Saturday, July 3, 2010

Left-sided Cancer / Striking a balance / Comment / Apple stunning discovery / News from Israel

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

3 July 2010

Left-sided Cancer: Blame your bed and TV?

Jul 2, 2010 04:30 PM in Health & Medicine

By R. Douglas Fields

Curiously, the cancer rate is 10 percent higher in the left breast than in the right. This left-side bias holds true for both men and women and it also applies to the skin cancer melanoma. Researchers Örjan Hallberg of Hallberg Independent Research in Sweden and Ollie Johansson of The Karolinska Institute in Sweden, writing in the June issue of the journal Pathophysiology, suggest a surprising explanation that not only points to a common cause for both cancers, it may change your sleeping habits.

For unknown reasons the rates of breast cancer and melanoma have both increased steadily in the last 30 years. Exposure to the sun elevates the risk of melanoma, but the sun's intensity has not changed in the last three decades. Stranger still, melanoma most commonly affects the hip, thighs and trunk, which are areas of the body protected from the sun. What is responsible for the left-side dominance and increasing incidence of these cancers?

An intriguing clue comes from the Far East. In Japan there is no correlation between the rates of melanoma and breast cancer as there is in the West, and there is no left-side prevalence for either disease.

Moreover, the rate of breast cancer in Japan is significantly lower than in the West; only 3 percent of what is seen in Sweden, for example. The rate of prostate cancer in Japan is only 10 percent of that in the U.K. and U.S.

The researchers suggest an explanation based on differences in sleeping habits in Japan and Western countries. Previous research has shown that both men and women prefer to sleep on their right sides.

The reasons for this general preference are unclear, but sleeping on the right side may reduce the weight stress on the heart, and the heartbeat is not as loud as when sleeping on the left. Still, there is no reason to suspect that people in Japan sleep in positions that are any different from those in the West. The beds in Japan, however, are different. The futons used for sleeping in Japan are mattresses placed directly on the bedroom floor, in contrast to the elevated box springs and mattress of beds used in the West. A link between bedroom furniture and cancer seems absurd, but this, the researchers conclude, is the answer.

The first line of evidence they cite comes from a 2007 study in Sweden conducted between 1989 and 1993 that revealed a strong link between the incidence of melanoma and the number of FM and TV transmission towers covering the area where the individuals lived. Despite epidemiological correlations like this one suggesting the possibility that electromagnetic radiation from FM and TV broadcasts stations could suppress the immune system and promote cancer, the strength of these electromagnetic fields is so feeble it has been difficult to imagine any biological basis for the correlation.

Consider, however, that even a TV set cannot respond to broadcast transmissions unless the weak electromagnetic waves are captured and amplified by an appropriately designed antenna. Antennas are simply metal objects of appropriate length sized to match the wavelength of a specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation. Just as saxophones are made in different sizes to resonate with and amplify particular wavelengths of sound, electromagnetic waves are selectively amplified by metal objects that are the same, half or one quarter of the wavelength of an electromagnetic wave of a specific frequency. Electromagnetic waves resonate on a half-wavelength antenna to create a standing wave with a peak at the middle of the antenna and a node at each end, just as when a string stretched between two points is plucked at the center. In the U.S. bed frames and box springs are made of metal, and the length of a bed is exactly half the wavelength of FM and TV transmissions that have been broadcasting since the late 1940s. In Japan most beds are not made of metal, and the TV broadcast system does not use the 87- to 108-megahertz frequency used in Western countries.

Thus, as we sleep on our coil-spring mattresses, we are in effect sleeping on an antenna that amplifies the intensity of the broadcast FM/TV radiation. Asleep on these antennas, our bodies are exposed to the amplified electromagnetic radiation for a third of our life spans. As we slumber on a metal coil-spring mattress, a wave of electromagnetic radiation envelops our bodies so that the maximum strength of the field develops 75 centimeters above the mattress in the middle of our bodies. When sleeping on the right side, the body's left side will thereby be exposed to field strength about twice as strong as what the right side absorbs.

