Saturday, April 24, 2010

CBC cell phones and towers / Book on honeybees / Dangers of Cell Towers / Public officials failed miserably / EMF-Omega News

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

25 April 2010

Sunday April 25 2010, at 11:00am,  CBC program on cell phones and towers.

Our Third Hour this morning is an investigation into a complicated debate and a frightening questions: Do cell phone cause brain cancer? Across the world medical and scientific researchers are grappling with the idea that radio from cell phones might be harmful to human especially children. We'll look at all sides of the argument.


Honeybees harmed by EMR

----- Original Message -----

From: Rosemary Delnavine


Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 5:26 PM

Subject: Your book on the honeybee: query, p.83

Dear Dr. Halter:

Thank you for your invaluable book 'The Incomparable Honeybee'.  I would like to send it to very many people I know, to help them understand that safeguarding honeybees must be an immediate global priority. 

My reason for writing to you, though, concerns a phrase on p. 83, in the context of bees' susceptibility to microwave radiation:

" . . . recently the head researcher of the project issued a statement that there is no established causal link between his findings on electromagnetic radiation and CCD."

May I ask to whom you are referring and where his statement can be found? 

I was taken aback to see this in your book, with no name or other attribution and therefore nothing to help readers research for themselves.   It is also confusing, because it seems to contradict the information immediately preceding it in the same paragraph. 

Given the corpus of evidence to the contrary, produced by credible, respected scientists in several different countries, I feel it is sadly misleading to make such a cursory reference to the connection between EMR and CCD.  The saturation of our environment with EMR from man-made devices has disastrous consequences for all living creatures, including humans and their future generations; in fact, "catastrophic" is not too strong an adjective when one takes into account humans' historic reluctance to amend their selfishness towards the environment.  Since the human organism is proven to be very seriously affected by EMR, how can the tiny yet infinitely more sensitive organism of the bee possibly remain unaffected?

For example, please see the attached article by Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy, and the link below:
Secondly, I urge you to read "Bees, Birds and Mankind", by Dr. Ulrich Warnke:

I believe that no intelligent person can possibly read Dr. Warnke's research findings and dismiss the effect of man-made EMR on the honeybee.  And, as you will see from the lengthy citation list in "Bees, Birds and Mankind", he is far from alone in his discoveries.

With regard to EMR and CCD, readers of your book should not be left with the impression that your words quoted above represent the last word on the subject.  The more people remain ignorant (willfully or not) about the cumulative effects of  technological choices on their only home, Planet Earth, the less chance of honeybees surviving far into this century.

Yours sincerely,
Rosemary Delnavine
White Rock, BC, Canada

cc: Dr. rer. nat. Ulrich Warnke, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany
Mr. Martin Weatherall, Co-director, Canadian Initiative on Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution (WEEP),  (corresponds with Dr. Goldsworthy)
Ms. Una St. Clair-Moniz, Executive Director, Canadians for Safe Technology Society,


Note - I encourage you all to download the document - "Bees, Birds and Mankind", by Dr. Ulrich Warnke, and provide it to environmental groups, who have special interests in gardening, birdwatching, health and nature etc.  It will open some eyes and hopefully some previously closed minds!

Martin Weatherall


Reader Commentaries:

Dangers of Cell Towers Continued

By Harry Brill

Saturday April 24, 2010

I am responding to Ray Barglow's disagreement with my Berkeley Planet commentary, which asserts that electromagnetic emissions from cell towers are dangerous to our health and longevity. Ray challenges the studies which claim that these emissions are a public hazard. He believes that they suffer major methodological flaws. Actually, no research on the issue is more flawed than a study that is currently being sponsored by the wireless industry. Incredibly, the industry study excludes certain types of tumors. It even eliminates from the sample those who died or were too sick to answer questions. Ray does note that those whose research he criticizes are not coming to the wrong conclusions because they harbo ulterior motives. But I don't think we could be as generous about those researchers who completely dismiss the issue.

