Sunday, June 6, 2010

Microwaves Bombard Us All / Health Risks From Wireless Technologies / EMF testing in Ireland / The British Library fails Wi Fi Test

W.E.E.P. News

Wireless Electrical and Electromagnetic Pollution News

7 June 2010

Microwaves Bombard Us All

June 4th, 2010

78050290Are you getting "nuked" without knowing it?

The kind of radiation in your microwave oven isn't limited to the kitchen anymore.

Broadcast and cell phone antennas, DECT cordless and mobile phones, wireless (baby monitors, Bluetooth devices, computer keyboards and mice, doorbells, headphones and speakers, even thermometers), and "Smart" power systems all emit unprecedented amounts of microwaves—many of them, 24/7.

Recent research by Magda Havas, PhD, associate professor of Environmental & Resource Studies at Trent University, finds—unequivocally—that the frequencies emitted by WiFi routers and microwave ovens adversely affect the heart, a bioelectrical organ, at levels far below those permitted by current federal safety guidelines.

A recent Swedish study in Environmental Health Perspectives shows that the strongest microwave effects from mobile phones occur in human stem cells—critical cellular targets for the origin of cancers including both leukemia and tumors.

Because almost all organs and tissues possess stem cells and because stem cells are more active in children, as this study finds, microwave exposure is a potentially deadly source of cancer.

"All cells involved with active division are affected by extremely low frequency ranges, as well as by the microwave band," explains investigative journalist B. Blake Leavitt. Both of these frequencies speed cell division—like runaway cell growth in cancer. And other research provides evidence that this kind of radiation interferes with DNA repair.

We're not just talking cancer here.

Polish scientists have discovered a growing number of subtle symptoms—including brain fog, dizziness, headaches, insomnia, nausea, and vision problems—to emissions "generally well below the recommended exposure limits" and "certainly far below those known to produce adverse effects." For instance, a 50-year-old woman suffered insomnia for years because of a wireless router in her bedroom. Once it was removed, however, she slept soundly through the night—almost immediately!

Dr. Ann Louise's Take:

From my vantage point as a nutritionist, I've been warning against the use of microwave ovens for decades. Not only do they all "leak" some degree of unwanted radiation, but also they don't cook evenly or thoroughly enough to kill pathogens and parasites. Even worse from a nutritional standpoint, several studies show that microwaving reduces antioxidants, vitamin B12, and other protective substances in foods.

No wonder, then, that a Swiss study comparing blood samples of people consuming microwaved- versus conventionally-cooked foods found many detrimental changes among those consuming microwaved meals. Not only were microwave users' cholesterol levels higher, but immune factors plus hemocrit and hemoglobin values were also different—suggesting trends toward anemia and immune dysfunction—after just two months!

That being said, the electromagnetic radiation from microwaving in your kitchen or the office lunchroom pales in comparison to the overwhelming electropollution to which we are being exposed today. Americans are currently being bombarded by billions of artificial frequencies and wavelengths never before known to humans.

The closer we are to microwave and wireless devices—and the longer we're exposed—the greater the risk. And those risks increase dramatically for the young whose brains are still developing.

Belgian research finds that indoor exposure to EMFs from microwaves and wireless can be higher than outdoor exposure—due to growing dependence on wireless everywhere from offices, public buildings, cafes, malls, schools, hotels, motels, and our own homes. In fact, Swiss scientists find airports and trains are the highest in terms of exposure to this kind of radiation.

Protect Yourself and Your Family

"Personally, I don't use WiFi at home," says EMF expert and activist Camilla Rees. "Wired connections, such as cable or fiber optics, are much safer, while also being much faster."

Whatever you decide, do keep in mind that the younger children are, the greater their risk, because of their thinner skulls. Here's what you can do on the homefront, right now, today:

• Move the baby monitor at least 6 feet away from your child's crib.

• Look for an older, used monitor with an antenna about 6 inches long—rather than the newer versions with the stubby half-inch antennas that operate like a cordless phone or WiFi.

• Buy routers and printers that don't even have wireless capacity so they don't constantly put out a signal looking for a connection.

I've personally found several useful detectors—no single piece of equipment does it all—for identifying radiation emissions in my own home. You'll find an EMF Product Guide on These include the Trifield Meter, which offers fast, reliable measurements of microwave and other forms of EMFs, or the eSmog Scout, which convert signals directly into sounds making it very easy to "hear" the frequencies. In addition, the Ultra Low EMF Telephone is a great solution for your home or office as it produces none of the microwaves or other EMFs found in cell and cordless phones.

Also, eat plenty of brightly colored fruits and veggies, rich in antioxidants and protective minerals to fight emissions that target your cells. Oxi-Key provides antoxidant enzymes that neutralize free radicals created by radiation-induced oxidative stress.

Take Action

"Existing safety standards are obsolete," write researchers Cindy Sage and David Carpenter, MD, MPH, in the journal Pathophysiology, because they're based solely on heat (or thermal) impact, rather than biological effects. "The rapidly expanding development of wireless technologies and the long latency for the development of such serious disease as brain cancer means that failure to take immediate action to reduce risk may result in an epidemic of potentially fatal diseases in the future."

We all need to take action to protect ourselves—and generations to come. "It was a tremendous failure of governments to allow a trillion-dollar wireless communications industry to emerge without pre-market health testing, especially when biological effects were well-known to the military going back almost half a century," says Rees.

While many unanswered questions remain, "the cost of doing nothing will result in an increasing number of people, many of them young, developing cancer," adds Dr. Carpenter. Ask Congress to take corrective action by signing the EMF Petition at


Health Risks From Wireless Technologies

by author Jeffry Fawcett, PhD

Suppose several hundred marine biologists were to study your swimming pool. A reasonable percentage of them report that you've got sharks in your pool. Would you dive in? Would you let your kids swim in the pool? According to European reports, cellphone radiation may be the shark in the water, and it is endangering our health.

Radio frequency radiation –the kind of radiation we're exposed to from sources such as cellphones, cellphone antennas, cordless phones, wireless routers, and other wireless technologies such as the iPhone–may have biological and health effects. Of the hundreds of studies conducted, 47 percent found increased cancer risks, 69 percent found disruptions to cell function, 77 percent found disruptions to electrical signalling in the body, and 83 percent found neurological, physiological, and behavioural effects.

No Proof of a Problem

This evidence has not convinced the major health agencies in North America to take action. In fact, the North American governments continue to reassure consumers: Health Canada says, "There is currently no convincing evidence, from animal or human studies, that the energy from cellphones is enough to cause serious health effects."

Yet a survey by the European Union Commission found that most Europeans believe cellphones and cellphone antennas damage health. Most Europeans also reported feeling properly informed on these issues by health agencies and the businesses that provide wireless technologies.

At about the same time, two events reinforced these concerns. As with the European Commission survey, these events were covered extensively by the European media but not at all in the North American media.

WiFi in British Schools

The first event was a BBC television news program broadcast in May 2007 that reported on schools with wireless networks. The program claimed that children in those schools are exposed to radiation up to three times the intensity generated by a cellphone antenna. The program prompted Sir William Stewart, head of the UK Health Protection Agency, along with the UK's Professional Association of Teachers, to call for an immediate moratorium. Some schools dropped plans to install wireless networks. Others initiated plans to remove wireless networks.

Health risks exposed

The second event to bring attention to wireless health risks was the release of the BioInitiative Report in August 2007. An international group of leading scientists formed the BioInitiative Working Group to summarize what is known about wireless health risks and to examine the inadequacies of current standards in light of that evidence.

The BioInitiative Working Group found significant evidence of harm: cancer (including childhood leukemia), nerve and brain damage, DNA damage, increased stress response, and decreased immune response. All of these effects were found at levels of radiation well below the current standards.

Almost immediately upon the report's release, the European Environment Agency called for action to establish appropriate levels of exposure to minimize risk.

Reasonable Evidence of Harm

Why is the European Environment Agency ready to act while Health Canada and the US Food and Drug Administration are not?

The answer lies in the fact that Europe has a much stronger public health tradition than Canada and especially the United States. Those who reassure us that wireless technologies are safe say that a strong scientific consensus must be reached before they take action. In contrast, the public health approach taken by the European Environment Agency is to take action when there's reasonable evidence of harm.

If you have reasonable evidence of sharks in your swimming pool, do you protect yourself? Or do you and your kids wait for scientific certainty as you dive in?

Jeffry Fawcett has a PhD in environmental economics and political economy. He is a writer and health educator, president of the Sustainable Health Institute (, and co-producer of the Your Own Health and Fitness radio show.

Source: alive #306, April 2008

Submitted by Robert


EMF testing in Ireland

Hello Fellow Ginnea Pigs,

The following is the government's brief on allowing EMF testing in Ireland. Unlike other government departments, the Commission for Communications Regulatoion, is not regulating, but touting for business in Ireland as a testing centre.

Secondly - and perhaps more importantly - I've been told that last Aug. / Sept. a nationwide audit was conducted of frequencies are in use, indicating the government did not fully know. It also presupposed that operators told the whole truth. 

Finally, regarding Ericsson's testing in Ireland, how would you like to be microwaved by a passing taxi or white van? They may find that the equipment works but how many innocent people going about their business are being microwaved? The testers don't care because their tests are "approved" and existing diminishing health resources are not able to pinpoint the cause because the vans are long gone and no one was watching to connect the test with the victim.

Irish Times

Mobile broadband gathers speed

Silicon Republic

Ericsson trials high-def TV over mobile broadband


Kind regards,

John Weigel


Hi All

The item below is from the British Library website.  The information about health risks is wrong, it is false!

You would expect that the British Library would have access to a few books and a few scientific documents, so why have they missed all the evidence which shows that microwave radiation, as transmitted and received by Wi Fi has many serious health effects.

Shame on the British Library for its lack of proper investigation and providing dangerous misleading information.  Shame on the HPA for lying to the public.

Martin Weatherall

Wi-Fi - Frequently asked questions

1. What exactly is Wi-Fi?
Wi-Fi is the popular term for the technology that allows computing devices to connect to data networks without a physical cable, using radio waves instead.

2. Is Wi-Fi secure?
Using Wi-Fi with securely configured software and hardware is low risk. Users should enable personal firewall software or features on their device, run antivirus software where appropriate, and keep their operating system software up-to-date (all of which is also true for wired connections).

3. Are there any health risks associated with the use of Wi-Fi?
The UK Health Protection Agency offers the following advice regarding Wi-Fi networks at the time of writing:

"On the basis of current scientific information, exposures from Wi-Fi equipment satisfy international guidelines. There is no consistent evidence of health effects from RF exposures below guideline levels and no reason why schools and others should not use Wi-Fi equipment. Based on current knowledge, RF exposures from Wi-Fi are likely to be lower than those from mobile phones."

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