The Mayor of Norris Arm, Newfoundland proclaimed October 2009 as 'Electromagnetic Hypersenstiivity Awareness Month'.
The proclamation document is attached
Thanks to Gerry Higgins and Joanne March for their hard work to have this illness recognized.
-magda
-----------------------------------------------
Honeybees face towering threat from mobiles VR
Jayaraj | Kochi
http://www.dailypioneer.com/203392/Honeybees-face-towering-threat-from-mobiles.html
Radiation from transmitters wipes out bee colonies which will affect food production: Study Studies in Kerala have brought out evidence to support the theory of colony collapse disorder (CCD) among honeybees due to bioactive microwave radiation from mobile phones and their relay towers, which leads to extensive disappearance of entire worker bee colonies. This could result in disruption in food production because most of the crops depend on bees for pollination. Although the theory of mobile towers leading to CCD is yet to be proved anywhere in the world, experts say this is highly possible and the phenomenon could cause unimaginable food troubles to most Indian States, especially Kerala which is already food-scarce. The State has the highest density of mobile towers. The phenomenon of (suspected) mobile tower-induced CCD and resultant crop loss were first noticed in the US several years ago, but this had spread to most European countries by 2007.
Now, experiments by Sainuddeen Pattazhy, a researcher and dean in the department of zoology at SN College, Punalur, Kerala, have found that worker bees fail to return to their hives when their navigation skills are interfered by the mobile microwaves. Sainuddeen had conducted his experiments by placing mobile phones near beehives (as some scientists in the West had done earlier). He found that these hives collapsed totally in five to 10 days with the worker bees failing to return to their homes, leaving the hives with the queens, eggs and immature bees. The vanished bees were never found, but the assumption was that they died singly far from home. The parasites, wildlife and other bees that normally raid the honey and pollen left behind when a colony dies, refuse to go anywhere near the abandoned hives. "The navigation skill of the worker bees is dependent on the earth's magnetic properties. The electro-magnetic waves emitted by the mobile phones and relay towers interfere with the earth's magnetism, resulting in the loss of the navigation capacity of the bee. Then it fails to come back.
Also,the radiation causes damage to the nervous system of the bee and it becomes unable to fly," said Sainuddeen. The researcher had earlier led a study on the impact of mobile phones and towers on ecology, in which other environmentalists had participated. The study revealed that bioactive radiations from mobile towers threatened the very existence of home sparrow, which lived in colonies close to human habitats, even in crowded cities.
Pattazhy, however, is not the first scientist to notice the phenomenon of CCD occurring in bees due to mobile phone-tower proximity. A limited study at Landau University in 2007, headed by Dr Jochen Kuhn, had found that bees refused to return to their hives when mobile phones were placed nearby. As back as in late 1990s, a researcher, George Carlo, had headed a massive study sponsored by the US Government and the mobile phone industry in America, had said, "I am convinced that the possibility is real."Apiarists in Idukki, Kottayam, Pathanamthitta and Wayanad districts confirm that they have been noticing the massive play of CCD for the past four or five years, but they have never thought of the relation between mobile tower-induced radiations and their bees. A beekeeper in Thodupuzha, Idukki said he had lost 13 of his 17 hives in the past three years. Three years ago, three mobile towers were erected on the hillock near his farm. "But I have never thought of the relation. I, like other farmers, was thinking that climatic changes and pesticides used in the rubber plantations were the reason," he said. Scientists warn that Kerala, which already has a large number of mobile sand towers, could face not just CCD-created hive losses but even a crop disaster if the mobile craze continues to grow.
"Honeybees can be wiped out in Kerala and many other Indian States and cities if there is no system to control the unscientific increase in the use of mobile phones. It can in turn lead to a disaster in the food front as bees are responsible for pollination in most of the food crops," said a biotechnologist at a Coimbatore college.
--------------------------------------------------
From Angela Flynn Evelyn Savarin has submitted comments to the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and Education regarding the recent hearing on Cell Phones and Health. I strongly urge people to write in as well.
Even just a quick note saying that you want action on this will suffice. I am copying Evelyn's comments below. Her write up is a landmark report on what is happening and what needs to be done.
Please send to: Dear Members Subcommittee on Labor HHS & Education, In addition put in Topic -"Re:"; Contact info -" Your Name, Organization (if desired), State, phone, email" Email to: "Curtin, Teri (Appropriations)"
Teri_Curtin@appro.senate.gov
--------------------------------------------------
From: Evelyn Savarin
Re: Subcommittee Hearing Sept 14, 2009 on Cell Phones and Health
Dear Members Subcommittee on Labor HHS & Education,
Thank you for holding the hearing on Cell phones and Health. Many of us in the hearing room that day have been impacted by wireless radiation in ways that have drastically altered our quality of life and health.
Your subcommittee's initiative to hold a hearing of this sort represented a major ray of hope for many of us who have long sought federal recognition and action on this issue. All measures presented to limit direct cell phone contact are necessary first steps.
Although restricting cell phones to children should still be a top priority, it should become clear from the remarks of the hearing, ambient cell phone radiation, for that matter all background wireless radiation, poses as many challenges, hazards and questions.
Including Cordless Phones in Precautionary Warnings A concern of mine was the exclusion of cordless phones from the discussion of precautionary warnings. Often cordless phones are given a casual seal of approval for it is believed they are much lower powered than cell phone sand therefore presumed to be safe. This idea is very misleading and potentially harmful. In fact, manufacturers of cordless phones state in their manuals to stay at least 9 inches away from the bay station. This cautionary statement should give us pause as to the potency of the bay station's ambient signal, not to mention the phone's own powerful effects. The claims cordless phones are safe because they are lower in watts than cell phones is a flawed analogy.
To begin, cordless phones operate at much higher frequencies - 6G vs the new 3G of cellular phones. Compared to cell phones the bay stations emits at higher watts than cell phones and the stations operate 24/7, with signals reaching well beyond the boundary of one's household. It's like having mini cell antennas in your home. RF/Microwave Signal Potency on the Body Wattage is only a small part of the concern when evaluating signal's potency on the body. Researchers are finding more and more we need to take as seriously other factors in a signal's propagation, such as waveform, frequency, pulsing pattern, resonance with the body, and body's vulnerabilities.
1,2,3,4 Scientists are also finding a sometimes higher frequencies, can induce more biological response than a lower frequency at presumably higher power levels.
5,6 Industry supporters that state lower wattage makes new phones safer without taking into account other signal factors totally obscure the science and play into the hands of the uninformed user. Clearing Misconceptions between Radio and Microwave Frequencies In order to avoid the negative images that may be associated with title of 'microwaves', all our wireless devices seem to be popularly addressed as 'radio frequency' products. Although the line of distinction between RF and microwave may vary, it is well accepted that many of our new household wireless technologies operate in the Microwave band. A cell phone operating at 2 to 3 GHZ or cordless phone operating at approximately 6 Ghz, are definitely in the microwave band. In fact new Microwave ovens now operate between 1 & 2 Ghz. Should we now call them Radio Frequency Ovens? In FCC radiation standards standing 5 inches from a microwave oven door are more stringent than those for putting cell phones to the head.
7 All these issues show how easily we can spin the terminology to dilute the potential risks. Dr. Segal Szediski Research has Troubling Implications Dr. Szediski presentation highlighted the need for a precautionary approach on cell phones for children, as well as the use of use earpieces. However, an observation she made on her research has troubling implications. Her research found higher incidence of brain cancers in the countryside from cell phone users than in the city where cell antennas are more dense. This observation follows along the line of her remark that exposure from cells phone radiation in elevators is stronger because transmission is weak. My concern is - will the solution become more frequent dispersion of cell antennas to reduce phone emissions? This would have a devastating effect on future brain cancer/tumor studies. If brain cancer rates continued to rise, separating brain cancer incidence between non-users, light users and long term heavy users of cell phones would be impossible to observe. The entire population will become equally exposed either by background RF or direct wireless phone use, effectively leaving wireless expansionists euphoric and the rest of us at risk. Dr. Robert Buckers Remarks and Shortcomings of the NIH Rat study Although the new NIH study presented by Dr. Bucker represents a major achievement in US EMF research initiatives, I am concerned about several remarks in Mr. Bucker's presentations, and his potential lack of knowledge on past human RF/MW studies. From my reading there is a plethora of human lab studies.
