George Carlo Interview in London, 22 February 2007
Way to go, George Carlo!
"We understand that these information-carrying radio waves trigger protein membrane responses at the cell membrane level leading to disruption of intercellular communication and build up of free radicals inside the cell [emphasis mine]. This mechanism understanding is very important because it now explains the wide diversity of symptoms that we are seeing in patients who are reporting electrohypersensitivity and also other conditions such as headaches and unexplained anxiety that henceforth from this point forward now we'll know will be associated with these information-carrying radio waves."
Click on
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0222/primetime_av.html?2222251,null,230
"Dr George Carlo, Chairman of the Science and Public Policy Institute, Washington, claims it has new data that indicates that use of mobiles are damaging to humans".
@
http://rte.ie/news/primetime/
Art Kab
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Benjamin Disraeli British politician (1804 - 1881).
--------
Dr Carlo's Presentation
From David and Vivienne Baron
How we saw it.
The Attlee Suite (the largest conference room in Portcullis House) was pretty well full by 3.00 pm, giving an audience of some 150 souls. As has already been reported, only 3-4 MPs bothered to grace us with their presence - a very poor show. Apart from RRT, HESE, Mast Sanity and other like groups and individuals (Barrie Trower included), notable attendees comprised Prof Lawrie Challis, Head of the MTHR, representatives from the HPA, and Mike Dolan of the MOA accompanied by operator representatives (John Collins of O2 amongst them,for example). The media appeared well-represented with 4 video cameras constantly recording and an undefined number of the press seated within the audience.
Dr Carlo gave a very impressive presentation (30 minutes without pause and without a note in sight). He set the scene by expressing his regret that mobile phone use had been introduced without any safety research or considerations. Next, he highlighted his $29M research programme on behalf of the cell phone industry which began in 1993 and ended when the results proved to be at variance with those the industry had predicted. He moved on to fhis work since 2001 which demonstrated EMR breaching the blood/brain barrier and interfering with the efficacy of cells. (As a layman, I bow out at this point.)
He then turned to electro-hypersensitivity which thereafter remained his focus. Whilst he respected the 'research studies' being undertaken in the UK into radiation and any impact it might have on health), he was highly critical of the absence of a clinical intervention research programme involving the medical profession. People were suffering from ill-effect, the symptoms often extreme, with government, scientists and GPs turning a blind eye. He raised the issue of Wifi and was at pains to express in particular his disgust that children should be of, what he called, a 'mass experiment' (use of such technology in schools).
Many people wanted to asked questions during the half-hour allocated. I found this period a disappointment for two reasons. First, the chairman, Dr Ian Gibson MP, resorted to taking several questions and only then inviting Dr Carlo to respond which is not, in my book at least, the appropriate way to conduct a question and answer period (and I have chaired many). This practice was unfair to Carlo and gave him an extremely difficult task; not surprisingly, it resulted in several individuals being denied any answer at all to their questions. Second, some members of the audience took to either 'making a speech' (which regrettably absorbed valuable time) or focused their questions on causal research studies (not Carlo's theme) rather than clinical intervention.
Against the above, I believe that this was a valuable and successful exercise and the RRT is to be congatulated on sponsoring the event. It was marred principally by the lack of MP interest - particularly disappointing given the time and effort several 'Masts' subscribers put in e-mailing Honorable Members and encouraging them to attend. Much now depends upon how the media reports the occasion!
David
Yes, I agree with D. The cellular phones were not tested for safety before being released on the public!! In witholding information from the public, you can be sued! $1,250,000 has gone to plaintiffs (from insurance) in the States. In the USA and in UK, cell phones and wireless telecommunications are NOT registered for safety. There are three distinct effect windows. ELF window where the magnetic part is dominant.
