http://www.omega-news.info/microwave_dangerous.htm



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Microwave

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Microwave+Cooking

By Stephanie Relfe B.Sc. (Syd.)

Microwave cooking is one of the most important causes of ill health. It is certainly one of the most ignored.

There was a lawsuit in 1991 in Oklahoma. A woman named Norma Levitt had hip surgery, but was killed by a simple blood transfusion when a nurse "warmed the blood for the transfusion in a microwave oven!"

Logic suggests that if heating is all there is to microwave cooking, then it doesn't matter how something is heated. Blood for transfusions is routinely warmed, but not in microwave ovens. Does it not therefore follow that microwaving cooking does something quite different?

A little evidence of the harm caused by microwaving cooking was given by the University of Minnesota in a radio announcement:

"Microwaves ... are not recommended for heating a baby's bottle. The bottle may seem cool to the touch, but the liquid inside may become extremely hot and could burn the baby's mouth and throat... Heating the bottle in a microwave can cause slight changes in the milk. In infant formulas, there may be a loss of some vitamins. In expressed breast milk, some protective properties may be destroyed.... Warming a bottle by holding it under tap water or by setting it in a bowl of warm water, then testing it on your wrist before feeding, may take a few minutes longer, but it is much safer".

There have been very few scientific studies done on the effect of eating food microwaved food. This is rather surprising when you think about the fact that microwaves have been with us for only a few decades - and that in that time the incidence of many diseases has continued to increase.

Two researchers, Blanc and Hertel, confirmed that microwave cooking significantly changes food nutrients. Hertel previously worked as a food scientist for several years with one of the major Swiss food companies. He was fired from his job for questioning procedures in processing food because they denatured it. He got together with Blanc of the Swiss Federal Institute of Biochemistry and the University Institute for Biochemistry.

They studied the effect that microwaved food had on eight individuals, by taking blood samples immediately after eating. They found that after eating microwaved food, haemoglobin levels decreased. "These results show anaemic tendencies. The situation became even more pronounced during the second month of the study".

Who knows what results they would have found if they had studied people who ate microwaved food for a year or more?

The violent change that microwaving causes to the food molecules forms new life forms called radiolytic compounds. These are mutations that are unknown in the natural world. Ordinary cooking also causes the formation of some radiolytic compounds (which is no doubt one reason why it is better to eat plenty of raw food), but microwaving cooking causes a much greater number. This then causes deterioration in your blood and immune system.

In addition, they found that the number of leucocytes increases after eating microwaved food - something which haematologists take very seriously, because this is often a sign of highly harmful effects, such as poisoning.

Also, after eating microwaved food, cholesterol levels increased. Hertel said "Common scientific belief states that cholesterol values usually alter slowly over longer periods of time. In this study, the markers increased rapidly after the consumption of the microwaved vegetables." He believes his study tends to confirm new scientific data that suggest cholesterol may rapidly increase in the blood secondary to acute stress. "Also," he added, "blood cholesterol levels are less influenced by cholesterol content of food than by stress factors. Such stress-causing factors can apparently consist of foods which contain virtually no cholesterol - the microwaved vegetables."

The results were published in "Search for Health" in the Spring of 1992. How was this research greeted? A powerful trade organisation, the Swiss Association of Dealers for Electroapparatuses for Households and Industry somehow made the President of the Court of Seftigen issue a `gag order'. Hertel and Blanc were told that if they published their findings they would face hefty fines or up to one year in prison. In response to this, Blanc recanted his findings. Hertel, on the other hand, went on a lecture tour and demanded a jury trial.

FINALLY, in 1998 the Court `Gag Order' was removed. In a judgment delivered at Strasbourg on 25 August 1998 in the case of Hertel v. Switzerland, the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Hertel's rights in the 1993 decision. The Court decided that the `gag order' prohibiting him form declaring that microwaved food is dangerous to health was contrary to the right to freedom of expression. In addition, Switzerland was sentenced to pay compensation of F40,000.

