Overkill durch Elektrosmog
Starmail - 3. Jul, 19:41
3
Jul
2006
What Happened To Me
Website put together by a young boy age 16 who suffers with electrosensitivity.
http://www.electrosensitivity.co.uk/mystory.htm
Eileen O’Connor
Trustee – EM Radiation Research Trust
http://www.electrosensitivity.co.uk/mystory.htm
Eileen O’Connor
Trustee – EM Radiation Research Trust
Starmail - 3. Jul, 11:57
Limitations of the Interphone study: Cellular Phones, Cordless Phones, and the Risks of Glioma and Meningioma
From Lloyd Morgan:
Commentary: Cellular Phones, Cordless Phones, and the Risks of Glioma and Meningioma (Interphone Study Group, Germany) Schüz et al., American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access published January 27, 2006
This study, similar to all Interphone studies published to date, has several serious problems. For one, its core findings report no risk for glioma or for meningioma from “regular” cellphone use (”regular” use is defined as at least one incoming or outgoing call per week for 6 months or more). Yet, it reports a 2.2-fold risk of glioma after more than 10 years of cellphone use with a 94% confidence that this risk is not due to chance. Also, it found a 1.96-fold risk of high-grade glioma for women from “regular” cellphone use with a 98% confidence. Given the specific problems of the studyæall of which would underestimate the risk of a brain tumoræthese findings are ominous.
Here is a list of the main problems in this study:
1. The definition of a “regular” cellphone user is so minimal that almost all “regular” cellphone users would not be expected to be at risk, even if cellphone use is found to create a very high risk of glioma and meningioma.
As mentioned earlier, regular use as defined by all Interphone studies, is “at least one incoming or outgoing call per week for 6 months or more.” As to longer periods of “regular” cellphone use, this study reported only 14% of the glioma cases and 6% of meningioma cases used a cellphone for 5 years or more; for 10 years or more, the percentages are 3% and 1%, respectively.
To understand that “regular” cellphone use as defined in this study is so minimal that risk ought not to be expected, even if there is a high risk of glioma and meningioma from cellphone use, consider a hypothetical study of smokers and the risk of lung cancer. Would a risk of lung cancer (which is a high risk for smokers) be expected to be found for smokers who had smoked once a week, for 6 months or more with only 12 subjects (3%) smoking for 10 years or more?
2. There is a strong possibility of selection bias. Some 30.5% of controls refused to participate in the study compared to only 4.8% of glioma cases and 4.9% of meningioma cases. If a higher proportion of controls who participatedæcompared to controls who refused participationæused a cellphone, then any risk would be underestimated. This resultæan underestimated riskæseems to be at play in this study.
Some 58% of controls who refused to participate answered a question whether or not they used a cellphone. These groups of non-participating controlsæone of both sexes between the ages of 40 and 59 years of age, and another of men between 30 and 39 years of ageæprovided confirmation that a selection bias problem indeed existed in this study. That is, these non-participating control groups used cellphones less frequently than did the participating control group.
[There were two small exceptions to this selection bias: Controls between 60 and 69 years who refused to participate, and those that did participate, reported a common amount of cellphone use and so did not contribute, one way or the other, to selection bias. This group represents roughly 15% of the total controls. The only non-participating controls that reported higher use of cellphones compared to participating controls were females 30-39 years of age. This would have caused an overestimation of risk among a very small proportion (about 8%) of all the controls.]
3. Substantial funding of this, and all Interphone studies, comes from the cellphone industry with a resultant, but undeclared, conflict-of-interest. Though the study reports that this funding “was governed by agreements that guaranteed complete scientific independence” it seems doubtful that this “guaranteed” “scientific independence” is possible. Researchers’ careers are dependent on receiving research grants. Even with isolation of funding for a specific study from the researchers themselves, the conflict-of-interest in such funding is not resolved. Because the researchers know where the funding has come from, the old adage, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you,” becomes the effective psychological reality (whether conscious or unconscious).
