W.E.E.P. News
Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News
15 April 2011
Yesterday, WEEP news published the concerns of one person, on the 'Oregon cell phone warning label' bill.
Today there is a conflicting view which I have been asked to include in WEEP news.
Oregon bill SB 679
With due respects to Elizabeth Barris and her work on this bill I have to take issue with her interpretation of why the bill failed. The bill was carried through to a hearing by the consumer protection committee and to my knowledge, from direct sources, could have gone much further (with potentially 4 of 5 committee members interested in the bill) had it not been for the lack of support in the rest of the senate and legislature. I was encouraged directly by the Senator Shields office to introduce the bill next year. As a member of the lobbying team who encouraged Senator Shields to introduce the bill in the first place, and an Oregon resident I have worked closely and directly with his staff who has been patient, respectful, encouraging throughout the process.
Elizabeth Barris lobbied from her home in Santa Monica and was not in touch with the political process here and perhaps in general. With the hundreds of bills they have to sort through I would guess that they probably spent more time with this bill than many others. There was no conspiracy to kill the bill and I am looking forward to it's reintroduction next year with renewed hopes for it's passage.
For more information, please contact me privately @ wirelesswatch@yahoo.com
David Morrison
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do Cell Phones Cause Brain Cancer?
Next Sunday, the New York Times Magazine will feature a long piece titled "Do Cell Phones Cause Brain Cancer?" by Siddhartha Mukherjee (it's already on the Times' Web site). It's a well written article.
Yet there is an important element missing: The politics of cell phone research, or more precisely the heavy hand of industry that controls much of what goes on and what gets done.
Read the rest of our latest "Short Take" at
Best,
Louis Slesin PhD
Editor, Microwave News
A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Phone: +1 (212) 517-2800; Fax: +1 (212) 734-0316
E-mail: <mwn@pobox.com>
Internet: <http://www.microwavenews.com>
Mail: 155 East 77th Street, Suite 3D
New York, NY 10075, U.S.A.
* Access to all the information on our Web site is free. Please help support Microwave News. Send us a contribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smart meters interfering with town radios
By JOHN TAPLEY INGERSOLL TIMES INGERSOLL -Electronic interference from Hydro One smart meters is forcing the Town of Ingersoll to replace radios linking key municipal offices. On Monday, council gave approval to transfer $4000 from the town's ...
http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3072748
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glasser: PG&E crossing the line on SmartMeters
Pointing media to the PG&E Web site which had stated that 39000 SmartMeters had been installed in Lake County when at that point in time, only 2500 meters had actually been installed. 2. Declaring a "delay installation" list that customers can be ...
http://lakeconews.com/content/view/19220/927/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Health Trust Urges City of San Francisco to Stand for the Truth and Uphold "Right to Know" Law on Cell Phone Radiation
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/4/prweb8298709.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PICK OF THE WEEK 25: REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL MICROWAVE EXPOSURE GUIDELINES FROM 1957 TO 1968.
April 13, 2011. Swanson and colleagues from the International Labour Office (Geneva, Switzerland) and the Bureau of Occupational Safety and Health, Public Health Services (Cincinnati, Ohio) reviewed guidelines for microwave radiation and published their review in the American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, Vol. 31: 623-629 (1970).
Below is some information from this article. My comments appear in square brackets. To convert from mW/cm2 to microW/cm2 multiple by 1000.
United States
1. From 1940s to 1970s the use of microwave emitting equipment had increased considerably.
2. In the United States radio frequencies (RF) from 10 to 10,000 MHz were classified as microwave radiation, while in Europe the range was from 300 to 300,000 MHz. [NOTE: We now use the European range to delineate the microwave part of the radio frequency spectrum.]
3. By 1970, scientists recognized that parts of the body that are unable to dissipate heat are the most vulnerable to microwave radiation. This includes the lens of the eye (cataracts) and the reproductive organs (sterility or degenerative changes).
4. Depth of penetration of radiation into tissue is a function of frequency with greater penetration at lower frequencies.
5. In the United States the first guidelines were established during the Tri-Service conference, held in 1957. Below is a quote about the guidelines:
It was the opinion of those participating in the Conference that there were not sufficient data to determine safe exposure levels for each frequency, or ranges of frequencies, within the microwave region; therefore, a level of 10 mW/cm2 [10,000 microW/cm2] was selected for all frequencies. The U.S. Air Force, in adopting this exposure level in May 1958, applied it to the frequency range of 300 to 30,000 MHz and established it as a maximum permissible exposure level, which could not be exceeded. The only factor considered in this criterion is the power density level. Such factors as time of exposure, ambient environmental temperatures that could have an increased or decreased effect on the body's thermal response, the frequency of the microwave energy, effects of multifrequency exposures, differing sensitivity of various body organs, and effect of air currents on cooling the body are not considered, although they are all recognized as factors that might affect biological response.
[NOTE: It was clear in 1970 that the US guidelines were somewhat arbitrary, were based on thermal effects only, and did not include other factors that influence biological and health consequences. This guideline has since been lowered from 10 to 1 mW/cm2 but is still 100 to 1000 times higher than guidelines in other countries.]
For more information and to download the pdf visit . . .
Dr Magda Havas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The future as Industry Canada sees it.
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ic1.nsf/eng/06096.html
Another member sent this as well, which pertains to the 700 MHz range.
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/info_sht/bdt14.htm
Sharon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this also EHS?
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5607242_mast-cell-activation-syndrome.html
The Role of the Brain and Mast Cells in MCS
http://www.tldp.com/issue/210/roleoftheb.htm
Catherine
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