In Summary: Blanc and Hertel found that eating microwaved food:

* Increases cholesterol
* Increases white blood cell numbers
* Decreases red blood cell numbers
* Causes production of radiolytic compounds (compounds unknown in nature)

RUSSIANS BAN MICROWAVE OVENS

After the World War II, the Russians also experimented with microwave ovens. From 1957 up to recently, their research has been carried out mainly at the Institute of Radio Technology at Klinsk, Byelorussia. According to US researcher William Kopp, who gathered much of the results of Russian and German research - and was apparently prosecuted for doing so (J. Nat. Sci, 1998; 1:42-3) - the following effects were observed by Russian forensic teams:

1. Heating prepared meats in a microwave sufficiently for human consumption created:

* d-Nitrosodiethanolamine (a well-known cancer-causing agent)
* Destabilization of active protein biomolecular compounds
* Creation of a binding effect to radioactivity in the atmosphere
* Creation of cancer-causing agents within protein-hydrosylate compounds in milk and cereal grains;

2. Microwave emissions also caused alteration in the catabolic
(breakdown) behavior of glucoside - and galactoside - elements within frozen fruits when thawed in this way;

3. Microwaves altered catabolic behavior of plant-alkaloids when raw, cooked or frozen vegetables were exposed for even very short periods;

4. Cancer-causing free radicals were formed within certain trace-mineral molecular formations in plant substances, especially in raw root vegetables;

5. Ingestion of micro-waved foods caused a higher percentage of cancerous cells in blood;

6. Due to chemical alterations within food substances, malfunctions occurred in the lymphatic system, causing degeneration of the immune system=s capacity to protect itself against cancerous growth;

7. The unstable catabolism of micro-waved foods altered their elemental food substances, leading to disorders in the digestive system;

8. Those ingesting micro-waved foods showed a statistically higher incidence of stomach and intestinal cancers, plus a general degeneration of peripheral cellular tissues with a gradual breakdown of digestive and excretory system function;

9. Microwave exposure caused significant decreases in the nutritional value of all foods studied, particularly:

* A decrease in the bioavailability of B-complex vitamins, vitamin C, vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotrophics

* Destruction of the nutritional value of nucleoproteins in meats

* Lowering of the metabolic activity of alkaloids, glucosides, galactosides and nitrilosides (all basic plant substances in fruits and vegetables)

* Marked acceleration of structural disintegration in all foods.

As a result microwave ovens were banned in Russia in 1976; the ban was lifted after Perestroika.

Standing in front of a microwave is also highly damaging to your health. Perhaps you have already felt this intuitively? We know that cells explode in the microwave - just fry an egg in your microwave. We are made up of trillions of cells. So work out how many are getting damaged if you stand in front of your microwave for 5-10 minutes.

In the past I had been told that it was important for people to stop eating microwaved food, but I did not pay too much attention to this because I had been microwave cooking for years. I never thought much about it but I suppose that I figured that if something was so bad for us, then there wouldn't be so many people using it. Little did I know.

When I first began seeing clients for sessions of kinesiology, I did not worry too much about telling them to give up eating microwaved food. However, I kept a record of all of the corrections that were needed for each client when they came in. Now, once a correction is made, it is to be hoped that the correction will stay in place for a long time to come, hopefully months if not years. People often ask me "How long will it last?" May answer to them is "That depends on your lifestyle".

Most of my clients came back to see me after about two weeks. In the early days I found that many who came back were not much better. I found that they were again `out of balance'. That is, their electrical circuits were not working correctly (which is common for many people). It was therefore not surprising that they were not much better, because the body does not begin to fully fix itself until the electrical circuits are in balance.

The question was, why did their electrical circuits go out of balance? The answer had to be something that was highly stressful, to effect the body in such a short space of time. Once that answer was remedied, the client would begin to get better. Using muscle testing, I went through the process of testing if the cause was electrical, chemical/nutritional, emotional or structural. Again and again the same answer would come up - electrical. When I then went through a range of possible electrical causes, the same answer again came up again and again - the person had eaten microwaved food! Incidentally, this answer never came up when a person had NOT eaten microwaved food.

I began to tell all of my clients on the first visit that under NO circumstances were they ever to do microwaved cooking again. I gave this a higher priority than any of things that are normally considered as health risks, such as cigarettes or alcohol. Immediately I began to get a marked improvement in the results I was getting. Long term problems such as headaches, back aches and emotional instability went away within a few weeks.

