his LED fixtures uses about 36 watts of
power to provide the same illumination that 100 watts provides with a standard
fluorescent fixture.
Besides installation costs, customers such as St. Cloud will pay LVX a monthly fee that's
less than their current lighting expenses. LVX plans to make money because the LED
fixtures are more durable and efficient than standard lighting. At least initially, the data
transmission system is essentially a bonus for customers.
77
Pederson said the next generation of the system should get even more efficient as fixtures
become "smart" so the lights would dim when bright sunlight is coming through a window
or when a conference room or hallway is empty.
Because the lights can also change color, Pederson said they could be combined with
personal locators or tiny video cameras to help guide people through large buildings. The
lights could show a trail of green lights to an emergency exit, for instance.
While Kavehrad and Mathias credited LVX for being the first company in the United States
to bring the technology to market, Kavehrad said it trails researchers and consumer
electronics companies in Japan and Korea in developing products for visible-light networks.
Pederson's previous company, 911 EP, built high-powered LED roof lights for squad cars
and other emergency vehicles. He said he sold the company in 2002. He said the visible-
light network grew out his interest in LEDs that goes to the mid-1990s.
The Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, which pays for 24-hour lighting and
replacing fluorescent bulbs on high ceilings, is considering an LVX system, said Jeffrey W.
Hamiel, executive director of the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
The system might include mounting cameras on the light fixtures to bolster the airport
security system, but the real attraction is the savings on electricity and maintenance.
"Anything we can do to save costs is worth consideration," he said.
Michael Williams, the city administrator in St. Cloud, said the city had been considering
LVX for some time.
"It's pretty wild stuff," he said. "They have been talking about it with us for couple of
years, and frankly it took a while for it to sink in."
______________________________
26. T-Mobile sues Johns Creek over cell tower denial
By Patrick Fox
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
5:52 p.m. Thursday, December 2, 2010
T-Mobile has filed suit in federal court against the city of Johns Creek for denying its
application to build a 134-foot cell tower on Rogers Circle in a rural area of the city.
At a meeting attended by dozens of residents in October, the city council voted to deny the
telecom company a zoning variance to construct the tower on land currently zoned for
agriculture.
It is the second north Fulton city to run into legal troubles with T-Mobile.
Earlier this year, the company filed suit against the city of Milton for denying a similar
application. The city ultimately declared a moratorium on new cell tower applications until
it could craft a new ordinance, which ultimately passed in August. The revised ordinance
calls for a more detailed application process and more restrictive policies regarding
78
location and height of cell towers, primarily for aesthetic purposes. It also institutes a
licensing fee.
The Johns Creek decision came after a public hearing in which five people, including a
representative of the current owner of the property, spoke against the tower.
Resident Lisa Muzi presented the council with a petition signed by more than 700 residents
in opposition to the tower.
Jay Stroman, vice president for advancement at Young Harris College, said as trustee of
the property, the college is committed to maintaining its value. A cell tower, he said, could
diminish the property value by as much as half, he said.
The college assumed ownership of the property in July, following the death of the former
owner whose family had been working with T-Mobile.
City council members pointed out that the proposed site is in one of Johns Creek's last
rural areas and contains numerous historic sites. They also said they were not convinced
the company explored alternatives to the site.
In its court filing, attorneys for T-Mobile said the company performed all the studies and
met all the requirements set out in the city's ordinance. It further acceded to any
conditions for landscaping and buffers recommended by the planning staff.
The council's decision, the company attorneys argued, was made in bad faith and has
caused T-Mobile unnecessary trouble and expense.
Representatives from Johns Creek and T-Mobile would not comment on the litigation.
______________________________
27. Taming the Microwave Dragon.
December 26, 2010.
As a scientist, who has been studying the biological and health effects of environmental
contaminants since 1975, I am deeply disturbed with what I read in the scientific literature
and what my own studies are showing about the harmful effects of electrosmog-a form of
electromagnetic pollution generated by both wired and wireless devices.
My concern is for the health of future generations and for the quality of life of the current
generation. My passion is to help those who have become ill and to protect those who are
still healthy. This is a monumental task that relies on many like-minded, committed, truth-
seeking individuals who are not willing to accept lies and are not willing to be victims of
bullying tactics no matter who perpetrates them.
Do I believe that world governments are trying to destroy the human race? No. I think
people in positions of authority are simply ignorant of the facts orare aware of the facts
but have no idea what to do about them or have been advised to do nothing for fear of
legal repercussions. They are-at the very least-fools or cowards and-at the worst-
criminals perpetrating crimes against humanity.
79
One fact is that microwave radiation is killing people! In the long run-if we don’t
change our ways-microwave radiation is likely to kill many more people than both
cigarettes and asbestos combined. Is this fear-mongering or is it the truth? Time will tell.
We have evolved into a culture that worships money. We have industrial giants who do
not care about the health and well-being of their customers or their workers and care only
about making profit quickly. These industries are profit-junkies that give no thought to
their destructive tendencies.
Scientists who speak out about the harmful effects of electrosmog are ridiculed and
attempts are made to discredit them by self-appointed skeptics who are NOT experts in
the field. Industry meddling causes some scientists to lose their research funding or their
jobs.
Industry scientists infiltrate health organizations and ensure that decisions are made to
protect the health and profit of their industry.
Physicists and engineers are making pronouncements about the safety of microwave
technology as though they were medical doctors or experts in life sciences.
Teachers who speak out about having WiFi in schools are reprimanded and ostracized.
Those on limited-term appointments find their teaching contracts are not renewed.
School boards threaten to expel students and to fine parents who want to protect their
children against microwave radiation in the classroom. Is this anyway for a school board
to act?
People who are sick have few places to turn. They need to figure out how to regain
their health. Ill informed doctors recommend psychiatric treatment and ply their patients
with painkillers, antidepressants, sleeping pills and anti-anxiety medication rather than
getting to the route of their problems, which is often related to some source of
electrosmog exposure at home or at work.
Trial lawyers seldom have a background in science and their attempts to understand
complexities that only a few scientists understand is challenging. Industries hire the best
lawyers money can buy who become experts in certain areas. They often out number and
out wit the single lawyer and the law student who are trying to help someone living near a
cell tower or near a power line, someone who can no longer work and cannot afford to pay
legal fees.
Corporate lawyers are concerned about the long-term financial health of their
corporations and may advise against producing products that generate lower emissions for
fear of legal action against the earlier higher emitting devices.
Journalists are trained to give balanced reporting. They seldom have the time to
investigate a story in detail and what appears on TV or in newspapers are sound bites that
pit experts against each other claiming opposite effects and leaving the public baffled.
80
Investigative journalists who begin to understand the scale of what is happening may
be moved to a different assignment if they become too passionate about uncovering the
truth especially if the wireless industry is paying for advertising.
Workers who become concerned about their exposure in the work place find their union
bosses are more interested in their own careers and keeping well in with management.
These union bosses won’t rock the boat. If monitoring of the workplace is permitted, a
“specially selected” industry expert is hired to support the company line.
So who is left? Who will speak out and do the right thing? Where are the heroes and
heroines to tame the microwave dragon threatening the global village?
Whether you use wireless technology or not; whether you protest or not; whether you care
or not . . . you are being exposed to radio frequency radiation and your exposure levels
are increasing. You can move to the country and live with like-minded souls but antennas
and smart meters are likely to follow you.
Whether you become ill or not will depend on many things but once you become ill your
quality of life will deteriorate and, if you live with others, their quality of life will be
adversely affected as well.
Leaving the sanctuary of your home, if indeed you can make your home into a sanctuary,
will be painful. Shopping, dining at restaurants, vacationing with family and friends will
become a distant memory. No matter how much you enjoyed using your smart phone and
your ipad, no matter how much you enjoyed surfing on the web, and no matter how much
81
you enjoyed communicating with friends on facebook or skype these will no longer be
possible . . . the pain, the confusion, the fatigue, the skin rashes, the dizziness and
nausea, the ringing in the ears will become unbearable. You will find yourself in self-
imposed exile with an ever-diminishing connection to the world.
Is the above a fairy tale? Not at all!