If this study is correct, the solution is simple: Replace the metal in our beds with a nonmetallic mattress or orient your bed, like an antenna, away from the direction of the local FM/TV transmission tower. Call it high-tech feng shui if you like, but if this new study has not identified the cause of left-side cancer, it will, for some, be the cause of insomnia.


R. Douglas Fields, Ph. D. is the Chief of the Nervous System Development and Plasticity Section at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and Adjunct Professor at the University of Maryland, College Park. Fields, who conducted postdoctoral research at Stanford University, Yale University, and the NIH, is Editor-in-Chief of the journal Neuron Glia Biology and member of the editorial board of several other journals in the field of neuroscience. He is the author of the new book The Other Brain (Simon and Schuster), about cells in the brain (glia) that do not communicate using electricity.   His hobbies include building guitars, mountain climbing, and scuba diving.  He lives in Silver Spring, Md.

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.


Striking a balance on wireless facilities

Wednesday, June 30, 2010, 9:00 AM

Guest Columnist Amanda Fritz

Cell phones and wireless Internet access are increasingly essential services. More than 60 percent of 9-1-1 calls in Portland come from cell phones. But these services require the physical equipment needed to provide coverage.

While many Portlanders want reliable wireless services, few welcome a transmission antenna near their home. Concerns include potential health risks, aesthetic issues and property values. But existing poles are reaching capacity, and new companies want to serve Portlanders. As the commissioner in charge of the bureau that oversees those services, I must balance the desired growth in cellular services with the livability of our neighborhoods, while also complying with applicable laws.

Some people have asked the city to deny all new antenna applications. But the federal government doesn't allow local jurisdictions to "prohibit or effectively prohibit" the ability of any entity to provide telecommunications service, and the Federal Communications Commission has ruled that cities may not consider health concerns in their permitting process.

Last year at my request, the City Council passed a first-in-the-nation resolution asking the FCC to require a review of scientific studies on potential health impacts of wireless systems. But Congress has not yet pressed the FCC to conduct this review, and Portlanders concerned about wireless health risks should contact federal lawmakers to urge their assistance.

Some have alleged that the city's primary interest in wireless services is the fees collected. Franchise and pole fees do generate millions of dollars, vital to help pay for basic city services -- police, fire, housing, parks. The public should benefit from the private use of our streets. Some have claimed that the city is giving "$13 million in tax breaks" to wireless companies because land-line usage is taxed but cellular usage is not. While such tax equity is an important issue, cell phone bills are already high, so adding taxes would not likely reduce demand.

Previously, permits for antennas on utility poles were approved without neighborhood notice or input. The city's zoning code applies only to lots, not streets. Applying zoning code reviews to all streets, as some have urged, would require the resolution of multiple legal issues after an extensive public process. We simply don't have the capacity to engage in those discussions with so many other urgent challenges during the recession.

Instead, early in my council term I worked with citizens who opposed a controversial 2008 proposal, as well as the city attorney's office, staff in cable and development services and industry representatives. We agreed on a new process that encourages neighbors' comments on antenna applications for residential streets, and that permits antennas in neighborhoods only if absolutely necessary. It allows taller structures so there can be fewer of them. It also includes significant incentives to avoid neighborhood streets and sets design standards to minimize impacts.

Given legal constraints and the desire of many Portlanders for good wireless service, these rules strike the right balance for regulating cellular facilities. No cell towers have been built in residential areas since 2004. Of the 80 antennas on utility poles, approximately 20 are on small neighborhood streets. And citizen participation now informs the permitting process, resulting in constructive changes.

It's not prudent to expose Portland taxpayers to the financial liability of lawsuits if we effectively prohibit cellular companies from providing service. To increase local control, we must change the federal mandates. Concerned citizens should urge Congress to address these issues promptly.