Other kinesiologists can confirm these results. David Bridgman, who has years of experience as a kinesiologist, said "Of all the people I test for allergies, 99.9% so far show severe sensitivity to any microwaved food".

I experienced the effect of eating microwaved food for myself one time. I had been doing quite a lot of kinesiology and feeling on top of the world when for no apparent reason I began to feel rather `grey' and rather low. I realised that I needed a balance from a kinesiologist. Sure enough, I was out of balance. When the kinesiologist used muscle testing to see why my body had gone out of balance, the answer came up ... microwaved food! The trouble was, I couldn't remember eating any. Until I remembered a particular vegetarian restaurant I had been to. When I went back to the restaurant and asked them if they microwaved their food, they told me that they did.

So be warned! Many restaurants use microwaved cooking, even `health' restaurants. Ask if the "steamed vegetables" are in fact steamed - or are they microwaved? I have sent meals back when they have not been what they were described on the menu, much to the surprise of the restaurant owners.

MICROWAVED PLASTIC WRAP HAS 10,000,000 TIMES FDA LIMITS OF CARCINOGENS!

From: doug@d-w-m.com

Sent to me by a reader: Hello Folks. Hopefully all of you are already well enough informed so as to avoid the use of a microwave oven due to the many detrimental effects consuming microwaved food has upon our health, but "just in case", here is some interesting info sent to me by Ron Scanlon -- many thanks, Ron! Cheers, Doug

University of California, Davis Medical Center 2315 Stockton Boulevard, Sacramento, California 95817

As a seventh grade student, Claire Nelson learned that di(ethylhexyl)adepate (DEHA), considered a carcinogen, is found in plastic wrap. She also learned that the FDA had never studied the effect of microwave cooking on plastic-wrapped food. Three years later, with encouragement from her high school science teacher, Claire set out to test what the FDA had not.

Although she had an idea for studying the effect of microwave radiation on plastic wrapped food, she did not have the equipment. Eventually, Dr. Jon Wilkes at the National Center for Toxicological Research agreed to help her. The research center, which is affiliated with the FDA, let her use its facilities to perform her experiments, which involved microwaving plastic wrap in virgin olive oil.

Claire tested four different plastic wraps and "found not just the carcinogens but also xenoestrogen was migrating [into the oil]...." Xenoestrogens are linked to low sperm counts in men and to breast cancer in women. Throughout her junior and senior years, Claire made a couple of trips each week to the research center, which was 25 miles from her home, to work on her experiment. An article in Options reported "her analysis found that DEHA was migrating into the oil at between 200 parts and 500 parts per million. The FDA standard is 0.05 parts per billion."

Her summarized results have been published in science journals. Claire Nelson received the American Chemical Society's top science prize for students during her junior year and fourth place at the International Science and Engineering Fair (Fort Worth,Texas) as a senior. "Carcinogens --At 10,000,000 Times FDA Limits" Options, May 2000. Published by People Against Cancer, 515-972-4444

http://www.relfe.com/microwave.html


Informant: beefree

--------

Microwaved Water
http://omega-news.livejournal.com/216498.html

Microwave oven info
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/491151/



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=microwave
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Mikrowellen/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Microwave+Cooking

Mehrmals stand die Gefahr unmittelbar bevor: Im November 2003 musste eine Maschine der deutschen Frachtfirma DHL notlanden, als sie in Bagdad nach dem Start von einer Rakete getroffen wurde. Ein Jahr zuvor entkamen die 271 Passagiere der israelischen Fluggesellschaft Arkia nur um Haaresbreite im kenianischen Mombasa einer Katastrophe, weil die Terroristen mit ihren Geschossen offenbar nicht richtig zielen konnten.

HB DÜSSELDORF. Sicherheitsexperten sind sich einig: Die Bedrohung ziviler Flugzeuge durch mobile, von der Schulter abgefeuerte Flugabwehrraketen ("Manpads") steigt. Schätzungen gehen davon aus, dass weltweit bis zu 30 extremistische Vereinigungen über diese Boden-Luft-Raketen verfügen. Völlig offen ist bislang, ob und wie sich die zivile Luftfahrt vor dieser Bedrohung schützen kann.