Friedman and Richter explored this concern by reviewing the conflict-of-interest problems found in studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine and The Journal of the American Medical Association during 2001. The paper found a strong association between those studies whose authors had an economic conflict of interest and, as well, reported positive findings (P <0.001, equivalent of greater than a 99.9% confidence). [3]
In the case of cellphone studies, could the findings of these industry-funded studies have a correlation with findings of no harm from cellphone use? It is interesting to note that the Interphone studies, all receiving substantial cellphone industry funding, consistently put forth press releases highlighting the “no risk” findings from cellphone use. But the Hardell et al. studies all independently funded consistently are finding a greater and greater risk from cellphone use with each new study they publish.
References:
1. Hardell et al., Case–control study of the association between the use of cellular and cordless telephones and malignant brain tumors diagnosed during 2000–2003; Environ Res. 2006 Feb;100(2):232-41.
2. Hardell et al., Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on the use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk of benign brain tumors diagnosed during 1997-2003; International Journal of Oncology 28: 508-518, 2006.
3. Friedman and Richter, Relationship between conflicts of interest and research results; J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Jan;19(1):51-6.
Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=509
Commentary: Cellular Phones, Cordless Phones, and the Risks of Glioma and Meningioma (Interphone Study Group, Germany) Schüz et al., American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access published January 27, 2006
This study, similar to all Interphone studies published to date, has several serious problems. For one, its core findings report no risk for glioma or for meningioma from “regular” cellphone use (”regular” use is defined as at least one incoming or outgoing call per week for 6 months or more). Yet, it reports a 2.2-fold risk of glioma after more than 10 years of cellphone use with a 94% confidence that this risk is not due to chance. Also, it found a 1.96-fold risk of high-grade glioma for women from “regular” cellphone use with a 98% confidence. Given the specific problems of the studyæall of which would underestimate the risk of a brain tumoræthese findings are ominous.
Here is a list of the main problems in this study:
1. The definition of a “regular” cellphone user is so minimal that almost all “regular” cellphone users would not be expected to be at risk, even if cellphone use is found to create a very high risk of glioma and meningioma.
As mentioned earlier, regular use as defined by all Interphone studies, is “at least one incoming or outgoing call per week for 6 months or more.” As to longer periods of “regular” cellphone use, this study reported only 14% of the glioma cases and 6% of meningioma cases used a cellphone for 5 years or more; for 10 years or more, the percentages are 3% and 1%, respectively.
To understand that “regular” cellphone use as defined in this study is so minimal that risk ought not to be expected, even if there is a high risk of glioma and meningioma from cellphone use, consider a hypothetical study of smokers and the risk of lung cancer. Would a risk of lung cancer (which is a high risk for smokers) be expected to be found for smokers who had smoked once a week, for 6 months or more with only 12 subjects (3%) smoking for 10 years or more?
2. There is a strong possibility of selection bias. Some 30.5% of controls refused to participate in the study compared to only 4.8% of glioma cases and 4.9% of meningioma cases. If a higher proportion of controls who participatedæcompared to controls who refused participationæused a cellphone, then any risk would be underestimated. This resultæan underestimated riskæseems to be at play in this study.
Some 58% of controls who refused to participate answered a question whether or not they used a cellphone. These groups of non-participating controlsæone of both sexes between the ages of 40 and 59 years of age, and another of men between 30 and 39 years of ageæprovided confirmation that a selection bias problem indeed existed in this study. That is, these non-participating control groups used cellphones less frequently than did the participating control group.
[There were two small exceptions to this selection bias: Controls between 60 and 69 years who refused to participate, and those that did participate, reported a common amount of cellphone use and so did not contribute, one way or the other, to selection bias. This group represents roughly 15% of the total controls. The only non-participating controls that reported higher use of cellphones compared to participating controls were females 30-39 years of age. This would have caused an overestimation of risk among a very small proportion (about 8%) of all the controls.]
