The Sun, 29/6/07

By CORINNE ABRAMS June 29, 2007

WHEN Sarah Dacre started to get headaches, little did she know within four years she’d need foil-lined wallpaper and silver curtains in her house to protect her.

The 51-year-old from London believes she suffers from the condition electrosensitivity.

The mum-of-one says electromagnetic radiation emitted by devices such as mobile phones, TVs, computers and vacuum cleaners led her to develop ME.

Nowadays she can’t even leave the house without a special silver shroud she says blocks out the electromagnetic radiation.

When Sarah started suffering from headaches and nausea she put them down to her hectic lifestyle working as a TV producer.

But within two years her symptoms had escalated so she was suffering from numbness in her right side, had poor eyesight in her right eye, erratic blood pressure readings, insomnia, heart palpitations and was constantly nauseous.

Read More...
http://www.avaate.org/article.php3?id_article=809

--------

I'm allergic to modern life
http://groups.google.com/group/mobilfunk_newsletter/t/ca6c0ff86f22d443



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=sensitiv
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=electromagnetic
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=allergic
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=headache
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=nausea
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=numbness
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=blood+pressure
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=insomnia
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=palpitation
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Sarah+Dacre
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Victims/
http://www.google.de/search?q=I%27m+allergic+to+mobile+phones

Neue Broschüre zur Mobilfunkproblematik !!! Ab Montag lieferbar !!

Dr.med.Wolf Bergmann, Dr.med. Horst Eger

„Mobilfunk – Einwirkungen auf die menschliche Gesundheit – Folgerungen und Forderungen aus ärztlicher Sicht“, 40 Seiten, Illustriert, Preis 5.- Euro

Herausgeber: Bürgerinitiative Mobilfunk Stuttgart West (Verein zum Schutz der Bevölkerung vor Elektrosmog) und Kompetenzinitiative zum Schutz von Mensch, Demokratie und Umwelt.

Bestellung:

Mail: bestellung @aerzte-broschuere.de .

Postalisch: Verein zum Schutz der Bevölkerung vor Elektrosmog, Bismarckstraße 63, 70197 Stuttgart.

Unkontrolliert wächst der Mastenwald. UMTS, WiMAX und jetzt der Polizeifunk TETRA sind nur einige seiner bekanntesten Baumnamen. Die Handydichte liegt bei über 100 %. Selbst das Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, das nicht für übertriebene Sorgen bekannt ist, kritisiert diese „unkontrollierte Exposition“.

Ärzte haben in dieser Situation, die unsere Gesundheit betrifft, eine entscheidende Verantwortung. Zwei verantwortungsbewusste Ärzte haben die hier publik gemachte Broschüre für Kolleginnen und Kollegen, aber auch für interessierte Laien geschrieben. Sie bietet eine Alternative zu industriefinanzierten Ärzteschulungen und ‚Aufklärungsbroschüren’ des Informationszentrums der Mobilfunkindustrie (IZMF), aber auch zu verharmlosenden amtlichen Broschüren.

Biowissenschaften und Medizin haben in Jahrzehnten der Forschung und empirischen Erfahrung ein immer breiteres Wissen über die Wirkung von Mikrowellen erarbeitet.

Dr. med. H. Eger, Arzt und Projektleiter der Naila-Studie, und Dr. med. W. Bergmann, Arzt, Mitinitiator des Freiburger Appells und Dozent an der Universität Freiburg, tragen hier auf knappem Raum zusammen, was an gesundheitlichen Schädigungen gut gesichert ist. Sich dagegen hinter unseriösen Grenzwerten und anachronistischen Vorstellungen von Exaktheit, die auf Bioorganismen am wenigsten übertragbar sind, zu verschanzen, ist medizinisch, wissenschaftlich und politisch gleich verantwortungslos. Beigefügte Tabellen machen den Unterschied von geltenden Grenzwerten und Vorsorgewerten, die von nationalen wie europäischen Gesetzesbestimmungen verlangt würden, bewusst.

Die millionenschwere PR-und Medienlobby der Mobilfunkindustrie hat ein Projekt ‚Mobilfunk und Gesundheit’ etabliert, dass das beunruhigende Wissen entsorgen soll. Zahlreiche für ihre Dienste gut bezahlte Ärzte und Wissenschaftler wirken daran mit, Politiker und selbst Ärztekammern geben ihm ihren Segen. Bürgerinitiativen und eine Fachkompetenz, die ihr Gewissen noch nicht an der Garderobe der Industrie abgegeben hat, sind jedoch dabei, ein Gegengewicht zu solchen Entwicklungen, die sie als moralisch korrupt erfahren, aufzubauen. Sie tun es ohne Millionen im Rücken und oft genug unter hohen finanziellen Risiken und Opfern. Helfen Sie Ihnen, indem Sie sich für diese Broschüre interessieren, sie vielleicht sogar Nachbarn oder Kollegen weitergeben! Vor allem aber gehört diese Broschüre in die Hand verantwortungsbewusster Ärzte. Wir schlagen Bürgern und Bürgerinitiativen deshalb vor, sie vor Ort Ärzten und Gesundheitsbehörden zu überreichen und um eine Stellungnahme zu bitten. Es geht um neue Krankheitsbilder, auf deren Ernstnehmen jeder nach Artikel 2,2 GG ein gesetzliches Recht hat!