8 I am generally surprised a man of his background and significance to the study would be so elusive and incurious. Whether scientists debate quality of the studies or whether better selection of bio-markers are needed is another issue. The fact is the human studies are there, and should be entered into the public debate on wireless safety. Perhaps most troubling is Mr. Bucker's discussion on the New NIH rat study now underway. I appreciate this research is one of many going on in the country, however it represents a major expenditure in taxpayer dollars to potentially not have realistic, real life comparisons. My understanding is that the signals in the Rat chambers will mimic cell phone signals of old, 900 Mhz and 1900 Mhz. Very few of our cell phones operate 900 Mhz. And 1900 Mhz is being phased out for the new 3 G phones which will allow for greater band width to accommodate a plethora of cell phone addons: internet, texting etc. The new phones receiving & emitting a complex of frequencies on one device will create further complexities for signal replication in biological lab studies unless the actual device is used. Add this complexity to the mix of many other wireless signals coursing through our bodies 24/7 which are not represented in the research and we are left with non- realistic experimental exposure conditions. Mr. Bucker's assistant discussed the similar NIH Rat study at the concurrent Cell phone conference. It became clear the exposure chambers as presently constructed cannot be easily modified to allow for varying new signal exposures without substantially higher costs. Over and over again we see lab research worldwide never adapting fast enough to adequately replicate the signals the public is unwittingly exposed to. Hence industry can proudly dodge the issue of biological effects by proclaiming a new signal coming to market will be different or safer; be it digital vs analogue, higher vs lower frequency, or lower power, arguments continuously intended to detract the uninformed user from the findings connecting RF/microwave radiation to health effects. Secondly, I question using only SARs (Specific Absorption Rates) as the sole assessment measure of RF/MW exposures in NIH study. SARs offer a confused comparison to people's direct RF/microwave exposure experiences. To correct this situation we need to include assessment measures using field strength readings, such as power density or ambient voltage and gauss readings. A Need for Biophyics Researchers/Scientists/Medical Professionals An issue that cries out for attention is appropriating more research dollars to educate more scientists and medical professionals to understand the atomic properties and workings of our body. European countries, especially Russia have long established schools/departments in Biophysics. Separating living creatures from man's manipulation of his planet's electromagnetic energies is pure folly. We evolved under the strength of nature's Electromagnetic energies and are protected by the ionosphere from the universe's more potent radiation. Medical schools and biological sciences have little or no interest or instruction on human response to the physical phenomena of the universe, hence no underlying appreciation that manipulations of our planet's natural energies could influence our everyday bodily processes.
9 Emphasis has always been on the body's chemical, mechanical and now genetic reactions, with pharmaceutical and biotech companies capitalizing nicely on this situation. This situation is compounded when self proclaimed EMF sensitive people seea doctor, and point to a correlation between certain EMF exposures and their symptoms. The unfamiliarity of the medical community with the electromagnetic health effects, makes our situation doubly frustrating. Their answer is to sedate us, when all we are looking for is ways to negate the affects and reduce our exposure Conclusions We have raised ambient power levels of RF/microwave frequencies to over 1010 power compared to background levels we evolved in over millenniums of years. It seems incredible that modern science and medical community can deny man's connection to the frequency bands of our planet. We see in the visible light frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum. We hear in another set of frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum. Our brains think and sleep utilizing another band of the EM spectrum. Our hearts beat at certain frequencies. Many animals use entirely different bands of the spectrum to see, hear and even feel. Can we believe that our bodies' might not sense man's manipulation in the radio and microwave band, when historic natural RF/MW signals were extremely weak compared to today's manmade signals.