3. Substantial funding of this, and all Interphone studies, comes from the cellphone industry with a resultant, but undeclared, conflict-of-interest. Though the study reports that this funding “was governed by agreements that guaranteed complete scientific independence” it seems doubtful that this “guaranteed” “scientific independence” is possible. Researchers’ careers are dependent on receiving research grants. Even with isolation of funding for a specific study from the researchers themselves, the conflict-of-interest in such funding is not resolved. Because the researchers know where the funding has come from, the old adage, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you,” becomes the effective psychological reality (whether conscious or unconscious).
Friedman and Richter explored this concern by reviewing the conflict-of-interest problems found in studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine and The Journal of the American Medical Association during 2001. The paper found a strong association between those studies whose authors had an economic conflict of interest and, as well, reported positive findings (P <0.001, equivalent of greater than a 99.9% confidence). [3]
In the case of cellphone studies, could the findings of these industry-funded studies have a correlation with findings of no harm from cellphone use? It is interesting to note that the Interphone studies, all receiving substantial cellphone industry funding, consistently put forth press releases highlighting the “no risk” findings from cellphone use. But the Hardell et al. studies all independently funded consistently are finding a greater and greater risk from cellphone use with each new study they publish.
References:
1. Hardell et al., Case–control study of the association between the use of cellular and cordless telephones and malignant brain tumors diagnosed during 2000–2003; Environ Res. 2006 Feb;100(2):232-41.
2. Hardell et al., Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on the use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk of benign brain tumors diagnosed during 1997-2003; International Journal of Oncology 28: 508-518, 2006.
3. Friedman and Richter, Relationship between conflicts of interest and research results; J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Jan;19(1):51-6.
Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=509
Starmail - 3. Jul, 09:17
Das Handy macht krank
Bitte wollen Sie meine Handy-Warnung, die vom Bayr. TV stammt, an Ihre Leser weitergeben ?
Siehe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpNT_gSUfDM
Peter Schneider
--------
Die Naila-Mobilfunkstudie
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/283426/
Die Naila-Studie (Präsentation)
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/520963/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Das+Handy+macht+krank
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/3318771/
Siehe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpNT_gSUfDM
Peter Schneider
--------
Die Naila-Mobilfunkstudie
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/283426/
Die Naila-Studie (Präsentation)
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/520963/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Das+Handy+macht+krank
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/3318771/
Starmail - 3. Jul, 08:53
2
Jul
2006
Proposed FPL poles spark health concerns
Posted on Sun, Jul. 02, 2006
North Miami has hired a legal team to fight FPL's plans for high-voltage lines through residential areas of the city, and Mayor Kevin Burns said Gov. Jeb Bush called him to say he `shares our concerns.'
BY TIM HENDERSON
thenderson@MiamiHerald.com
North Miami has hired a Tallahassee law firm to look into legal avenues of fighting FPL's plans to run high-voltage lines through the city's residential areas.
City attorney Lynn Whitfield told the City Council on Tuesday that she expects a report from Nabors Giblin & Nickerson soon. A decision from Florida Power & Light is expected within two weeks on whether to run the lines from Interstate 95 east along 135th Street or 125th and 123rd streets.
Mayor Kevin Burns said he was able to attract the attention of Gov. Jeb Bush, who phoned recently to say he ''shares our concerns,'' Burns said.
''I have to tell you I was shocked when he called my cellphone at 7 o'clock on a Saturday night,'' Burns said.
Residents at Tuesday's meeting said they have health concerns about EMF, or electromagnetic fields, from power lines and electrical appliances.
City Clerk Frank Wolland mentioned a 1996 court case in which former North Miami High School Principal Leonard Glazer sued FPL, claiming EMF from power lines at his Coral Gables homes caused his leukemia. A judge dismissed the case, hearing that most of the measured EMF came from grounded water pipes.
