WiFi, Mobile phones: Let’s not wait for a catastrophe before taking action
Effects of Electropollution On Hormones and Breast Cancer
Posted by: Dorothee Krien
The Following article appeared in Nexus Magazine, August-September 2007.
Electropollution, Hormones and Cancer
by Sherill Sellman, ND (c) 2007
ElectroPollution, Hormones, and Breast Cancer
I recently read a report in Time Magazine about the drastic increase in the rates of breast cancer around the world. What I found extremely surprising - or not - is the fact that there was no mention of the probable effects of Electromagnetic Radiation on this increase. One wonders - or not - if this was not on purpose! I gave one of my pamplets today to a Chinese woman I work with and her response was "Thank you for the propoganda!" I am not sure if she fully understood the meaning of the word "Propoganda" or not but I replied to her "This in not propoganda. These are facts. What your government tells you is propoganda. What the cell phone companies tell you is propoganda, but this is not propoganda." :)
In the report entitled the BioInitiative, Dr. Martin Blank - of the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University - states very clearly on page 18 of "SECTION 7: Evidence for Stress Response (Stress Proteins) Health Risk of Electromagnetic Fields: Research on the Stress Response":
"An experiment on EMF stimulation of cell growth that has almost disappeared from the EMF literature is the work of Robert Liburdy (Liburdy et al, 1993). He reported that weak 60Hz fields can interfere with the ability to inhibit growth in MCF7 breast cancer cells. This finding has been replicated six times, but the original experiment and its replications have been ignored by many health oriented scientists (Liburdy, 2003), including the recent WHO review (BEMS Supplement 7, 2005). Even breast cancer researchers (e.g., Loberg et al, 1999), who have not been directly involved in the EMF debate, appear to be totally unaware of results showing the ability of weak 60Hz fields to affect cancer cell growth. It is shocking when an EMF research review by a presumably scientifically neutral WHO fails to even mention any of the papers that offers insight into the mechanism of a devastating disease that is so prevalent in the population (Blank and Goodman, 2006). Let us not forget the asymmetry in scientific proof (Popper, 1959), where a single reproducible harmful effect would outweigh all the negative results. The many replications of the Liburdy experiment have given us a crucial finding the question of EMF risk, and they cannot be ignored."
Re: ElectroPollution, Hormones, and Breast Cancer
Looking at breast cancer rates and melanoma rates in different parts of the world clearly shows that there is a common factor. And I don't believe it is excessive sun tanning habits...
Take a look at the graph on p2 of my Newsletter for 2006 Jan-Apr.