There have been a substantial and growing number of studies, far more than I mentioned in the Planet article, that document the intolerable assault on the health of those who live near cell towers. As a result, over 100 physicians and scientists at Harvard and Boston University Schools of Public Health have agreed that cell towers pose serious risks, whether cell phone users or not. Keep in mind that these scientists are not wild eyed radicals seeking to prey on the business community.

The U.S. standard of radiation exposure from cell sites is among the least protective in the world. The exposure allowed in the U.S. is 580-1,000 microwatts per sq. centimeter, which is 100 to 1,000 times higher than in many countries. Only 10 microwatts are allowed in Russia and Italy, 6 microwatts in China, and only 4 microwatts in Switzerland. I doubt that the widespread fear in Europe and elsewhere that cell site emissions are very dangerous is due to neurotic anxiety.

Obviously, we can have our cell phones without sacrificing our lives for the sake of convenience. But the higher financial costs to business to make these cell sites safer would reduce the rate of profit. Indeed, profit maximization has already given us polluted air and water, food sprayed with poisonous pesticides, and many products that present safety and health hazards. Now for a growing number of people electromagnetic emissions are inescapable. It should not be a surprise that life expectancy in 47 countries is higher than in the United States.

Ray and I have a disagreement about the impact of cell towers, but we agree on a fundamental political principle. Ray is, as always, committed to democracy. I am pleased, but not surprised, that he believes that a community has a right to decide about whether cell sites should be allowed, and if so, under what conditions I couldn't ask for a more worthy opponent.

Harry Brill


Maine Voices: Lawmakers, public officials failed miserably on cell phone safety


HARBORSIDE - We depend on elected officials to carry out committee assignments responsibly, especially in matters of public health, but we witnessed abysmal dereliction of duty recently in Augusta when cell-phone safety was debated.


Jody Spear is a resident of Harborside.

In between the public hearing and the work session on the bill to mandate a warning label on cell phones, politics intervened. The governor let it be known that he would not support any legislation that could possibly have a detrimental effect on Maine's business community.

Dr. Dora Anne Mills, head of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention and one of a six persons testifying against L.D. 1706, the others telecom industry lobbyists or supporters -- undoubtedly had the greatest influence on the final decision to reject a warning label.

Here are the experts who came before the Health and Human Services committee urging precautionary action -- scientists with illustrious credentials whose advice the committee disregarded:

Om Gandhi, professor of electrical engineering at the University of Utah, specializes in making models showing how far cell-phone radiation penetrates into the brain (in adults 2 inches, in children much deeper, varying according to stage of growth). He finds that standards set for cell-phone safety are inadequate.

Franz Adlkofer, biologist and professor of internal medicine at the Foundation for Behavior and Environment in Munich, points to damaged DNA strands, causing mutations that lead to cancer, as a result of electromagnetic radiation from cell phones.

Martin Blank, professor of physiology and cellular biophysics at Columbia University, conducts experiments on cells demonstrating that they make stress proteins when subjected to electromagnetic frequencies and other stressors. He finds that DNA damage happens before cells heat up from low-frequency radiation.

Devra Davis, professor of preventive medicine at Mt. Sinai Medical Center in New York and author of The Secret History of the War on Cancer, cites recent studies of people who have used cell phones for ten years or longer -- studies that show a clear connection to cancers of the brain, salivary glands, and acoustic nerves on the side of the head where cell phones are customarily held, as well as to problems such as reduced sperm count and insomnia.

Lloyd Morgan, electrical engineer and principal author of "Cell Phones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern," emphasizes the fact that brain cancer has a 20- to 30-year latency period and cell phones have not been in use long enough for a full body count. Nonetheless, animal experiments show dead neurons after a two-hour exposure to cell-phone radiation.

He points to the absurdity of the often-cited Danish cohort study of 2006, funded by the telecommunications industry, for its claim that cell phones protect from brain cancer.

His "15 Reasons for Concern" makes clear that the telecom industry has been falsifying science from the beginning of what can only be termed a mass biological experiment.