Die Rüstungsindustrie forscht deshalb an einer Reihe von Technologien. Dahinter steht auch politischer Druck: Die US-Heimatschutzbehörde hat Firmen wie Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems oder Raytheon beauftragt, die militärischen Raketenabwehrsysteme auf ihre zivile Tauglichkeit zu testen und neue Lösungen zu erforschen. Ziel der Regierung ist es, die knapp 7 000 US-Passagierflugzeuge gegen die Manpads zu schützen. Pikant daran: Konzerne wie Raytheon sind auch die führenden Hersteller der mobilen Raketenwaffen.

Dafür gilt ein Konzept von Raytheon gegen die eigenen Produkte als vielversprechend. Infrarotsensoren am Boden schaffen einen "Schutzraum" über dem Flughafen, der das Eindringen einer Rakete in den Start- und Lande-Luftraum meldet. Eine Maschine in Reiseflughöhe ist für die kleinen Raketen zu hoch. Kern des Konzepts ist eine Anlage, die dann gezielte Hochleistungs-Mikrowellen zur Ablenkung der Raketen erzeugt. Der Clou daran: Nicht hunderte Flugzeuge werden mit der Raketenabwehr ausgerüstet, sondern nur die Flughäfen.

Selbst Wettbewerber von Raytheon sehen das Potenzial des Konzepts. Doch auf der praktischen Ebene sind noch Fragen offen, zum Beispiel die der Wirkung der Mikrowellen auf die sensible Elektronik anderer Flugzeuge. "Wenn schon ein Handy an Bord eine Gefahr darstellt, wie steht es dann mit elektromagnetischen Feldern?", fragt Sascha Lange, Rüstungsexperte bei der Stiftung für Wissenschaft und Politik. Auch müssen die Sensoren bei großen Flughäfen ein riesiges Gebiet abdecken: 40 Kilometer Ausdehnung am Boden und eine Höhe bis zu 10 000 Meter - dafür wäre eine sehr hohe Anzahl vonnöten.

Weil die Flughafensicherung noch Zukunftsmusik ist, kreist die aktuelle Diskussion vor allem um Abwehrsysteme, die sich im Flugzeug selbst installieren lassen. Derzeit stehen mehrere militärische Technologien zu Verfügung: Die gängigste sind so genannte Fackeln ("Flares"), die im Fall eines Angriffs mit einer Rakete vom Flugzeug abgeworfen werden und das mit einem Infrarotsuchkopf ausgerüstete Geschoss verwirren. Einem ähnlichen Prinzip folgt der "Laser Jammer": Ein Laser-Spektrum erfasst den Sucher der Rakete und lenkt sie ab.

Auf die Zerstörung der Rakete zielt hingegen der Einsatz von Hochenergielasern. Tests in den USA haben gezeigt, dass diese sogar in der Lage sind, Artilleriegeschosse abzufangen. Sie könnten auch moderne Manpads, deren Sensoren sich ebenfalls weiterentwickeln, bekämpfen. Doch die Laserwaffen sind noch weit von der Marktreife entfernt.

Was sich in der militärischen Forschung oder im Einsatz bei Kampfflugzeugen bewährt hat, muss jedoch in der zivilen Anwendung nicht gleich Erfolg haben: Experten räumen ein, dass der Einbau der modernen Technologien bei den Jets der großen Airlines nicht wirtschaftlich ist und zudem praktische Probleme mit sich bringt. Die US-Forschungseinrichtung Rand Corporation hat errechnet, dass die Verwendung der Laser Jammer in allen zivilen US-Flugzeugen - zusammen mit der Entwicklung und Wartung über zehn Jahre - bis zu 40 Mrd. Dollar kosten könnte.

"Neben der Frage der Kosten gibt es auch dort Sicherheitsbedenken", sagt der Rüstungsexperte Lange. So werden zum Beispiel die einzelnen abgeworfenen "Flares" sehr heiß. Wenn sie in einem Wohngebiet oder einem trockenen Waldgebiet zu Boden gehen, besteht Brandgefahr. Hinzu kommt: Alle einsetzbaren Technologien tragen ein hohes Risiko von Falschalarmen.

Zwar können die Sensoren an den Jets, die eine angreifende Rakete erkennen, innerhalb einer Sekunde nach deren Start bereits analysieren, ob die Flugbahn tatsächlich eine Gefahr darstellt, doch oft reagieren sie eben auch auf andere "Reize", was in einem Gebiet mit hoher Flugdichte ein ernstes Problem darstellt. Die Ingenieure von Rand kommen daher zu dem Schluss: Derzeit macht es keinen Sinn mit einem Milliarden-Dollar-Aufwand Technologien einzusetzen, die unzuverlässig und unwirtschaftlich sind.

Rand schlägt deshalb ein Bündel verschiedener Maßnahmen vor. Ein wichtiger Punkt darin: Den Verkauf von Manpads international stärker zu beschränken.

http://zeus.zeit.de/hb/880042.xml


Nachricht von der BI Bad Dürkheim

http://www.rense.com/general37/skull.htm


Informant: Angelo Cohen

HLV INFO 89/AT

13-06-2005

Dr. Scheingraber 12-06-05

Der Arbeitskreis Elektro-Biologie e.V. erhält immer häufiger Anfragen bezüglich der biologischen Auswirkungen von digitalen Rundfunk- und Fernsehsendern. Da wir glauben, dass in Kürze immer mehr Personen davon betroffen sind möchte ich die erst Stellungnahme des AEB zu DVB-T und öffentlich machen.

Ob DVB-T und DAB-T gesundheitsgefährdend sind, kann zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt noch kein Mensch sicher beantworten. Das Problem ist, dass wieder eine neue, gepulste Mikrowellen-Großtechnik eingeführt wurde, ohne irgendeine biologische Verträglichkeitsprüfung! Wenn man die angewandte Technologie von DVB-T näher betrachtet hat sie eine große Ähnlichkeit mit den UMTS-Signalen. Bei DVB-T handelt es sich um eine Sendetechnik mit einer großen Frequenzbreite von 8 MHz (Megahertz) pro Kanal. Bei eng aneinender stehenden Kanälen kommt es so zu einer Bandbreite von 16 MHz. Im Vergleich, UMTS hat eine Bandbreite von 10 MHz und die GSM-Netze nutzen eine Bandbreite von nur 200 kHz (Kilohertz).

Aus biologischer Sicht sind 2 technische Faktoren für die gesundheitliche Betrachtung sehr wichtig. Welche Leistungsflussdichte (Maß für die übertragene Energie pro Fläche) kommt bei der entsprechenden Person an und wie groß ist die Frequenzbandbreite, auf der gesendet wird, auch unser Körper arbeitet mit breitbandigen Signalen. (Es gibt noch andere wichtige Faktoren, die aber vorerst aus biologischer Sicht außer Betracht bleiben können).

Bedenkt man, dass die GSM-Netze (D1,D2, E-Plus, O²) nur eine technische Bandbreite von 200 kHz nutzen und mit einer Senderleistungen von durchschnittlich 20 Watt (in Städten weniger) arbeiten, viele Menschen aber bei dieser Sendeleistung und der geringen Frequenzbandbreite schon unter erheblichen Befindlichkeitsstörungen leiden, dann können Sie sich sicher vorstellen was passiert, wenn Sendetechniken benützt werden, die ein 80-fach breiteres Frequenzband hat und eine vielhundertfache Senderleistung benützt.

Dass die alte analoge Rundfunk und Fernsehtechnik relativ wenig biologische Störungen ausgelöst hat, ist weitgehend auf die fast pulsfreie Sendetechnik im Fernsehen zurückzuführen.

Da es keine einzige wissenschaftliche Untersuchung gibt, die sich mit der biologischen Verträglichkeit der DVB-T Signale auseinender gesetzt hat, kann man nur auf Untersuchungen zurückgreifen, die sich mit ähnlichen Signalformen beschäftigt haben. Es gibt da die TNO-Studie aus Holland welche die UMTS-Signale (10 MHz Bandbreite) auf biologischen Auswirkungen untersucht hat. Die Studie kam zu dem Ergebnis, dass breitbandige Signale Befindlichkeitsstörungen wie Schwindel und Übelkeit auslösen, während gleichstarke GSM-Signale (200 kHz Bandbreite) keine Befindlichkeitsstörungen in der Versuchgruppe auslösten!