10, 11 As a society we consider it important to ensure various technological devices do not have signal interference with each other, but we will totally deny the possibility that living organisms which are intricately more frequency complex could possibly sustain the same interference problems. If medical technology has so aptly harnessed the power of EMF - RF/microwaves to cure disease (Search: Pubmed search engine) one has to ask how is it possible we are not impacting life with the indiscriminate and unrestrained broadcasting of manmade RF/microwave energies. To say there are inconsistencies in the health research literature as a reason for dismissal of the evidence is beyond logic. Never has a science accumulated such a body of biological and health effects without some plausible action by governments to implement strong safety measures.
12 The ongoing conflicts should not be cause for dismissal of disagreeable research or for government inaction, but rather it should highlight the power of vested interests, love affair with this technology, and the biological complexity of this science - all inferring we enact a more precautionary approach to wireless expansion.
Recommendations and Interests
This brings me to my final conclusion. There are many of us who because of different physical reasons and our personal research have chosen not to partake in this wireless revolution. Despite the fact I own no wireless devices, I must accept second hand exposures from all others who choose to use them, and from governments who choose to approve their expansion. In other words I have been left with no choice, but to live with the discomforts and health impacts the State imposes upon us.
Through the years I have bought expensive meters to assess and control my RF exposure, only to find those meters become increasingly obsolete as the wireless frequencies deployed by the new technologies reach higher and higher levels.
Many of us are finding it increasingly difficult to find a place in this country where we can live with the sense of well being and calm we once experienced before the by-products of wireless age became so invasive.
Considering the many unanswered question inherent in the safety of this science, and major conflicts of interest that increasingly permeate the research agenda, I ask this subcommittee to consider re-evaluating wireless expansion policies and regulations I ask your subcommittee to please consider the following:
. Consider initiating a whole new approval process for the introduction of Wireless devices before going to market. The approval process should consider the interference of new RF/microwave devices with body frequencies not only with other electronic devices. The ALARA principle should be considered for non-ionizing products as well as ionizing products . Give preference in the new Recovery Stimulus Act appropriation for fiber optics, cable technologies or other wired technologies in Broadband expansion. Any new wired technology should be ascertained to not emit unintentional high frequency radiation in the ambient atmosphere.
. Reassess the new Recovery Stimulus Act appropriation for Smart Grid technology. The portion of the Smart Grid technology that will employ wireless components should be discouraged in favor of wired components with assurance that those components do not emit stray voltages that would increase new forms of ambient electromagnetic radiation.
. Hold hearings to repeal the Telecom Act of 1996, section 704, which prohibits consideration of environmental and health effects of wireless technologies in municipal proceedings. European countries, especially France, have been more successful in bringing up the health issues in the public arena, hence their awareness has initiated greater impetus for Precautionary warnings.
. Designate 4 or 5 Wireless Free Zones in this country where minimum ambient EMF thresholds could be established and maintained. These areas could also serve as future controls sites for RF/MW studies. Establishing criteria and locations for these places should include the representation of specific interest groups & trained engineers in RF metering devices. . Minimize Conflicts of Interest in Research Peer Review Panels. Panel selection should be publicly aired, and selection should include varied backgrounds and interests.
. Empower local or state bodies to set up their own RF/MW and other EMF frequency Monitoring/Enforcement offices across each state with responsibility and resources to measure ambient exposure levels. A fee on wireless carriers should be imposed for operating and setting up these offices. The measurement devices should be of uniform standard for calibration and accuracy.
. Allocate research/education appropriations in the training & establishment of bio-physics disciplines at university and colleges. As much as we are manipulating the physical properties of our universe, we need to ensure that biological sciences stay attuned to our altered EMF ambient environment and its potential effect on biological health.
-------------------------------------------------
Bonjour, Aujourd'hui le sénat français vient d'adopter un projet de loi interdisant l'utilisation du téléphone cellulaire dans les maternelles, écoles primaire et secondaire. En plus, ils veulent inter dire la publicité pour les enfants de moins de 14 ans. Le tout au nom du Principe de Précaution. Voir la nouvelle diffusée sur France 2 aux nouvelles de 20h et dans l'article suivant:
http://www.come4news.com/le-senat-preconise-linterdiction-du-telephone-portable-dans-les-ecoles-333002
Dossier à suivre... François Therrien Porte-parole du SEMO
ftherrien@aei.ca http://www.dangersemo.com/
Posts