The problematic Danish cohort study was cited by Dr. Mills when she stood up to testify against L.D. 1706, claiming that experts define no specific risk from cell phones.

She did, however, concede that "uncertainty exists about the effects of long-term cell-phone use."

The comments submitted by Mills and the five corporate lobbyists who oppose L.D. 1706 should have been scrutinized closely for the sources on which their opinions are based. The first question to ask is whether studies reflect an industry bias or are conducted impartially.

All the experts supporting L.D. 1706 agree that the FCC exposure standards for allowable levels of electromagnetic radiation are set about 1,000 times too high.

All concur that it is possible to develop safer technology, and all are campaigning for meaningful safety standards.

Instead of a label that would prompt users to think about lessening the time spent on them, to consider using a headset to allow less radiation to be driven into the brain, to consider using cell phones only in an emergency and keeping them always switched off, members of Maine's HHS committee recommended in a minority report that the state CDC issue advisories on its website to educate persons who choose to reduce radio frequency exposure.

They also called for the telecom industry to share information readily with the public.

With those minimal demands denied, a growing number of supporters, led by Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford, are continuing the educational campaign begun by the Children's Wireless Protection Act, in preparation for next year's bill.


EMF-Omega News

Dear Sir, Madam, Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends,
for your information.
Best regards,
Klaus Rudolph
Citizens' Initiative Omega
Member of the Buergerwelle Germany (incorporated society)
Protectorate Union of the Citizens and Initiatives for the Protection against Electrosmog
Mobile Phones: An Emerging Public Health Concern
Mobile Phones Cause Cancer
Mobile Phone Tumour Fears
I'm worried about living next to cell phone mast
Biologic effects and health hazards of microwave radiation
Warning about the serious health effects from exposure to microwave radiation
Forres man's health worries over 'radiation'
British Scientist: Mochudi Mascom Tower Was Dangerous
Safety is focus of cell tower debate
School Children's Exposure to Cell Antennas in U.S. State Capitols and Washington, D.C.
Public Health Threatened by Cellphone Radiation
Lawmakers, public officials failed miserably on cell phone safety
Telecom Masts: One Angel, Many Goblins [analysis]
Residents living along route of power line 'fear for their health'
Win for Bardon's mobile phone tower protest group
URA asked to revoke depot licences
Next-up News Nr 1327
News from Mast Sanity
Our links:
Note: EMF-Omega News belongs to the Buergerwelle Germany (incorporated society), Umbrella Organization of the Citizens and Initiatives for the Protection against Electrosmog. Editor and responsible for the content: Citizens' Initiative Omega, member in the Buergerwelle. Buergerwelle Germany (incorporated society), which works on non-profit base. Our messages are the result of many hours of daily research, roundup and editing.

If you would like to support our activity for people around the world with a donation or an aid fund unique or on regular base, you can do it: Recipient: Buergerwelle Germany (incorporated society), bank-connection: Hypo Bank Augsburg, account-No 2250284, BLZ 720 200 70, IBAN: DE83 7202 0070 0002 2502 84, SWIFT (BIC): HYVEDEMM408. Buergerwelle Germany (incorporated society), Umbrella Organization of the Citizens and Initiatives for the Protection against Electrosmog: 1. Chairman Siegfried Zwerenz, 2. Chairman Barbara Eidling, Mailing address: Lindenweg 10, D-95643 Tirschenreuth, phone 0049-(0)9631-795736, fax 0049-(0)9631-795734,


Internet .

Thank you.

If you have information which you would like to share with your friends and colleges around the world and which are from common interest, please send us this information, we will send them out. Disclaimer: The information in our EMF-Omega-News are derived from sources, which we believe to be accurate but this cannot be guaranteed. We are not responsible for any errors or omissions and disclaims any liability incurred as a consequence of any of the contents of this resources.

Web site    e-mail

To sign up for WEEP News:  (provide name and e-mail address)

W.E.E.P. – The Canadian initiative to stop Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution