Thursday, December 2, 2010

HOUSE OF COMMONS HEALTH REPORT / Dr. Katherine Albrecht Show / Information on Smart Meters is misleading / Effect of Microwaves / Dear School Administrator / Ants affected by EMR

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

3 December 2010

AN EXAMINATION OF THE POTENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION

HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/Committee/403/HESA/Reports/RP4834477/403_HESA_Rpt10_PDF/403_HESA_Rpt10-e.pdf

-----------------------------------------------

My comment on the above report: 

I would expect a more thorough, accurate, informative and balanced report from a group of high school students!

Martin Weatherall

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Dr. Katherine Albrecht Show"

Genesis Communications Network, M-F 4-6 PM EST
Dr. Magda Havas is interviewed about the health effects of Wi Fi

http://www.gcnlive.com/programs/katherineAlbrecht/archives.php

Select Dec 2, hour 2.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information on Smart Meters is misleading

Information provided to the public by those who are promoting Smart Meters is misleading and factually incorrect!  Below is a document that was produced by Iberdrola USA and Central Maine Power. Can you find the one fact that is partially correct?

http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/12/02/are-smart-meters-safe/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

December 2, 2010.  Pick of the Week #18: 

Effect of Microwaves on the Central Nervous System, German Translation, 1965.

Bergman, W.  1965.  The effect of Microwaves on the Central Nervous System.  Translation from the German for Research and Scientific Laboratory, Ford Motor Company by the Technical Library Research Service.  82 pp.

ABSTRACT

The autonomic nervous system is affected by the microwaves of the centimeter wavelength band. These waves affect circulation, respiration, temperature control, water balance, albumin and sugar concentration in the cerebro-spinal fluid, hydrogen ion concentration, EEG. GSR, sleep, conscious awareness, etc. Depending on the applied dosage, these waves stimulate the sympathetic or parasympathetic system. Very small dosages produce analgesic effects; however, very large dosages are fatal. An undamped or modulated frequency is more effective than damped waves. The biological effect of these waves results from the resonance absorption in the ganglia. There are indications that only higher harmonics, and not the fundamental frequency, produce biological effects. The shielding of the test subject by metal screens increases these effects; however, magnetic fields remove them. Higher harmonics producing these biological effects have physical properties which are similar to those of the bio-electrical energy generated by the human body. The mechanism of hypnosis is explained by the transmission of this energy.

Note: you can download this document at:  

http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/12/02/pick-of-the-week-18-effect-of-microwaves-on-the-central-nervous-system-1965-german-translation/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

November 27, 2010

Dear School Administrator

I am writing to ask for your help.   My husband and I have  decided to start home-schooling our two children in January due to the issue I am composing this letter about.

I don't know if you have been following the media reports about the growing concern parents are having about the use of  wi-fi  in their children's schools. 

One of our daughters has become electrohypersensitive due to being in a classroom right next to the wi-fi router all of last year.  Her symptoms (extreme headache, dizziness, nausea, racing heart beat and muscle aches while at school) have become so bad that today we pulled her and her sister out of school.  Because my daughter has become so sensitized to the radiation emitted by the wi-fi router, she acts as the "canary in the mine".  ALL children are being adversely affected by this radiation bombarding their still-developing brains and bodies 6 hours a day, 5 days a week, 10 months a year. 

I have also, so far, heard of 2 teachers who are experiencing the same symptoms.  Teachers are being forced to allow their bodies to be radiated sometimes for 10 hours a day as they spend even longer in the school building than the children do.  What are they to do?

WHO IS PROTECTING THE HEALTH OF OUR CHILDREN AND THEIR TEACHERS? NO ONE.

Health Canada's position so far when they are questioned is that Safety Code 6 (a code written in the 70's to establish safety limits for microwave ovens) is used to make sure wi-fi is safe.  Experts in Europe have warned Health Canada that Safety Code 6 is outdated, obsolete and irrelevant to cell phones and wi-fi and any other wireless device because it only considers the thermal effects from any device to be relevant to safety.  If a device cannot heat tissue to the level that it becomes "cooked" within 6 minutes, it is considered safe according to Safety Code 6. 

Scientists know that this same radiation has non-thermal effects on biological beings.  Our bodies are electric, operating at very strict frequencies.  The frequencies of our cells are disrupted by the signals emitted from wi-fi.  Wi-fi also emits CONTINUOUSLY, unlike a cell phone which only powers up when it is receiving a call.

Health Canada's track record for providing early warning to the public about health risks from various environmental and pharmaceutical toxins is dismal.  Asbestos, tobacco, thalidomide, DDT and PCB's are just some of the dangers they failed to warn Canadians about although they knew the potential for harm prior to the fallout from lawsuits etc. 

Why should it be any different with this new harmful issue?  The telecommunications industry is arguably the largest in the world with seemingly endless resources.  Our government is at the mercy of this industry. We as parents, teachers and administrators in the school system CANNOT be at their mercy too.  Our children's health and possibly lives (as well as those of our teachers) hang in the balance.  The insurance industry will no longer insure cell phone/wireless companies because the risk of tumour development over the next 20 years is so high that they fear bankruptcy (as was the case with asbestos).

As it currently stands legally, employers have become responsible for damage incurred to their employees due to wireless devices used at work.  The liability for any harm to teachers due to wi-fi exposure rests squarely on the school districts.  This is a potentially disastrous situation as school boards stand the risk of being bankrupted should any of their employees develop brain tumours after being forced to work in the presence of wi-fi all day.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission, in 2007, released a report listing non-thermal biological effects of microwave radiation well below Canada's regulatory limits that included breakdown of the blood-brain barrier, cardiac arrythmias, headaches, dizziness, irritability, fatigue, weakness, insomnia, impaired memory and damaged DNA.  There is much contention in the scientific community about whether or not the known biological effects of non-thermal radiation will end up doing harm. 

Because of this enormous uncertainty, it would be prudent for the BC Teachers' Federation to demand that the precautionary principle be adopted and insist that schools be hard wired until such time as there is indisputable proof that wireless radiation is 100% safe for children and adults alike.

If we are worrying for nothing, all that will have been lost is a modest amount of convenience (i.e. not being limited by a cable needing to be attached to a computer to access the internet).

But, if these concerns are justified and we do nothing, we stand to lose considerably more.  We should not wait for the body count to begin before we respond to this threat.

PLEASE ACT WITH OUR CHILDREN'S AND TEACHER'S BEST INTERESTS AT HEART. This is an issue worth fighting for.

Recently we got a non-profit, educational, non-industry funded organization called Citizens for Safe Technology to give a presentation at our School.  They are very knowledgeable and have provided me with documentation verifying all the science proving harm from wireless radiation.  I would be more than happy to share any and all of it with you.

Our children are powerless to protect themselves.  They rely on us to keep them safe from harm. 

Please help them.

Sincerely,
A concerned parent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tunneling for 'Ant'swers

By LAUREN SCHOENEMANN S&T editor

Published: Thursday, December 2, 2010

http://www.hbucollegian.com/science-technology/tunneling-for-ant-swers-1.2419463

Four undergraduate students from the College of Science and Mathematics tend to their farms three times per week after their classes.

Juniors Urooj Shahid, Shruti Sakhuja, Sharon Fonseca, and Nida Hassan have studied the effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation on the metabolic activity of male red harvester ants since September for a joint ecology and biophysics research project.

Fonseca and Hassan, biology and biochemistry/molecular biology majors, research the components that relate to physics. Shahid, majoring in biology and business, and Sakhuja, a biology and biochemistry/molecular biology major, conducted the study as part of a research project for their ecology course, taught by Dr. Betty Thompson, professor of biology.

Shahid said that Dr. James Claycomb, associate professor of physics, proposed the idea last summer when the students worked as teaching assistants for his first-semester physics course.

"He encouraged us to participate in research, then looked into ant farm studies and found relevant articles that we used to guide our own project," Shahid said.

The results of the study supported the students' hypothesis that prolonged subjection to radiation would decrease activity in ants.

Two ant populations were observed. Each group was placed in an ant farm enclosure that contained a blue gel in which the ants tunneled and used as a food source.

One group of ants was exposed to a frequency of 75 hertz, and the control group was not subjected to radiation.

The carbon dioxide emissions of the ants in each farm were measured for 10-hour intervals after 48 hours of exposure, and the tunneling behavior of each was observed after two weeks of consecutive subjection.

The ants exposed to the radiation tunneled less than the members of the control group and yielded less carbon dioxide, meaning they had lower respiration rates.

Fonseca explained that the ants' carbon dioxide output indicates the production of adenosine triphosphate, a coenzyme that functions as a unit of currency in intracellular energy transfer in many living organisms, from ants to humans.

Claycomb said the findings are significant because the effects on the ants may parallel those on people who frequently use cell phones. Mobile devices release microwaves, forms of electromagnetic radiation, which may cause long-term health problems.

In addition to learning more about red harvester ants, each student said that she now understands more about research in general.

Shahid said they became more independent in the lab by learning how to use new techniques and equipment, such as parallel plate capacitors and carbon dioxide probes and chambers.

Hassan said she learned that experiments do not always run as smoothly as expected. Sakhuja added that they would often have to retrace their steps to determine how to troubleshoot problems. For example, the students originally attempted to study fire ants but found that they were small enough to escape from the enclosures, so they used the larger harvester ants.

Fonseca said they were also able to apply knowledge acquired from biology and physics courses to a real-world situation.

Thompson commended the group for its professionalism and laboratory technique.

"The students were rigorous in the execution of the scientific method and did an excellent job finding reproducible results," she said.

Thompson also stressed that students who conduct undergraduate research are more competitive candidates for summer internships as well as graduate and medical schools because hands-on laboratory work is fundamental to an understanding of science.

"Real science is, in fact, research," Thompson said. "Research improves critical-thinking skills and allows students to study science at a higher level than simply memorizing facts does."

Web site www.weepinitiative.org e-mail contactweep@weepinitiative.org

To sign up for WEEP News: newssignup@weepinitiative.org (provide name and e-mail address)

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

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Acoustic Neuroma, New Japanese Research / Presentation to December Board meeting / New Warnings about the Hazards of Cell Phones / Scare stories threaten Maine smart meter rollout

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

2 December 2010

Acoustic Neuroma

The acoustic neuroma story is becoming more and more compelling. A Japanese group is the latest --the third-- to link cell phones to this tumor of the acoustic nerve.

Read our latest post at:

http://www.microwavenews.com

And check out the recent updates to our continuing coverage of ICNIRP and its new industry-friendly EMF exposure guidelines in our new "Short Takes" column, also on the Microwave News Home page.

Best,
Louis Slesin

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Presentation to December Board meeting

Nov 30, 2010

Hello Maria,

I apologize for getting back so late; as for many, life is very busy and I'm trying to keep up with things as they come. If you would, please forward this email with attachments to all members of The Board for review;  we are eager to share this vital health information regarding the safety of Wi-Fi in schools and appreciate the opportunity to present in person at the upcoming School District meeting on Dec. 7th. We will have three speakers presenting on Wi-Fi in schools: Karen Weiss (son suffers with EHS); Walt McGinnis (certified electrician and EMR consultant); and Robb Jeske (concerned parent & cancer survivor). If possible i would like a few minutes at the start to introduce our group and distribute some handouts that i have. I understand each speaker has approx. 10 minutes. Is there any objection if someone wants to give a portion of their time to the other?

Also may we please use a projector and screen if there is one available? If not we do have one if we are allowed to set up ahead of time. I have provided some attachments that include:

a comprehensive preamble on the public health risks of wireless technology; the City of Colwood's Proclamation on the environmental sensitivity EHS; a scientific report from the Royal Society of Canada that acknowledges leakage of the blood brain barrier, DNA damage, and other biological effects, also identifying children as a vulnerable sub group; a study funded by T-Mobil that clearly identifies the damaging effects from low level exposure to microwave, radio frequency radiation and; German/Swiss recommendations to schools to keep computers hard wired for safety.

Some attachments are large, so please let me know if there is any trouble and i will try to provide a link instead.

Best regards,

Tammy Jeske

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SD #62

Nov, 30, 2010

Dear members of The Board of Education,

We thank the Chair, Wendy Hobbs, for hearing our concern as parents and allowing us the opportunity to present crucial health information on the growing body of research that indicates repetitive exposure to microwave radiation from wireless technology significantly increases the risk for many illnesses, chronic diseases, and cancers, with children being at the greatest risk.

Ubiquitous use of wireless communication devices and the proliferation of cellular infrastructure has created a saturated environment of microwave, radiofrequency radiation that many scientists affirm is damaging to our health and puts our children at great risk for serious health outcomes with prolonged exposure. In our insatiable world of wireless a growing number of the population experience ill symptoms when around devices that emit energy fields known as electromagnetic sensitivity (EHS). Adverse symptoms range from mild to severe and often start with headaches and concentration difficulty (brain fog) but may also include symptoms such as extreme fatigue, nausea, dizziness, fast or irregular heart beat, insomnia, night sweats, sinus congestion, asthma, tinnitus, burning eyes, restless leg syndrome, and skin rashes. Many countries including Canada recognize EHS as an environmental sensitivity, however, Health Canada  has done nothing to strengthen exposure standards and still allows radiation levels hundreds to thousands of times higher than many other countries do; the usual mantra from federal representatives to the public " there is no convincing evidence" is used to diffuse any health concerns and avert action when mounting international evidence would prove otherwise.

Many industry critics say there is no proof that low level non-ionizing microwave radiation is harmful, but there is only need to look to Swiss COM, the government owned telecommunications provider that applied for a patent for a method to completely eliminate the radiation caused by the Wi-Fi base station when not in use.

http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/10/20/free-internet-access-in-swiss-schools-no-wifi/

In this patent document, Swiss COM admits damage to hereditary material with increased risk for cancer, and even includes studies conducted by scientists at the World Health Organization! The patent comes at a time when the Swiss government (home to the WHO) has enacted some of the world strictest radiation guidelines. Of course these new limits are not welcomed by the telecommunication industry, nonetheless, it is law and they are forced to comply. It is important to note cell phones and Wi-Fi technology were never pre market tested for safety nor is industry required to monitor for potential health effects such as with the food and pharmaceutical industry

It is vital members of the Board review all credible, non industry funded science to attain a more accurate assessment of what the true risk is to health using wireless technology in our schools, considering the potential short term and long term health implications to our children and teachers who would be exposed to microwave radiation for many hours daily, five days a week. It is important to note many schools are constructed with industrial grade materials, using thick concrete and highly reflective metallic surfaces; certain areas may have higher exposure levels (hot spots) due to proximity to powerful commercial grade transmitters and reflective metal surfaces such as roofs and siding may amplify radiation levels within increasing the risk even greater.

We must ask: when will it be enough evidence to warrant precaution with our children's lives?  Does the definition of precaution not mean "action taken in advance to protect against possible danger, failure, or injury; a safeguard"?

Children rely on adults to make prudent decisions on their behalf, never is it acceptable to gamble with their young lives.  And why would we potentially wager everything for a mere convenience when we have safer alternatives that achieve the same goal- it is called cables. These cables are well insulated to withstand and contain powerful energy fields, unlike children's immature brains and central nervous system that are vulnerable and not fully protected until into the twenties.

As concerned and responsible parents we want to share scientific evidence and technical information to support why computers should remain hard wired in schools and offer viable alternatives to Wi-Fi along with simple safety measures that can make hand held learning devices such as ipads and E-books much safer to use, still allowing versatility in and outside the classroom but with out harmful emissions. In a time where wireless is almost inescapable, let us consider making schools a safer, greener environment that is conducive to clear thinking and healthy bodies, providing an optimal learning atmosphere that still utilizes the necessary modern tools for learning without the threat to health.

Clearly the safety of students and staff is paramount and we are confident Board members will act with due diligence to ensure that this remains the priority when considering any technology within our schools. With that said, please consider a moratorium on any further Wi-Fi installation until such time as a comprehensive review of all relevant health information is completed to ensure safety. We look forward to discussion and answering any questions The Board may have on this crucial issue of Wi-Fi (microwave radiation) in our schools.

Sincerely,

Tammy Jeske

Citizens for Safe Technology

http://www.citizensforsafetechnology.org/

From: Maria Whitmarsh

Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:50 AM

To: jeskers@shaw.ca

Subject: Presentation to December Board meeting

Good morning,

Further to the invitation from our Board Chair, Wendy Hobbs, the date of our Board of Education meeting in December is Tuesday, December 7th.

The public meeting begins at 8:00 p.m., and your presentation would be early on the agenda.  The Board Office is located at 3143 Jacklin Road in Langford, and the Board Room is just off the main lobby.    The Board asks that presentations be kept to approximately ten minutes.  If you would like written material included in the agenda package that is sent to participants in advance, please send it to me before Tuesday, November 30th, for the agenda planning meeting.   

Could you please confirm if you will be able to make your presentation at that time, and let me know the name(s) of the presenter(s).

Thanks very much,

Maria Whitmarsh

Secretary to the Secretary-Treasurer

School District No. 62 (Sooke)

3143 Jacklin Road

Victoria, BC  V9B 5R1

250- 474-9804 (phone) 250- 474-9850 (fax)

mwhitmarsh@sd62.bc.ca

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Warnings about the Hazards of Cell Phones

Dr. Mercola
November 29 2010

http://emf.mercola.com/sites/emf/archive/2010/11/29/more-warnings-about-cell-phone-dangers.aspx

Holding a cell phone against your ear, or putting it in your pocket, may be hazardous to your health ­ or so says the fine print on a little slip that you probably tossed aside when unpacking your phone. Apple says your iPhone should come no closer than 5/8 of an inch; BlackBerry recommends about an inch. Statistics show that, over all, there has not been a general increase in the incidence of brain cancer since cell phones arrived ­ but the average hides that fact that brain cancer has increased in the 20-to-29 age group while dropping for the older population.

According to the New York Times: "The largest study of cell phone use and brain cancer has been the Interphone International Case Control Study ... The authors included some disturbing data in an appendix available only online. These showed that subjects who used a cell phone 10 or more years doubled the risk of developing brain gliomas, a type of tumor." Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal investigates various methods of cutting down the radiation your cell phone produces.

However, they say the most effective one may be the simplest -- keep the phone away from your head and body.

Sources:

New York Times November 13, 2010

Wall Street Journal, October 5, 2010

Good Health Nov 15 2010

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

This summer I purchased the Sprint EVO, which is one of the top Android phones, and I can tell you that it is clearly my favorite gadget. In my opinion, it is far better than any navigation device on ANY car and has loads of other useful tools. More than two-thirds of the time I don't use the phone for calls but when I do it is nearly always in speaker mode and I rarely ever hold the device or put it to my head. We have had an exponential growth rate of cell phones and their numbers will continue to grow as the smart phone market expands. As the New York Times reported, there are 292 million wireless numbers in use in the United States, which is close to one for every man, woman and child. And as of June about 25 percent of U.S. households had given up their landlines in favor of going wireless-only. For many, NOT having a cell phone is viewed as virtually impossible. Today's cell phones are much more than phones. They can also be your camera, video recorder, hand-held computer, and your lifeline to staying in touch with your work and family.

Indeed, cell phones are extremely convenient and useful, and from a technology standpoint have changed the way humans interact and do business S they're an incredible invention, really S except for one nagging problem. They're likely going to trigger a brain cancer epidemic the likes of which the world has never seen. Did You Know that Cell Phone Manufacturers Warn You to NOT Hold the Phone to Your Head? Cell phones are so common nowadays that it may take you a minute to wrap your head around the fact that studies are showing they may not be safe. But remember, it wasn't long ago when doctors gladly endorsed cigarette companies and smoking was commonplace even in hospitals. Many are now suggesting that cell phones will be the cigarettes of the 21st century S and one day we will look back on all the photos of people, including children, walking around pressing these radiation-releasing devices directly to our heads and wonder what we were thinking. But for now most people are in a state of ignorant bliss, assuming that cell phones must be safe if they're being used so extensively and there are no public health warnings about them.. The reality is, however, that even cell phone manufacturers do not advise using your cell phone the way you probably use it ­ pressed up against your ear. Many cell phones actually contain package inserts that warn you to hold the cell phone away from your head when in use. Apple recommends keeping your iPhone at least 5/8 of an inch from your head, while BlackBerry recommends about an inch. Why might these companies be quietly warning you to keep your phone away from your head?

New Research Shows Cell Phones are Dangerous

Devra Davis, PhD, professor, Department of Epidemiology at the Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh has written a new book -- Disconnect -- in which she exposes research showing that radiation from cell phones has been linked to:

* DNA damage

* Memory loss

* Alzheimer's disease

* Cancer

* Break down of your brain's defenses

* Reduced sperm count

Then there were the results of the massive Interphone study, which was meant to finally provide definitive evidence on the safety, or lack thereof, of cell phones. It cost more than $30 million (funded in part by the mobile phone industry) to carry out, and involved nearly 50 scientists from 13 countries, along with more than 14,000 people.

It turns out that the study was a massive PR campaign by the telecommunications industry to provide reassurance that cell phones are safe so they can continue to generate hundreds of billions of dollars of profits. That is why it is no surprise, now that the data has finally been released, that it turns out the study is seriously flawed. The study is filled with ludicrous and disturbing findings such as "heavy users" of cell phones have an approximately doubled risk of glioma, a life threatening and often-fatal brain tumor, after 10 years of cell phone use.

You might wonder why this is a ludicrous finding, but you will instantly understand once you learn that: their definition of a "heavy" user was someone who used a cell phone about two hours S a month! What this means is that if you use your cell phone for two hours a month or more, you may be doubling your risk of a potentially fatal brain tumor. Use your cell phone significantly more than that, and your risk is likely much, much higher This study does absolutely nothing to address the hundreds of millions of cell phone users who easily have exposure up to FIFTY times higher. Other studies too, like the review of 11 long-term epidemiologic studies published in the journal Surgical Neurology, have revealed that using a cell phone for 10 or more years increases your risk of developing a brain tumor. The 2009 special EMF issue of the Journal of Pathophysiology also contains over a dozen different studies on the health effects of wireless technology and electromagnetic fields.

Just Like Cigarettes, It Will be Decades Before the Real Effects Show Up

It is still too soon for most cell phone-induced brain tumors to show up. Just as people don't get lung cancer a few weeks or months into their smoking habit, there is a delayed effect between cell phone usage and brain tumor development that typically is over 10 to 20 years. Of course, not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer, and not every cell phone user will develop brain cancer. There are many variables that contribute to susceptibility. For instance, children and teens are among those MOST at risk because their younger skulls are thinner and their growing brains much more susceptible to radiation exposure. One study even found that children and teenagers are five times more likely to get brain cancer if they use cell phones -- so why risk it?

SAR Values are Not a Valid Measure of Safety

There's been a lot of talk lately about cell phones' SAR values, which is simply a measure of the power of your cell phone and its potential for heating your tissues. Values vary from one model to the next, starting around 0.2 watts, but the maximum allowable SAR rate is 1.6 watts per kilogram for phones sold in the United States. This guideline is based on the exposure from a six-minute phone call. Although knowing your phone's SAR value is a good first step, it is by no means an absolute measure of safety.

As Camilla Rees, founder of ElectromagneticHealth.org explains: "The cell phone SAR value does not accurately reflect the potential for biological harm from the frequencies of the communication, and, very importantly, there are also some biological effects that have been shown to be worse at lower SAR values compared to higher SAR values, such as blood-brain barrier permeability."

So it's important to realize that you simply cannot rely on the SAR value alone when gauging cell phone safety. Rather, know that safety is dependent on how you use your cell phone.

What are the Safest and Most Dangerous Ways to Use a Cell Phone?

The most dangerous manner of use is to place the phone against your head. The best way to decrease your exposure to radiation is to use either the speakerphone or a safe headset when speaking on the phone, and to keep your phone as far away from your body as possible whenever it is on. You should never carry your phone in your shirt pocket or on your belt, for example. San Francisco legislation now actually requires education about such cell phone risks at the point-of-sale.

Educational materials must "inform customers of actions that can be taken by cell phone users to minimize exposure to radiation, such as turning off cell phones when not in use, using a headset or speaker phone and texting." (Lines 15-17 of the final legislation.)

The Washington Post also reviewed a few products meant to minimize radiation exposure, such as a T-shirt and blanket that contain silver fibers to help block cell phone radiation, which are meant for use by pregnant women. There are also special cases on the market that contain pieces of gold designed to pull radiation away from your head and release it from the back of the phone. These options may help cut back on your exposure, but the simplest way to really minimize your risk is to keep the phone as far away from your head and body as possible, as much as possible.

I also recommend that everyone who uses a cell phone follow these commonsense guidelines:

* Children Should Always Avoid Using Cell Phones: Barring a life-threatening emergency, children should not use a cell phone, or a wireless device of any type. Children are far more vulnerable to cell phone radiation than adults, because of their thinner skull bones and other factors.

* Reduce Your Cell Phone Use: Turn your cell phone off more often. Reserve it for emergencies or important matters.

* Use a Land Line at Home and at Work: Although more and more people are switching to using cell phones as their exclusive phone contact, it is a dangerous trend and you can choose to opt out of the madness.

* Reduce or Eliminate Your Use of Other Wireless Devices: You would be wise to cut down your use of these devices. Just as with cell phones, it is important to ask yourself whether or not you really need to use them every single time. Even portable home phones, including the older kind that operate at 900 MHz, can be a problem. The lesson from the field is that all DECT portable phones are a problem. If you do not know if you have a DECT phone (as many are not labeled as such), the ONLY way to know for sure is to measure. You can learn about measuring instrumentation at www.emfsafetystore.com. For "hands free" calls at home, I recommend getting the old-fashioned speakerphone (either attached to the phone or separate) or using SKYPE on your computer on speaker mode, which is terrific.

* Use Your Cell Phone Only Where Reception is Good: The weaker the reception, the more power your phone must use to transmit, and the more power it uses, the more radiation it emits, and the deeper the dangerous radio waves penetrate into your body. Ideally, you should only use your phone with full bars and good reception. Also seek to avoid carrying your phone on your body as that merely maximizes any potential exposure. Ideally put it in your purse or carrying bag.

* Turn Your Cell Phone Off When Not in Use: As long as your cell phone is on, it emits radiation intermittently, even when you are not actually making a call.

* Keep Your Cell Phone Away From Your Body When it is On: The most dangerous place to be, in terms of radiation exposure, is near the emitting antenna. You do not want any part of your body near this area and proximity is everything. The closer the phone is to your body, the worse the exposure -- with the exposure falling off dramatically with distance. Thus, using the speaker mode, the farther you can keep the phone away from your body and still hear the call, the better.

* Use Safer Headset Technology: Wired headsets will certainly allow you to keep the cell phone farther away from your body. However, if a wired headset is not well-shielded -- and most of them are not -- the wire itself acts as an antenna attracting ambient radio waves and transmitting radiation directly to your brain and your body, for example over your heart. Make sure that the wire used to transmit the signal to your ear is shielded. The best kind of headset to use is a combination shielded wire and air-tube headset. These operate like a stethoscope, transmitting the information to your head as an actual sound wave; although there are wires that still must be shielded, there is no wire that goes all the way up to your head.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scare stories threaten Maine smart meter rollout

Nov 30, 2010    

http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/Technologies_Metering_News/Scare-stories-threaten-Maine-smart-meter-rollout-3327.html

We reported recently that Central Maine Power (CMP had asked the state's Public Utilities Commission to dismiss complaints related to potential smart meter health, fire and security hazards. But after a town meeting in which complaining residents and CMP met to talk it out Monday night, it looks like the utility has a fight on its hands. According to The Forecaster newspaper, the five-hour public forum barely finished hashing through the topic of health hazards at midnight — the fire and security issues had to be delayed. Small wonder. The forum, held in the small town of Scarborough (population: about 17,000, attracted meter opponents from more than 15 communities and two states other than Maine. The complaints ranged from big business forcing residents into accepting products they don't want to intense skepticism that smart meter-related health issues haven't been adequately researched.

Hudson, New York, resident Michele Hertz was quoted in the newspaper as saying the meters affected her concentration, made her agitated and caused headaches. "I'm not being paid to be here. I'm not a scientist. But I'm living proof — smart meters installed on my house made me sick. I really do not believe the electric companies are trying to hurt people, but they're making a terrible mistake."

Local doctors chimed in, agreeing that health concerns were far from resolved. Scientists hired by CMP went through technical explanations of the safety of the meters and compared the frequencies emitted by smart meters to those emitted by cellular and cordless phones. The Maine Center for Disease Control has acknowledged a lack of long-term studies on the issue, but said existing research showed no "consistent or convincing evidence" to support concerns for health problems related to the range and power of radio frequencies used in the meters. The PUC has not yet decided if it will dismiss the complaints or investigate them. CMP received a $96 million ARRA stimulus grant to support its smart grid project. About 56,000 smart meters have already been installed.

Web site www.weepinitiative.org e-mail contactweep@weepinitiative.org

To sign up for WEEP News: newssignup@weepinitiative.org (provide name and e-mail address)

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