''It came down to a battle of expert testimony and I think FPL just had more money to hire experts,'' Wolland said.
FPL spokeswoman Aletha Player, who attended the meeting, said the link between EMF and disease "is not established.''
The American Cancer Society says ''there is conflicting evidence'' about EMF from high-voltage lines as a risk factor for leukemia, but the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has suggested limiting exposure to EMF when possible. The lines' route has been the subject of controversy since April, when FPL held a series of community meetings in North Miami and neighboring villages to discuss the need to run the high-voltage lines to connect a substation at Northeast 127th Street and 14th Avenue in North Miami, adjacent to the FEC tracks, and a substation at Northwest 93rd Street, between Fifth and Sixth avenues, just east of I-95. FPL says the lines are needed because the area's need has grown.
Concrete poles more than 80 feet tall, about twice as high as traditional power poles, would carry the lines.
After the April meetings in which dozens of possible routes were discussed, many residents in Biscayne Park, Miami Shores and El Portal banded together to keep the poles out of their villages.
The City Council's next meeting is scheduled for July 25, but Burns said a special meeting could be called to handle any developments in the FPL case.
http://tinyurl.com/mspp5
North Miami has hired a legal team to fight FPL's plans for high-voltage lines through residential areas of the city, and Mayor Kevin Burns said Gov. Jeb Bush called him to say he `shares our concerns.'
BY TIM HENDERSON
thenderson@MiamiHerald.com
North Miami has hired a Tallahassee law firm to look into legal avenues of fighting FPL's plans to run high-voltage lines through the city's residential areas.
City attorney Lynn Whitfield told the City Council on Tuesday that she expects a report from Nabors Giblin & Nickerson soon. A decision from Florida Power & Light is expected within two weeks on whether to run the lines from Interstate 95 east along 135th Street or 125th and 123rd streets.
Mayor Kevin Burns said he was able to attract the attention of Gov. Jeb Bush, who phoned recently to say he ''shares our concerns,'' Burns said.
''I have to tell you I was shocked when he called my cellphone at 7 o'clock on a Saturday night,'' Burns said.
Residents at Tuesday's meeting said they have health concerns about EMF, or electromagnetic fields, from power lines and electrical appliances.
City Clerk Frank Wolland mentioned a 1996 court case in which former North Miami High School Principal Leonard Glazer sued FPL, claiming EMF from power lines at his Coral Gables homes caused his leukemia. A judge dismissed the case, hearing that most of the measured EMF came from grounded water pipes.
''It came down to a battle of expert testimony and I think FPL just had more money to hire experts,'' Wolland said.
FPL spokeswoman Aletha Player, who attended the meeting, said the link between EMF and disease "is not established.''
The American Cancer Society says ''there is conflicting evidence'' about EMF from high-voltage lines as a risk factor for leukemia, but the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has suggested limiting exposure to EMF when possible. The lines' route has been the subject of controversy since April, when FPL held a series of community meetings in North Miami and neighboring villages to discuss the need to run the high-voltage lines to connect a substation at Northeast 127th Street and 14th Avenue in North Miami, adjacent to the FEC tracks, and a substation at Northwest 93rd Street, between Fifth and Sixth avenues, just east of I-95. FPL says the lines are needed because the area's need has grown.
Concrete poles more than 80 feet tall, about twice as high as traditional power poles, would carry the lines.
After the April meetings in which dozens of possible routes were discussed, many residents in Biscayne Park, Miami Shores and El Portal banded together to keep the poles out of their villages.
The City Council's next meeting is scheduled for July 25, but Burns said a special meeting could be called to handle any developments in the FPL case.
http://tinyurl.com/mspp5
Starmail - 2. Jul, 18:14
Aufzeichnungen zum 1. Treffen der britischen Electromagnetic Fields Discussion Group
Das erste Treffen der Electromagnetic Fields Discussion Group (EMFDG) hat am 2. März 2006 stattgefunden; an dem von Sir William Stewart geleiteten Meeting haben Schlüsselpersonen der Health Protection Agency (HPA), des Department of Health, der Mobile Operators Association (MOA) sowie Vertreter von Aktionsgruppen teilgenommen. Sir William hat die Diskussionsgruppe aufgefordert, ein Forum zur Verfügung zu stellen, um gesundheitliche Besorgnisse in Verbindung mit der Exposition mit elektromagnetischen Feldern zu berücksichtigen und Eingaben zur Entwicklung der Empfehlungen der HPA bereitzustellen. Die Health Protection Agency erklärt dass der Diskussion Aktionen folgen müssten. Es gebe Verpflichtungen gegenüber elektrosensiblen Menschen, Krebspatienten und vielen anderen Menschen, die an Problemen leiden, die sie mit elektromagnetischen Feldern in Verbindung bringen. Die Aufzeichnungen zu dem Meeting stehen nun auf der HPA-Webseite zur Verfügung. Das 2. Meeting ist für den 16. Oktober 2006 geplant.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/understand/radiation_topics/emf/emfdg/emfdg_minutes_2_3_06.pdf
Aus: FGF-Infoline vom 29.06.2006
Der Forschungsgemeinschaft Funk e.V. (FGF), gehören alle deutschen Mobilfunkbetreiber an.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/understand/radiation_topics/emf/emfdg/emfdg_minutes_2_3_06.pdf
Aus: FGF-Infoline vom 29.06.2006
Der Forschungsgemeinschaft Funk e.V. (FGF), gehören alle deutschen Mobilfunkbetreiber an.
Starmail - 2. Jul, 16:53
Do GSM 900MHz signals affect cerebral blood circulation?
A near-infrared spectrophotometry study Effects of mobile phone type GSM 900MHz signals on the cerebral blood circulation were investigated using near-infrared spectrophotometry in a trial on 16 healthy volunteers. Borderline significant short term responses of oxyhemoglobin and deoxyhemoglobin concentration were observed during exposure, corresponding to a decrease of cerebral blood flow and volume. These were smaller than regular physiological changes and these responses may be spurious and require further study. No dose-response relation or long term response was detected. Bibliographic information: Wolf et al., Optics Express, Vol. 14, No. 13, pp., June 2006, Abstract and Full Publication Text
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-14-13-6128
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-14-13-6128
Starmail - 2. Jul, 15:56
Mobilfunkproblematik an öffentlichen Schulen
Im März dieses Jahres schickten wir der Bildungsdirektorin des Kantons Zürich, einen Brief (ink. 11 Beilagen) mit einigen Anliegen bzw. Forderungen. Unterschrieben wurde der Brief von über 180 Eltern. Gleichzeitig sandten wir der Gesundheitsdirektorin des Kantons Zürich, die Kopie davon mit einem Begleitbrief. Da wir vernetzt sind, haben es Personen aus dem Kanton Luzern und St. Gallen übernommen und die Briefe, angepasst, ihren Behörden geschickt.
Die Idee ist nun, dass auch andere Personen von anderen Kantonen die Briefe für sich anpassen können, damit soviele Behörden wie möglich mit diesem Thema konfrontiert werden und sich damit beschäftigen, bzw. dazu äussern müssen.
Im Anhang sind nun beide Briefe, aber mit gelben Markierungen: Um selber anzupassen oder Infos zum Schreiben.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/bildungsdirektion_version_gaigg.doc
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/bildungsdirekt._gesundheitsdirekt._version_gaigg.doc
Freundliche Grüsse,
Annemarie Jenal Ammann
Die Idee ist nun, dass auch andere Personen von anderen Kantonen die Briefe für sich anpassen können, damit soviele Behörden wie möglich mit diesem Thema konfrontiert werden und sich damit beschäftigen, bzw. dazu äussern müssen.
Im Anhang sind nun beide Briefe, aber mit gelben Markierungen: Um selber anzupassen oder Infos zum Schreiben.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/bildungsdirektion_version_gaigg.doc
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/bildungsdirekt._gesundheitsdirekt._version_gaigg.doc
Freundliche Grüsse,
Annemarie Jenal Ammann
Starmail - 2. Jul, 13:21
Canadian Cancer Society advises on EMFs
While the various cancer organisations in Australia and elsewhere continue to ignore the EMF cancer connection, the Canadian Cancer Society now gives clear advice on the issue. This is an IMPORTANT breakthrough which will be communicated to the many thousands of cancer self-help groups worldwide. With the information that was presented at the recent BEMS conference at Cancun, Mexico (see: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=505 ) the old ICNIRP and WHO assurances of safety are looking a bit irrelevant, to say the least. Perhaps Repacholi was very wise to retire at this time.
Don Maisch
From Robert Riedlinger:
http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,2939,3172_372086__langId-en,00.html
Advice from the Canadian Cancer Society
Electromagnetic fields
Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are invisible lines of force that surround any electrical device. Examples of EMF sources include power lines, electrical appliances and cell phones. Based on current research, a cause and effect relationship between electromagnetic fields and cancer has been neither established nor ruled out.
Precautions that can be taken to limit a person’s exposure to electromagnetic fields include:
Increase the distance between yourself and the EMF source
*The strength of a magnetic field does not depend on how large, complex, powerful or noisy the appliance is. (In fact, the magnetic fields near large appliances are often weaker than those near smaller devices.)
*Stand back from an appliance when it is in use. Magnetic fields from appliances drop off dramatically in strength with increased distance from the source.
*Sit at arm’s length from a computer terminal.
Avoid unnecessary proximity to high EMF sources
*Don’t let children play directly under power lines or on top of power transformers for underground lines.
*Correct any household wiring problems, or update household wiring in an older home.
Reduce time spent within the electromagnetic field
*Turn off the computer monitor and other electrical appliances when not in use.
For more information
Health Canada
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=508
--------
Canadian Cancer Society...suggestions?
In your July 8, 2006 posting of Redaktion you cited - "Canadian Cancer Society advises on EMF's" and I was quite excited about that! However, they NOW appear to be taking a step backwards as they have updated their site as of July 13, 2006 with the addition of the words - "This position is now under review." Like my friend the nurse cited below the easiest option is to deny that this amazing technology could have made her sick or like Disney the lucrativeness of the cell technology is a financial sacrifice they now cannot pass up. The criticism reigned on the CCS by Wendy Mezley obviously made an impact (the CCS site updated at May 19 2006 was just in time for their major fundraising campaign Relay For Life in June - which I did NOT participate in this year), but now are they back paddling? I will continue to watch their site and see how/if their position changes. Perhaps they need a reminder where their obligations lie and who (citizens who generously donate) keeps them in business...or perhaps the CCS is kept in business by the very industry that is causing people to get cancer in the first place. This is a sinister thought, but this would not be the first time people are bribed for personal selfish reasons. Why else did the CCS not tell women that the Pill was implicated in causing breast cancer (July 2005) until Wendy Mezley pointed it out on global television (Mar. 2006)? Pharmaceutical companies and the cell industry benefit beyond measure if agencies like the CCS white wash the truth or hide the facts from the people.
I would like to know why the CCS is now reviewing its position on EMF's and for what purpose. Taking a precautionary stance with regard to EMF's was a step in the right direction. Suggestions as to what we can do?
From: Janice Burns
Subject: Canadian Cancer Society, Disney etc.
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:01:23 -0400
Greetings from Ontario Canada!
The Canadian Cancer Society who APPEARED to finally be taking a stand about EMF’s and advising a precautionary stance as of May 19, 2006, APPEARS to be waffling. They have now added this advisory to the beginning of their page on Prevention dated July 13, 2006 - “THIS POSITION IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW."
http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,3182,3172_372086__langId-en,00.html
I will save a hard copy of this page as well so that I can see how long it takes for the erosion or even removal of this precautionary advice. Below is the original CCS text dated May 19, 2006:
Electromagnetic fields Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are invisible lines of force that surround any electrical device. Examples of EMF sources include power lines, electrical appliances and cell phones. Based on current research, a cause and effect relationship between electromagnetic fields and cancer has been neither established nor ruled out.
Precautions that can be taken to limit a person's exposure to electromagnetic fields include:
·Increase the distance between yourself and the EMF source
· The strength of a magnetic field does not depend on how large, complex, powerful or noisy the appliance is. (In fact, the magnetic fields near large appliances are often weaker than those near smaller devices.)
· Stand back from an appliance when it is in use. Magnetic fields from appliances drop off dramatically in strength with increased distance from the source.
· Sit at arm's length from a computer terminal. Avoid unnecessary proximity to high EMF sources.
· Don't let children play directly under power lines or on top of power transformers for underground lines.
· Correct any household wiring problems, or update household wiring in an older home. Reduce time spent within the electromagnetic field.
· Turn off the computer monitor and other electrical appliances when not in use.
Last modified on: 19 May 2006
I have a friend who is a nurse. She got a brain tumour in the frontal lobe. I learned last year that when she was on-call at night, she would sleep with her cellphone under her pillow so that if there was an emergency at the hospital, an incoming call on the land-line would not disturb her husband. Apparently her doctor (a well known Toronto doctor) has warned her to stay away from “pesticides” as he felt that this was the cause of her tumour. When I told her about the possible connection between cellphone use and brain tumours, she of course thinks that I am misinformed.
As well, in the July 2006 issue of Good Housekeeping magazine published in the U.S. there is a full page Disney advertisement for cell phones, which offers GPS locating of your children. If you as a parent cannot visually see your young children in a mall for instance, a cell phone is not going to keep him or her safe from a predator. This is giving a false sense of security as well as encouraging lax parenting strategies, not to mention possible 24/7 radiation from cellphones.
Janice
--------
Review of ICNIRP EMF exposure guidelines
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2253406/
‘The fight goes on’
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2272126/
Don Maisch
From Robert Riedlinger:
http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,2939,3172_372086__langId-en,00.html
Advice from the Canadian Cancer Society
Electromagnetic fields
Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are invisible lines of force that surround any electrical device. Examples of EMF sources include power lines, electrical appliances and cell phones. Based on current research, a cause and effect relationship between electromagnetic fields and cancer has been neither established nor ruled out.
Precautions that can be taken to limit a person’s exposure to electromagnetic fields include:
Increase the distance between yourself and the EMF source
*The strength of a magnetic field does not depend on how large, complex, powerful or noisy the appliance is. (In fact, the magnetic fields near large appliances are often weaker than those near smaller devices.)
*Stand back from an appliance when it is in use. Magnetic fields from appliances drop off dramatically in strength with increased distance from the source.
*Sit at arm’s length from a computer terminal.
Avoid unnecessary proximity to high EMF sources
*Don’t let children play directly under power lines or on top of power transformers for underground lines.
*Correct any household wiring problems, or update household wiring in an older home.
Reduce time spent within the electromagnetic field
*Turn off the computer monitor and other electrical appliances when not in use.
For more information
Health Canada
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Source: http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=508
--------
Canadian Cancer Society...suggestions?
In your July 8, 2006 posting of Redaktion you cited - "Canadian Cancer Society advises on EMF's" and I was quite excited about that! However, they NOW appear to be taking a step backwards as they have updated their site as of July 13, 2006 with the addition of the words - "This position is now under review." Like my friend the nurse cited below the easiest option is to deny that this amazing technology could have made her sick or like Disney the lucrativeness of the cell technology is a financial sacrifice they now cannot pass up. The criticism reigned on the CCS by Wendy Mezley obviously made an impact (the CCS site updated at May 19 2006 was just in time for their major fundraising campaign Relay For Life in June - which I did NOT participate in this year), but now are they back paddling? I will continue to watch their site and see how/if their position changes. Perhaps they need a reminder where their obligations lie and who (citizens who generously donate) keeps them in business...or perhaps the CCS is kept in business by the very industry that is causing people to get cancer in the first place. This is a sinister thought, but this would not be the first time people are bribed for personal selfish reasons. Why else did the CCS not tell women that the Pill was implicated in causing breast cancer (July 2005) until Wendy Mezley pointed it out on global television (Mar. 2006)? Pharmaceutical companies and the cell industry benefit beyond measure if agencies like the CCS white wash the truth or hide the facts from the people.
I would like to know why the CCS is now reviewing its position on EMF's and for what purpose. Taking a precautionary stance with regard to EMF's was a step in the right direction. Suggestions as to what we can do?
From: Janice Burns
Subject: Canadian Cancer Society, Disney etc.
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:01:23 -0400
Greetings from Ontario Canada!
The Canadian Cancer Society who APPEARED to finally be taking a stand about EMF’s and advising a precautionary stance as of May 19, 2006, APPEARS to be waffling. They have now added this advisory to the beginning of their page on Prevention dated July 13, 2006 - “THIS POSITION IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW."
http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,3182,3172_372086__langId-en,00.html
I will save a hard copy of this page as well so that I can see how long it takes for the erosion or even removal of this precautionary advice. Below is the original CCS text dated May 19, 2006:
Electromagnetic fields Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are invisible lines of force that surround any electrical device. Examples of EMF sources include power lines, electrical appliances and cell phones. Based on current research, a cause and effect relationship between electromagnetic fields and cancer has been neither established nor ruled out.
Precautions that can be taken to limit a person's exposure to electromagnetic fields include:
·Increase the distance between yourself and the EMF source
· The strength of a magnetic field does not depend on how large, complex, powerful or noisy the appliance is. (In fact, the magnetic fields near large appliances are often weaker than those near smaller devices.)
· Stand back from an appliance when it is in use. Magnetic fields from appliances drop off dramatically in strength with increased distance from the source.
· Sit at arm's length from a computer terminal. Avoid unnecessary proximity to high EMF sources.
· Don't let children play directly under power lines or on top of power transformers for underground lines.
· Correct any household wiring problems, or update household wiring in an older home. Reduce time spent within the electromagnetic field.
· Turn off the computer monitor and other electrical appliances when not in use.
Last modified on: 19 May 2006
I have a friend who is a nurse. She got a brain tumour in the frontal lobe. I learned last year that when she was on-call at night, she would sleep with her cellphone under her pillow so that if there was an emergency at the hospital, an incoming call on the land-line would not disturb her husband. Apparently her doctor (a well known Toronto doctor) has warned her to stay away from “pesticides” as he felt that this was the cause of her tumour. When I told her about the possible connection between cellphone use and brain tumours, she of course thinks that I am misinformed.
As well, in the July 2006 issue of Good Housekeeping magazine published in the U.S. there is a full page Disney advertisement for cell phones, which offers GPS locating of your children. If you as a parent cannot visually see your young children in a mall for instance, a cell phone is not going to keep him or her safe from a predator. This is giving a false sense of security as well as encouraging lax parenting strategies, not to mention possible 24/7 radiation from cellphones.
Janice
--------
Review of ICNIRP EMF exposure guidelines
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2253406/
‘The fight goes on’
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2272126/
Starmail - 2. Jul, 08:45
Blair loses ruling in terror case
Throwing down a new challenge to the British government's tactics against terrorism, a High Court judge ruled Wednesday that so-called control orders - a form of house arrest without trial - were incompatible with European human rights laws.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/28/news/brits.php
From Information Clearing House
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/28/news/brits.php
From Information Clearing House
Starmail - 2. Jul, 08:43