Wenn die Befürchtungen, die unser Arbeitskreis und andere Umweltärzte haben, zutreffen, dann werden auf die Menschen, die in der Nähe der Sendeanlagen wohnen (das kann eine Entfernung von 1-20 km sein) erhebliche gesundheitliche Störungen langfristig zukommen. Dem Arbeitskreis Elektro-Biologie e.V. wurden bereits 15 Tage nach Einschalten der digitalen Fernsehsender neue Befindlichkeitsstörungen im Umkreis der Münchner Sendeanlage gemeldet. Eine erste Vergleichsmessung hat eine auf die Leistungsflussdichte bezogene Erhöhung der Immission um 10-20 dB (= 10-100 fach) erbracht. Viele weitere Messungen sind notwendig um ein aussagekräftiges Bild bezüglich der Erhöhung der Leistungsflussdichte zu erhalten. Der AEB e.V. wird das Geschehen weiter verfolgen und berichten.

Erst die Zeit wird zeigen ob unsere Befürchtungen eintreten werden. Wir alle sind Teilnehmer dieses gigantischen Großversuchs an unserer Bevölkerung!


Dr. Claus Scheingraber - Arbeitskreis Elektro-Biologie e.V.
Taubenstr. 14, 85649 Brunnthal
Tel: 08102-4420 ab 19 Uhr, tags: 089-9038020
Fax: 089-9045369
Mail: Claus.Scheingraber@t-online.de

Monday, Jun. 10, 1957

A 42-year-old worker who accidently stood in front of a powerful radar transmitter ten feet away for less than a minute died within a fortnight. Thus, last week, reported California Surgeon John T. McLaughlin, an industrial medical consultant. There were no marks on the victim's body, but "his insides were cooked ... A hole as big as a silver dollar was burned in his small bowel." Dr. McLaughlin has seen other, less severe cases, warns that high-powered radar microwaves (similar to those used in electronic stoves) can do serious damage at short range without proper safeguards by causing "intolerable" rises in tissue temperatures.

http://www.time.com/time/archive/printout/0,23657,937474,00.html


Informant: Iris Atzmon

(excerpt)

We are being exposed to increasing levels of electromagnetic radiation, especially microwaves, from an increasing number of sources, including cell phones and towers, cordless phones, satellites, computers, digital TV, radar, wireless internet, and wireless LANs in schools. This radiation is having a demonstrably harmful effect on our health. Below are some measures we can take to protect ourselves.

A computer monitor emits radiation all around—more at the sides and back than in front, because of the flyback transformer. Monitors that adhere to the Swedish MPRII or, preferably, TCO standard emit the least, but it’s still a good idea to sit at least 30 inches from the screen (and 3 feet from a TV). If necessary, use 14-point type to make your work easier to see. If you know you’re not going to use the computer for a period of time during the day, shut off the monitor rather than sitting there bathed in its glow.

Maintain the same distance from other monitors. If the back of a monitor in the next office or cubicle is against a common wall or partition, avoid sitting within 3 feet of that spot. (This also applies to other office equipment that gives off radiation, like printers, copiers, faxes, and modems.) Hard drives emit radiation, so avoid placing the computer right next to you or on the floor next to your legs. Pregnant women are especially advised to avoid extensive computer work— preferably none, and 20 hours a week at most.

The liquid-crystal display (LCD) in most laptop screens gives off much less radiation than desktop monitors. However, the hard drive may still be a problem, because, as Blake Levitt points out in Electromagnetic Fields, it rests "literally on the user’s lap at genital level."

Cell phones and portable phones give off extensive radiation. The most common fear is cancer, but neurological problems tend to appear first. Levitt advises the following: "Because of serious concerns about the safety of this technology, it is recommended that people stay with wired models until more is known or strict national standards are in place. Also, keep in mind that you are not the only one affected by wireless items; so is everyone near you." Current standards do exist, but they’re not what could be called "strict."

Other significant sources of radiation to be avoided include fluorescent lights, microwave ovens (both because of leakage and the effect on food), electric blankets, and waterbeds (because of the electric heater). For a more extensive discussion, see Robert O. Becker, M.D., Cross Currents, and Levitt, Electromagnetic Fields.



ECOTERRA Intl.