Public Health l. Limit exposure
2. Minimise effects
3. Repair damage As 2.2 billion people now use cell phones, we have to have an alternative structure to wireless - increase fibre optic and decrease wireless. Primary prevention technology then can be applied. Dr. Carlo said that post market registry is essential. Again, he insisted that clinical intervention programme is needed. What was very interesting is his approach to an alternative way of communicating - a fibre option around your property. (This was met with gasps of approval except from one s...t, (probably Collins in the back row - where else?) who said "What about the laws of trespass. It couldn't work!" (Well, we could all tell them a thing or two about trespass - trespass on our welfare, our schools, our health, the devaluation of property, don't get me wound up!) Anyway, there are 7 different class actions and law suits in the US at present. Why? Because Industry KNEW about the dangers and LIED about them. (Someone take that one further - please) A woman named Sheila (no, not Australian, she is American) said that Dr. Carlo had not had published papers and others had, and I was informed later that she worked for the telecoms Industry. Challis was given a platform to put his views forward, and this was so unfair as this was supposed to be Dr. Carlo's presentation. In front of Jasmin and I, Andrew Miller (MP) made it clear that he was on the side of the Industry. Behind us the science reporter from the Telegraph held up Rubin's paper. James Rubin did research at the Mobile Phones Research Unit, New Medical School Building, London - who is (I think) a pyschoanalyst or something along those lines, but he obviously had impressed the Telegraph journalist, who I cornered later and said to him "Who do you think funds Rubin's research?" But from the look the Telegraph guy gave me, Rubins is either his brother in law, or one of his best friends. After all the hard work from Gary, Angie, and others, the lack of interest from the MPs was shameful. Thanks to Eileen for all the effort she had put into this. From my point of view, it was nice to see old friends and to meet new ones, and to put faces to names. Well done, to those who put questions forward, and I cried along with Syvia whose little girl had developed such a terrible rash and was in so much pain because of EMFs. May we all go forward........
Kind regards,
Vivienne
Dear Vivienne and David,
Many thanks for your notes on Thursday's talk. Below you find mine, which will hopefully complete the picture for all those who could not attend, whilst we wait for a complete transcription.
Andrea
Summary of Dr George Carlo’s talk on Thursday 22nd February 2007 at Westminster
1. History of the WTR Programme and the Foundation of the Safe Wireless Initiative
Established in 1993 after congressional hearings following a lawsuit in which the husband of a woman who had died of cancer sued because he was convinced her cancer was attributable to cell phones. Cell phones had not been tested for health effects before being introduced to the market and the cell phone industry was not regulated, due to the prevailing thermal view and based on research about microwave ovens. Congress decided that proper cell phone research was needed. A deal was struck between the FDA and the wireless industry, according to which the industry would fund an extensive research programme with $28.5 million (Wireless Technology Research programme – WTR) in exchange for the industry to remain unregulated.
The WTR programme lasted six years and was controlled by a peer review board from Harvard University.
Dr Carlo mentioned the following points amongst the findings:
- Near field radiation causes a leakage in the blood brain barrier
- Genotoxic effects were found at non thermal levels of exposure
- A doubling of the risk of neuroepithelial tumours was found
When presented with the research findings, the FDA claimed the evidence was not strong enough to justify action.
I did not get the details about the lawsuit (was it against Industry who had used Dr Carlo as an expert witness or was it against Dr Carlo himself?) I understood that there was an out of court settlement in which two individuals were paid half a million dollar each and the remaining $250000 left over from the WTR budget were used to found the Safe Wireless Initiative, which is one project within the wider framework of the Science and Public Policy Institute founded by Dr. Carlo in 1994 to advancing scientific and policy debate in the public health arena.
The SWI was created to establish a post market surveillance registry to develop practical solutions and save lives.
2. Scientific background:
Dr Carlo described the three effect windows of the electromagnetic spectrum:
- Lower part of the spectrum: ELFs - the mechanism of harm is a direct magnetic effect. There is believed to be a threshold below which there is no ill effect suffered.
- Higher part port oft spectrum: ionising radiation – the mechanism of harm is a breakage of chemical bonds due to the high energy carried by the wave. There is also believed to be a threshold below which there is no harm (since we are all naturally exposed to cosmic radiation of this type and have evolved to withstand it).
- The window in between the above: radiofrequency radiation:
Dr Carlo claims that a simple unmodulated wave in this part of the spectrum is not able to cause harm since it’s not recognised by biological tissue. Only when modulated to carry information, these waves are recognised.
He explained the mechanism as follows:
Information carrying RF waves trigger the protein vibrational receptors on the cell membrane. These receptors recognise the information as an enemy of the cell (foreign invader) which leads to a series of biochemical reactions within 30 seconds of the trigger:
Cell membranes become less permeable. This leads to a loss of communication between cells.
Nutrients cannot get in, waste cannot get out. Free radical levels within the cell rise.
Specific types of damage occur inside the cell. The increased free-radical concentration leads to both disruption of DNA repair (micronuclei) and mitochondrial dysfunction, leading in turn to complete malfunctioning of the cell. Thus, next time such a compromised cell undergoes cell division (mitosis), the compromised DNA is replicated. The new cells will always react as if under stress even if the original stressor is no longer present. This could be one basis for the triggering of electrohypersensitivity.
When cells undergo apoptosis (programmed cell death), which is nature’s way to eliminate damaged cells, the micronuclei formed from the disrupted DNA repair are released into nutrient rich interstitial (intracellular) fluid and they are free to clone and proliferate -- that is the most likely cancer mechanism.
Specific damage occurs to proteins on the cell membrane -- the effect is that intercellular communication is compromised. Cells can't talk to each other and that damages tissue, organ and organism function. Overall, almost all of the acute and chronic symptoms seen in electrosensitive patients can be explained in some part by disrupted intercellular communication.
These mechanisms explain the wide scope of problems we observe following EMR exposure -- from learning and sleep disorders to birth defects and cancer. The interventive effect occurs at the cellular level, but it is manifested at the tissue, organ and organism levels
There is no threshold below which these effects do not occur.
3. Solutions offered by the Safe Wireless Initiative:
Based on the above information, the SWI is proposing the following interventions, following the
Public Health Paradigm:
* Primary intervention: Eliminate exposure, e.g. by shielding, avoiding exposure where possible and by using technologies that act to prevent the cell membrane protective response from being inappropriately triggered. These act on the "cause" of the problems and include: headsets, active noise field technology and passive noise field technologies.
* Secondary intervention: support the exposed biological system, e.g. by using technologies are those that act to restore intercellular communication and thus can ameliorate the "effects" of the exposure to EMR. These are most effective in conjunction with primary interventions and include: subtle energy technologies, diodes, and some pendants.
* Tertiary intervention: reverse ill effects, e.g. by using technologies that act to rehabilitate and correct cell damage. These work only in conjunction with primary and secondary intervention technologies and include: nutritionals, anti-oxidants and repair supplements
The SWI have established a registry with tens of thousands of cases with clinical data. They also have established a programme to communicate the knowledge gained from their clinical data database to the medical profession. (Andrea’s note: if you want to know more, look up the CERSA program on this link
http://www.safewireless.org/Default.aspx?tabid=209 )
SWI’s mission is not to engage in scientific debate, but rather to offer practical solutions now.
Dr Carlo stressed that it would be an important part of the solution to the problem to revert to using fibre optic spines. This could reduce exposure by 90%. He also condemned wifi in schools.
4. Autism Link:
Dr Carlo announced that in 45 days, he would be publishing a study on the link between autism, mercury poisoning and EMFs.
He mentioned his research with autistic children whose condition improved considerably when living in an EMF free environment whilst having the mercury cleared out by chelation.
5. Conclusions for the UK
Dr Carlo identified a lack of and urgent need for a postmarket surveillance system to be established to collect clinical data. Primary care givers need to be alerted to the situation and trained to recognise and treat the symptoms.
Dr. Carlo's presentation
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/dr._george_carlo_notes_on_westminster_address_1.doc
Dr. Carlo made it very clear that we should be changing to fibre optice, as they communicare just as efficiently as the present set up without damaging our health and the environmnent.
He also ended my problem of, 'How can EMR cause so many different health problems?" Of course! If it damages our cells, it's bound to affect everything! The whole system would be compromised. Roll on Fibre optics.
Kind regards,
Gill
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
--------
Dr. George Carlo in the English Parliament
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/3280721/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Carlo
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=electrohypersensitivity
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=autism