I know of politicians who are asking that warnings be placed on cell phones and that a
moratorium be placed on deployment of smart meters until we learn more about the
safety of this technology. They do this despite strong political pressure and industry
lobbying.
I know of scientists who have lost their funding and their jobs. Many of them continue to
do excellent work despite the threats and penalties.
I know of teachers who have been told not to publically oppose school policy about WiFi.
Many continue their fight to remove WiFi from schools and some continue to speak out in
public ignoring the threats.
I know of principals who have removed WiFi or won’t allow it in their school because their
top priority is the health and safety of their students and staff.
I know of parents whose concerns for their child’s safety have been ignored. So they are
now organizing other like-minded parents to make certain that their concerns are heard.
I know of many, many people who are sick because of their exposure to electrosmog,
who feel better when they are not exposed and are trying to design safer sanctuaries for
themselves at home and at work. Many of those who are beginning to recover are
devoting time and using their experience to helping others.
I know of doctors who are successfully treating their electrically sensitive patients.
Instead of prescribing pharmaceuticals, they advise their patients on how to reduce their
exposure and build up the immune system and detoxify their bodies. Some keep a low
profile because neither the medical association nor big Pharma support non-
pharmaceutical interventions that interfere with profit. A few of these doctors are
beginning to speak out publicly.
I know of a few exceptional lawyers who are now specializing in this field and are
dedicated to helping the under privileged.
82
I know of a growing number of journalists who are doing excellent reporting on issues
dealing with compact fluorescent light bulbs, WiFi, mobile phones, smart meters, ground
current, antennas and power lines.
I know of union representatives who, despite a tough management, are responding to