Ergänzend zu dieser Broschüre steht ab sofort eine Recherche-Seite im Internet unter

http://www.der-mast-muss-weg.de/150recherche01.htm .

Viele der zitierten und verwendeten Dokumente sind dort als PDFs zum Download verfügbar.


Peter Hensinger


Anhang

Leseprobe
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/lesepro_aerzte_brosch.pdf

Werbetext
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/anschreiben_ae_br.pdf

--------

Freiburger Appell
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/943294/

Naila-Studie
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/291645/



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wolf+Bergmann
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Horst+Eger

http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/mast_victims_stories.htm

--------

Eileen O´Connor´s story
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/eileen_oconnors_story.htm



http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Victims/

http://www.mastsanity.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149&Itemid=129

Statement

On the basis of currently available information, the long-term biological effects of mast emissions are unknown. We note the presence of biologically vulnerable young children in nearby houses and schools. We feel it is therefore potentially medically unsafe for O2 to transmit radiation from the mast being erected in Cambridge Rd, Crosby. Because this is an avoidable potential risk, we advocate that the mast is removed.

The following Doctors endorse this statement:
(Thereunder are 25 doctors' names, including two professors.)

Introduction

This statement is the independent and collective view of a body of local Doctors. It relates specifically to the ongoing work by O2 who are erecting a mobile phone mast in Cambridge Rd, Crosby. By logical extension these views would apply to any similarly placed masts.

Mobile phones are an increasing part of life. They are popular and useful. We are not against this technology. People who use a mobile phone do so by personal choice as indeed the authors of this statement do. With regard to base stations and masts however, locals (especially children) do not have a choice about usage. Therefore those who live or go to school near to a mast are not able to give their informed 'consent' to accepting any potential health risks that may occur.

Mandate Doctors have an ethical responsibility to ensure the health of the local population is not inappropriately compromised. This body of Doctors is specifically concerned about this site as our patients, our children, our friends and our colleagues are affected. We feel able and justified in making this statement due to our independent ability to scientifically evaluate current information. We also have many years of experience in understanding the aetiology (origin) and pathology (disease process) of human illness. We are not constrained by any legal, political or financial matters (which Councils, Phone companies and Politicians may be).

The ethics of 'risk' Risk is part of life. From a medical ethics point of view there are 2 important points relating to this mast issue. Firstly there is the issue of consent to a potential risk. Doctors work under an accepted principle that a risk should only be taken with the agreement of that person. Secondly, there is a general principle that a potential toxin (harmful agent, such as a drug, radiation, or other vector) is properly evaluated before being unleashed on the general public. In relation to this particular mast both of these principles would appear to be broken on the basis of information available (as outlined below).

Current Facts The Stewart Report (2000) has, so far, been the largest report into potential health problems of masts. This report clearly states there is an unknown potential for health risks and recommends a precautionary approach (endorsed by the BMA 2001).

Both the BMA and the Stewart Report confirm that children absorb considerably more radiation into the head. If this fact is added to the consequences of longer lifetime exposure then the BMA state that children are more vulnerable to the effects of radiation.

Current safety guidelines (NRPB and ICNIRP) relate only to the thermal ('microwave heating') effects of the radiation. As this type of radiation will only raise the body temperature by tiny fractions of a degree Celsius they are unlikely to be significant. The potential for non-thermal or biological effects has not yet been fully evaluated hence the precautionary approach has been recommended .The results of ongoing multimillion pound research across the UK and Internationally will not be known for some time.2

A review appeared in The Lancet (Hyland GJ, 2000) outlining potential biological mechanisms for the development of neurological disease, cancers, immune system compromise and cognitive function from this radiation.

In the case of this specific mast in Cambridge Rd the close proximity of a large local population of children and the presence of several local schools is noted. According to the BMA model of mast emissions2 the highest intensity of radiation will be at ground level between approximately 160 and 260m from the mast. It is noted that 3 schools are within this area, all with significant numbers of the most biologically vulnerable under 12 age group (Streatham House, Valewood Primary School and Atherton House). The Stewart Report clearly recommends that the beam of maximum intensity should not fall on any part of school grounds without agreement from schools or parents.

Anecdotally, Sir William Stewart (the author of the Stewart Report) has been quoted in the media as saying masts should not be near to schools and that he would not allow his grandchildren to use a mobile phone for health reasons. Also, several precedents exist regarding the location of masts.

Statement

On the basis of currently available information, the long-term biological effects of mast emissions are unknown. We note the presence of biologically vulnerable young children in nearby houses and schools. We feel it is therefore potentially medically unsafe for O2 to transmit radiation from the mast being erected in Cambridge Rd, Crosby. Because this is an avoidable potential risk, we advocate that the mast is removed.

Sources of Information

1 The Stewart Report 2000 http://www.iegmp.org.uk

2 Mobile Phones and Health, an interim report 2001 (available from BMA library or website

3 Hyland GJ . Physics and Biology of mobile telephony. The Lancet 2000;356:1833-36.

4 Media quotes available from http://www.mastaction.org

Local, National and International Precedents regarding placements of mobile phone masts (available on website http://www.antimast.org )

We tried this link, but it appears to be broken. A search for "antimast" sites revealed several for specific locales, but we have left this in place rather than change the text of someone else's article.


From Mast Sanity



http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/rrt_submissions_22_12_03.pdf
http://www.responsemessaging.com/portal/alias__cw12/lang__en-GB/tabID__3393/DesktopDefault.aspx