Amanda Fritz is a Portland city commissioner.


Comment to above story:

wirelesswatch July 02, 2010 at 7:57AM

On it's face, the 1996 telecommunications act is unconstitutional, a cover-up and a license to kill. The telecoms are shielded from "health concerns" as a valid consideration when challenging the location of a cell tower. Free speech? We don't use it anyway. "Health Concerns" why? What do they know and when did they know it? The Government and the Military have known for over 50 years that radio frequency is harmful to all biological systems. Bees, bats, humans, plants and trees are all affected by it. While people complain about cell towers going in next to schools we allow the school board to install wi fi in all the schools and irradiate our kids for 6-7 hours each day before they go home and let their parents finish the job with DECT portable phones, wi fi and Wii's.

A tsunami of cancers and early alzheimer's await our kids while the Portland School Board won't even consider adding to the health curriculum information on "safer" cell phone use and the dangers of wireless technology. We teach about alcohol, tobacco, drugs and safe sex but not about cell phone use. Young people under the age of 20 are 420% more at risk of forming brain tumors because of their soft skulls, brain size and cell turn over time. We are in a wireless trance and many scientists are in a state of panic as they see this thing expand with no safety testing or public education programs in place.

wirelesswatch July 02, 2010 at 9:11AM

Barrie Trower Cell Phone Tower Radiation Dangers Deception Part 4
Posted by admin on July 1st, 2010 and filed under mobile phones | No Comments »

Barry Trower
Document 2.:

In Sir William Stewart's report page 113, frequencies between 300 MHz and 300 GHz are defines as microwaves.

This is in line with the International Commission's definition of microwaves as defined in 1998.

Therefore everything discussed in this report is in the microwave frequency.

Microwaves react very differently in our water-based bodies to radio waves.
The term 'Radio Frequency' is often used to describe microwaves based communication systems.

It is important that the term 'Radio Frequency' is not associated with Radio Waves, but associated with microwaves.

Microwaves are used by the communications industry because they are more penetrative than radio waves.

The Stewart Report 2004 asks that anecdotal evidence be taken seriously in the absence of long-term epidemiological studies, concerning illnesses around the area of mobile phone transmitters. Such anecdotal evidence produced July 2002 refers to 92 cases of cancer around just 19 mobile phone transmitters.

Other illnesses on the same paper refer to breast cancers, thyroid, bowel and blood problems.

Another report dated November 2003 titled 'School References (school and cell tower antennas)' from 138 schools lists miscarriages, brain tumours, cancers, breast cancers and teachers ill within this report. One single school had transmitters on its roof in the Saint-Cyr-l'Ecole quarter of France where 8 cases of cancer were confirmed among children in the district.

Common sense dictates that if you surround the school with mobile transmitters, the children will be able to use their mobile phones in school, this obviously exacerbates the problem of surrounding the children with microwave radiation.

The Stewart Report on page 63, section 4.1.1 recommends …..RF fields to which the public will be exposed will be kept to the lowest practical level that will be commensurate with the system….

The same page the Stewart Group recommend….. Base Stations sited within school grounds that the beam of greatest intensity should not fall on any part of the school grounds or buildings without agreement from the school and parents.

Similar considerations should apply to macro base stations sited near school grounds.

Doctor Gerd Oberfield , published a report dated Novemberand December 2004, titled 'Putting Cellphone Antennas near schools is too Risky'.

This report states:…..with respect to negative health effects on people living in close proximity to cell phone towers, there are three different epidemiological studies including our recent study. All of them found statistically significant relationships between exposure to radiation and health effects.

Two of the studies did measurements in subject's bedrooms and found significant increases in stress related symptoms as well and neurological symptoms…. Also depression, fatigue, sleep disorders and concentration difficulty were found. These symptoms were related to exposure levels, not distance from the antennas. A recent research project called EU-Reflex or European Union Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure using sensitive in Vitro Methods shows that cells exposed to cell phone radiation exhibit chromosomal damage well below the exposure guidelines of the W.H.O.

Barrie Trower


Apple stunning discovery ?

FAQ: What does the 5-bar signal strength icon really mean?

The five bars measure the decibels of power that is being received from the cell phone tower. What does it mean if I have fewer bars versus if I have more ...

Apple acknowledged the problem, and explained that customers were simply covering up the antenna with their hand. Now the company says its engineers have made a "stunning" discovery.


News from Israel

Yesterday evening a TV program "what the cell companies hide from us" showed:

A brain tumor victim who can hardly walk, Zvika, plans with the rest of his time to sue the companies. His tumor is at the same side of where he spoke. His wife told to the camera that if it's from the phone it's very sad. She talked of his intellectual ability deterioration. He is going to file a class action.

Dan Shilon a respected TV journalist was hired by the companies to improve their image. He asked to receive full journalism freedom and got it but he also signed on a contract to keep everything in secret {...} he reached to too much info so they cancelled his program (they funded it). I sent the item about it in the past, so now he was interviewed. He said that he had found phones are dangerous, and he thinks that clearly there is a problem with both the phones and antennas. The main person on Shilon's program was supposed to be Prof. Sadezki she was interviewed and said that "it is very possible that there is a connection between phones and cancer" and that there are indications like time of use and same side. She said I am absolutely not saying let's stop using it but to speak wisely. To put the phone at distance from the body [her logic is not clear: isn't it the same logic like saying: let's use this wisely, by throwing it to the sea, isn't it like taking as much as distance from the body as possible. What kind of logic is she saying here I can't understand].

Yossi Riback was taken into focus: a professor of TV university, an occupational M.D who is hired by the cell companies is taken for a deep talk about it-  he was asked: can it be that they are using you in order to whiten themselves in the eyes of the public?

he answered: "absolute negative"

He said that his opinion is consistent and it is OK that someone is doing a work and is paid for that. But this reflects what he thinks on the subject.

COM device was used in order to show radiation from the phone to distance and recommending air tubes.

Two measurement were taken of antenna- one before the cell phone companies knew about it and another afterwards they knew about the TV crew there.

The first before 21 uW/cm2

After - 0.4 uW/cm2

Yael German, the Mayor of Herzelia was talking about the companies action to increase their wealth only - from rich companies to richer companies on the public's back. She resisted for long time to non informing the public on erection of antennas. The companies come to erect antennas at 2:00 AM middle of night like thieves in order to not be seen by the public.  In the past she received a letter from Tal Zilberstein, who was consultant to Ehud Ulmert Israeli former prime minister, Tal was the spokesman for the cellular companies forum which is a PR office, Yael German said its job was to take care that none interferes with what they (companies) want to do. So she received a letter from Tal threatening her to disconnect her city from cellular communication because she runs a fear journey that throws salt in the eyes of the public in order to advance herself politically. He wrote that if you want to disconnect your city from cellular connection it will be considered positively. She asks to inform the public on antennas. The Knesset made a law that enforced to have construction license for each antenna. Ofir Piner former MP who fought the companies: the companies have strong lobby and the public pays very expensive health price.

Cellular forum reaction to everything:

Whoever wants to talk safely has to understand that he has to have an antenna near his house.

Stelian Galberg from the Env. ministry wrote to Yeal German that her lack of co-operation hurts the citizens because they are exposed to more radiation. That she must enable more antennas and it will profit the residents.

All antennas stand in the standards.

The two measurements before and after: the companies "were ready" to decrease the radiation from antennas after they were approached to.

On Shilon: the movie was a part of a campaign of the forum to increase antennas, but they decided not to do it because they understood that without the support of the health and Env. ministry it would not receive the public trust.

Wow isn't it? ...

full programme


Submitted by Iris

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