concerns about electrosmog exposure in the workplace.
I know of firefighters, brave men and women who rush into burning buildings to save
strangers, who voted to prevent antennas on fire halls until they are shown to be safe.
The tide is turning but it will take time before we have changes in policy and
manufacturing guidelines . . . in the meantime individuals can make changes in their own
environment. They can reduce their exposure before they become ill and they can learn
and share information with others.
The microwave dragon will be tamed and the village will become safe once more or, at
least, safer than it is right now. How quickly that will happen depends on the heroes and
heroines, on those who place health and the quality of life above profit and
greed.
If we are lucky, captains of industry, government scientists and policy makers, as well as
the engineers who design these devices will recognize that optimizing profit and health
(of the workforce, of the public and of the environment) makes more sense than
maximize profit alone.
When that day comes we will have earned the name Homo sapiens sapiens.
Note this is about “taming” not “slaying” the microwave dragon. Microwave technology
can be used wisely and the sooner we use it wisely the less it will damage the global
village.
Click here for a pdf of the above essay and click here if you want to watch a youtube video
of an abbreviated version of the above text.
http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/12/26/taming-the-microwave-dragon/
83
______________________________
28. Culver City Residents Defeat Cell Site, Declare Victory,

Donate Documents
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Posted By: EditorUtility Technologies
Stop Sawtelle Tower, a group formed to oppose a cell site in a Culver City neighborhood,
prevailed in its efforts and is now working to encourage Culver City to adopt a wireless
ordinance like Glendale’s, with protections for residential areas.
Although the group will discontinue its website, leaders wanted their resources to be
available to other communities interested in how to oppose cell sites.
Stop Sawtelle Tower provided four key documents to Sunroom Desk, including its analysis
of how to fight the application, its review of different candidate sites, a T-Mobile response
to its objections, and its own reply to the T-Mobile response. All of these have now been
uploaded to the Sunroom Desk Wireless Facilities – Issues and Links resource page.
Thanks to Stop Sawtelle Tower, congratulations on a successful civic effort, and best
wishes on crafting a good wireless ordinance for Culver City.
Resources developed by Burbank and Los Angeles residents are also available via links or
uploaded documents on the new Local Resources section of the page (scroll down past
quite a few hearings and documents).
http://sunroomdesk.com/2010/12/22/culver-city-residents-defeat-cell-site-declare-
victory-donate-documents/
______________________________
29. Italian company offers to install shark shields in Egypt
Dec 26, 2010 23:06 Moscow Time
84
An Italian company has offered to set up in the resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh,
electromagnetic shields to protect the Egyptian coast from sharks. According to local
media, shields giving off electromagnetic radiation will scare away sharks, keeping them
away from the beaches, and, yet, would have no impact on vessels or disrupt the routine
of holidaymakers.
Such devices have already found application in the area of the coast of Australia and South
Africa.
In early December, as a result of shark attacks in Sharm el-Sheikh a 70-year-old tourist

from Germany died, while four other tourists, including Russians, received injuries.
http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/12/26/37822509.html
______________________________
30. THE LEGISLATOR’S GUIDE TO WARNING LABELS ON

CELL PHONES AND THE LAYMAN’S GUIDE TO THE SCIENCE
BEHIND NON-THERMAL EFFECTS FROM WIRELESS DEVICES
AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
http://www.thepeoplesinitiative.org/uploads/Non_Thermal_Paper_10-10_AAA.pdf
______________________________
31. Warning in User`s Manual of Android 2.2 Smart Phone

Good Morning, Paul
85
Thank you a lot for all the information you send all the time.
An incident was reported where a car had sudden acceleration and the brakes didn`t work.
I think people in the foreign media (especially America) would be interested in such a
story. Please let them know. Softbank should make public to what kind of car it happens.
Mariko TOYA
Warning
Ban
In case of an effect on the vehicle`s electronic equipment, do not use in the vehicle. When
using device in vehicle, depending on the car model, in rare cases, there may be an effect
on the car`s electronic equipment impairing safe driving.
Directions
When you are in crowded trains and other crowded places, please switch off the power to
the device. There may be people with cardioverter-defibrillators and cardiac pacemakers
nearby. Radio waves have been known to cause cardioverter-defibrillators and cardiac
pacemakers to malfunction.
ポールドヨンさま、おはようございます。
いつもたくさんの情報をありがとうございます。
車の急発進事故やブレーキがきかなくなった事件が報道された、
海外のメディア（とくにアメリカ）が知ったたら、大問題になるのではないかと思うことを
お知らせします。ぜひ英語圏のみなさまにお知らせください。
ソフトバンク社は「車種」を公開すべきですよね。
戸谷真理子
注意
禁止
車両電子機器に影響を与える場合は使用しないでください。
本機を自動車内で使用すると、車種によりまれに車両電子機器
に影響を与え、安全走行を損なう恐れがあります。
指示
満員電車などの混雑した場所にいるときは、本機の電源を切ってください。
付近に植込み型心臓ペースメーカおよび植込み型除細動器を
装着されている方がいる可能性があります。
電波により、植込み型心臓ペースメーカおよび植込み型徐細動器が
誤動作するなどの影響を与える場合があります。
http://mb.softbank.jp/mb/smartphone/product/003z/pdf/003z_caution_r2.pdf
86
______________________________
"Doubt is our product," a cigarette executive once observed, "since it is the best
means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the minds of the general
public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy."
http://www.amazon.com/Doubt-Their-Product-Industrys-Threatens/dp/019530067X
"Not one drop of rain thinks it causes the flood."
______________________________
And the Insanity Continues! Until next time! Wake Up People, Wake Up! Giving up your cell
phone is an act of compassion -- and intelligence.
The EMF Refugees
87

EMR-Updates12 27 10-1 2 11

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

EMR-Updates12 27 10-1 2 11

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

EMR-Updates

December 27th, 2010 – January 2nd, 2011

International Coalition for an Electromagnetic Safe Planet

Education! Awareness! Support! Action!

1. Cell Phones and Wireless Hazards (William Thomas)

1. CELLPHONE & WIRELESS HAZARDS AND RESPONSES

Did Santa Bring You An iPad?

Who Says Wireless Is Dangerous?

You Bet Your Life

Top Cell Phone Studies

How To Limit Your Wireless Exposure

Hot Links For Cell Phone & Wireless Info

2. Why did the Russians Ban an Appliance Found in 90% of

By Dr. Mercola (originally posted May 18 2010)

Why the no nukes policy?

When it comes to microwave ovens, the price for convenience is to compromise

Sad State of Our Soils

Three recent studies of historical food composition have shown 5 to 40 percent

Convenience Comes at Significant Toxic Threat to You and Your Family

Microwaves heat food by causing water molecules in it to resonate at very high

The January/February 1990 issue of Nutrition Action Newsletter reported the

One of the worst contaminants is BPA, or bisphenol A, an estrogen-like compound

Microwaving distorts and deforms the molecules of whatever food or other

Microwave Radiation Leakage

“Even when the microwave oven is working correctly, the microwave

Since your eyes are known to be particularly susceptible to microwave radiation

New Study Confirms Microwaves Affect Your Heart

Dr. Havas says:

No longer can skeptics claim that microwaves produce no immediate

The study will be appearing in a peer-reviewed journal sometime during

Microwaving Also Zaps the Nutrients Right Out of Your Food

The majority of studies on microwaves and nutrition were conducted prior to

● Another study about breast milk/infant formula by Lee in 1989[11] found

How Your Microwave Actually Heats Your Food

Microwaves are a form of electromagnetic radiation—waves of electrical and

A magnetron is a tube in which electrons are subjected to both magnetic and

As an example, microwaves are used in the field of gene altering technology to

● Insomnia, night sweats, and various sleep disturbances

According to Professor Franz Adelkofer, a leading scientist in the area of biological

“There is real evidence that hyperfrequency electromagnetic fields can

They should be based on biology, not on physics.”

Twenty Years of Russian Research Supports Microwave Concerns

● Russian investigators found that carcinogens were formed from the

The Swiss Clinical Study: Hans Hertel

Some fairly compelling evidence supporting the destructive effects of microwaves

Hertel’s conclusions were that microwaving food resulted in:

In spite of Hertel’s methodological shortcomings, his findings do raise concerns

“There are no atoms, molecules, or cells of any organic system able to

And then there is the issue of biophotons.

Possible Microwave Effects on Your Biophotons

Biophotonics is the study, research, and applications of photons in their

Biophotons contain important bio-information and are very important to many

It seems quite plausible that microwaves could disrupt or destroy biophotons,

Long-Term Effects of Exposure to Non-Ionizing Radiation

One of the basic controversies about the effects of microwaves centers on

There are two basic forms of radiation: ionizing and non-ionizing[16] :

1. Ionizing Radiation: Creates charged ions by displacing electrons in

● Effects at low levels can be more noticeable than at higher levels.

Is Microwaving Food Any More Dangerous than Heating it with a Conventional

● Microwave heating and conventional heating may appear identical on a

Sometimes common sense trumps empirical evidence.

The Penn State letter/article said it best: