Hi all.

I have just received this E-mail and have been asked to post it on. Please, also post it on to local groups.

Best regards.

Agnes


Who Determines what is Junkscience?
The Corporate Corruption of Science.

This text wrote Stewart Fist, it is from http://electric-words.com/junk/junkindex.html at 2000 (- his sites http://electric-words.com/junk/junkindex.html

and http://electric-words.com/junk/carlo/carlo.html are not more available, see instead
http://www.iddd.de/umtsno/vater.htm#carlo )


"Dr. George Carlo: This is your life.

A chronology of the most remarkable scientific administrator of our time. The scientist who is expert in a thousand fields without ever needing to study; the man who can juggle a thousand different industry research problems and produce the results the funding companies want."

Regards

Kris
webmaster@umtsno.de


----- Original Message -----

From
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 7:37 AM
Subject: Very important

Friends: This notice was sent out late last night to millions of consumers in the U.S. The organization, http://www.mywireless.org is a front for the cell phone industry under the guise of a consumer friendly non-profit organization.

...

The industry is concerned about the growing membership numbers of members in the Safe Wireless Initiative, Wireless Consumers Alliance, the EMF Forum, as well as other consumer advocacy groups, and the new willingness of the media to talk and write about studies that show health problems.

An industry issues management task force was put together to deal with the problem and this is what they came up with.

It would be very helpful if you were able to put the word out into your contact groups that this new organization is not what it appears. The wolf has taken on sheep's clothing.......and the plan is not consumer or public health friendly.

Thanks for spreading the word.


Dr. George L. Carlo
Science and Public Policy Institute
1101 Pennsylvania Ave. NW -- 7th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20004
http://www.sppionline.org
202-756-7744

--------

This is absolutely true. Here is the result of a domain search. The e-mail address of Nelson Lathrop is nlathrop@ctia.org. http://www.ctia.org is the website of the Wireless Association, the international association for the wireless communication industry, dedicated to expand the wireless frontier.

Domain ID:D91520252-LROR Domain Name:MYWIRELESS.ORG Created On:24-Oct-2002 06:23:02 UTC Last Updated On:27-Oct-2005 14:36:10 UTC Expiration Date:24-Oct-2011 06:23:02 UTC Sponsoring Registrar:Network Solutions LLC (R63-LROR) Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED Registrant ID:39177567-NSI Registrant Name:MyWireless.Org Registrant Organization:MyWireless.Org Registrant Street1:1400 16th Street, NW Registrant Street2:Suite 600 Registrant Street3: Registrant City:Washington Registrant State/Province:DC Registrant Postal Code:20036 Registrant Country:US Registrant Phone:+1.2027850081 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email:nlathrop@ctia.org Admin ID:39180218-NSI Admin Name:Nelson Lathrop Admin Organization:MyWireless.org Admin Street1:1400 16th Street, NW Admin Street2:Suite 600 Admin Street3: Admin City:Washington Admin State/Province:DC Admin Postal Code:20036 Admin Country:US Admin Phone:+1.2027850081 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email:nlathrop@MyWireless.Org Tech ID:39180218-NSI Tech Name:Nelson Lathrop Tech Organization:MyWireless.org Tech Street1:1400 16th Street, NW Tech Street2:Suite 600 Tech Street3: Tech City:Washington Tech State/Province:DC Tech Postal Code:20036 Tech Country:US Tech Phone:+1.2027850081 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email:nlathrop@MyWireless.Org Name Server:NS3.WORLDNIC.COM Name Server:NS4.WORLDNIC.COM Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server:

The wireless industry has started a 'non-profit consumer advocacy organization giving wireless consumers a powerful and unified voice to protect the freedom, value, security and mobility they enjoy with wireless services. MyWireless.org brings together consumers from across the country to protect their wireless rights in their cities, states, and nationally.'

Unbelievable. The wireless industry misleads the consumer to expand their frontier.

--------

WIRC: an internet fraud?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2077174/

How Industry Manipulates Science
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/350582/




http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Carlo
http://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Carlo
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Mywireless.org
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=World+Health+Organization
http://www.next-up.org/Newsoftheworld/WHO_OMS.php#10

Brilliant news in the Independent Saturday there was a special section written by the Ecoogist entitled 'How well connected are you?"

Of points 1 to 13, number 9 was entitled "Killing Fields'

Yes it was about phone masts!!

Although old news it quoted the Cellular Phone Task Force in New York putting the advert in the press as to the health effects suffered when the first transmitters were turned on in 1996.

I feel that perhaps we should give up on the Guardian and send letters with our case studies to the Independent and the Ecologist.

Both these need supporting and I feel they are about to start taking this issue seriously.

Best

Sarah

--------

Here are the links to 'Killing Fields' and the more recent 'Revolt' by the Ecologist but they haven't done much as far as I know since October 04.

http://www.theecologist.org/archive_detail.asp?content_id=285
http://www.theecologist.org/archive_detail.asp?content_id=330

Sandi

Following Andy's message a couple of days ago where he mentions the disappearance of nesting seagulls on his roof, I have become aware of the lack of nesting seagulls in Brighton this year. Central Brighton is usually teaming with seagulls, particularly in the spring, when newborn seagulls nesting in many chimneys are being cared for. There is usually unending noise throughout the night - now there is a complete silence......

If this is happening in other coastal towns where tetra masts have been erected, then this ought to be quite easy to establish.

Catarina



Firstly we had the disappearing sparrows, now we have the question regarding the diminishing population of seagulls.

Some time ago, I endeavoured to make contact with the RSPB regarding the possibility of a link between fewer birds and microwave radiation from mobile phone technology. I was surprised that, in spite of two attempts, I got no acknowledgement from the RSPB. I subsequently discovered that the main sponsors of the RSPB is in fact VODAFONE. Could this be the reason for their lack of response. Since then they have conducted various trials to try to ascertain the reason, or reasons, for the drop in the bird population, including the request for people to count the number of bugs on their car number plates to determine if the food chain has been changed, but none of their attempts at finding a solution included the possibility that mobile phones could be one of the reasons. Anyway, it could be that the microwave radiation is killing the bugs too. So that is a double whammy for the birds.

Dennis Cannon



Perhaps someone needs to talk to the RSPB and point out their link with Vodafone and conflict of interests?!

sara



RF/MW mast radiation has been known to affect bird navigation and flocking behaviour since 1924, when the first transatlantic transmitters were installed at Valencia, Spain. The birds there broke up their previously co-ordinated wheeling flocks as soon as the transmitters were switched on each day. Ulrich Warnke published a paper in 1989 proposing that these flocks relay on electric fields induced by wing movements which charge the birds. As for the sparrow disappearances, there are many possible causes: but one cannot rule out disruption of nesting behaviour and chick embryo abnormalities (see the Henhouse project of the 1980s), especially since the harmonics of the base resonant frequency (related to 900 and 1800MHz wavelengths) matches the house sparrows normal egg diameter. The RSPB doesnt seem to want to know about it, sadly.

Best,
Roger Coghill MA (Cantab) C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt)



As a wife of a birdwatcher it might be worth pointing out here that the org that attempted to publicise the link between sparrows starlings and masts a few years ago was the british ornithology trust .. they and the rspb arnt bosom buddies though both are respected.. it may be worth while getting on to them about this issue instead http://www.bto.org/


Cheers

Lisa


From Mast Sanity/Mast Network

--------

Micro Waves Effects on Wildlife Animals
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/540756/

WE THE UNDERSIGNED call upon the UK Government to unify the permission process for mobile phone and TETRA installations in order that there is clarity and transparency within the decision making process, in order that:-

The concerns of local communities on health are fully taken into account within each stage of the decision making process;

That there be a single process for deciding all installations which allows the full participation of local communities affected by the procedure;

That all installations approved by the process known as 'Licence Notification' (no planning permission) be revoked;

That all installations on church property are decided by the civil planning authority;

That guidance is given enabling greater use of the existing process under s97 and s102 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, for the revocation of permission, or the discontinuance of the use of a site for telecommunication purposes, in order to enable the removal of those installations in sensitive locations.

We also call upon the UK Government to listen to the many renowned scientific voices warning them of the Human disaster that will occur very soon if the erection of these masts in residential areas is not curtailed.

Please sign under:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/national-mast-petition/


Petition Sponsor:

Mast Sanity campaigns for the safe siting of Mobile phone and TETRA masts. We advise thousands of campaigners across the country and abroad on how to fight masts. We are a voluntary organisation providing free advice to all.

http://www.mastsanity.org
Advice line: 08704 322 377

--------

Electro-Magnetic Impairment
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1859314/

Found at-

http://silverprotects.com/media/chemtrails.html

A Mr. Clifford Carnicom has cultured chemtrail spray samples in New Mexico and proven that barium is present.10 His test procedures and results are posted at www.carnicom.com. Barium suppresses human T-cell production, making the human body very susceptible to infectious agents. Barium also has electromagnetic properties and may be both amplifying and more evenly dispersing pulsed-energy waves first uncovered by a deceased University of Chapel Hill professor, Dr. David Fraser, in 1975. These waves are now most likely blanketing all cities and towns in North America for the purpose of mood and mind control. Carnicom has also confirmed the existence of the pulsed energy in every location he has tested and has created a method by which it can be measured and recorded that is posted on his website, http://www.carnicom.com . Pulsed-energy mind-control technology for mass populations was first tested on Medford, Oregon, making it the suicide capital of the nation overnight in the mid-seventies. See my article, "The Secret War Against Medford, Oregon", posted at http://www.silverprotects.com , under "Other Writings": http://aboutsilvermedicine.com/media/medford_war.pdf

--------

Informant: Dorothee Krien


Barium in Chemtrails video in US.

This shows that fluoride isn't the only toxin that governments are trying to get into peoples bodies!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okB-489l6MI



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=chemtrails
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=barium

Siegfried Schwarzmüller, Union for Education and Science

(Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissen GEW)

Danger from high frequency fields

Under the motto of ‘increasing efficiency’, things are happening in many schools in an almost unnoticed and uncritical manner, which would have lead to animated discussions and actions in the past. Without informing or consulting staff, the federal state of Hessen has equipped around 100 schools with laptops in the name of ‘increased media competence’, ’new learning culture’ and ‘better education’. On the surface, the use of these mobile computers certainly offers advantages such as maximising space and flexibility.

Better education through WLAN?

By installing these new student workstations, the government and education authorities are introducing a new technology, against which there are strong concerns about potential health effects. According to the initiative ‘Schools and Future’, in which the government and local education authorities co-operate, ‘only WLAN is to be considered’, when it comes to laptops in schools. This WLAN technology (Wireless Local Area Networks) currently pushed by the authorities, consists of a transmitter installed in the classroom or school via which the students communicate with each other, with the periphery hardware and with the internet. In this case, each laptop is a sender and a receiver. In order to function as such, each workstation emits high frequency electromagnetic fields, which are generally acknowledged to have harmful effects on health. As early as 2001, the independent environment office of the Protestant Church of Hessen-Nassau concluded that the ‘large number of studies lead to the conclusion that living organisms react to this radiation’. Precautionary health protection is therefore urgently recommended, especially if we consider the experiences from the past, when the careless use of substances like wood preservatives, asbestos and CFCs lead to devastating health hazards and financial losses, also in schools.

High frequency radiation

With a network within one room it is still mostly an individual decision whether the students are linked with each other via cable or wireless. If the network extends through the entire school, the staff has no possibility to decide whether they agree to be exposed to the additional radiation or not. Similar to the situation in the waiting areas in airports and large train stations, they are exposed all working day long to the electromagnetic fields from the WLAN transmitters. Exposures within a building can vary to a large degree. Overlaps and reflections can create radiation hotspots which go completely unnoticed.

The magazine Eco-Test [Translator’s note: an ecological equivalent of the UK Which magazine] tested workstations in the juristic library in Göttingen and found a peak value of 23,000 µWatt/m2. The current official guideline in Germany [and in the UK] is 10 W/m2. Without cable connections, a WLAN-installation must also be switched on at night and linked via radio link to the network, since it is then that the remote maintenance of the school transmitter with the docked-on laptops is done. In November 2002, Eco-Test magazine found in a large study that particularly laptops which are sending information and their WLAN cards emit considerable amounts of radiation. This radiation is often considerable higher than the recommended precautionary values and in hotspots even exceeds the official guidelines. Likewise, the Nova-Institute had previously found in its study regarding the installation of a WLAN network at the University of Bremen that persons working on notebook workstations had to ‘count on the precautionary values being exceeded’.

In addition to the already existing massive interference from unnatural electromagnetic fields from sources such as mobile phones, DECT (cordless) phones, microwave ovens and computer screens, children, adolescents and staff are now exposed to additional health hazards which would be easily avoidable. It is possible without any quantitative or qualitative sacrifice, to use any laptop with a cable and hence to avoid the additional radiation load created by a WLAN installation. Only a cable is needed to link the laptop with the network, and the peripheral hardware such as a central printer can be connected via plug-ins as well.

Almost all arguments go against WLAN!

In addition to the precautionary aspect, it would be cheaper for schools and local education authorities to equip schools with wired networks, since they do not incur cost for the radio (wireless). Further arguments against WLAN technology are its susceptibility to exterior influences on data transmission, its slower operational speed when compared to wired networks, its lower capacity, its limited suitability for the use in exams and its higher rate of disruption in everyday use. Exterior pressures and industry interest however, seem to outweigh all the health, technical, financial and pedagogical objections. Doubts and objections are probably not least ignored in order to further the quick implementation and testing of this new technology which promises much profit in a large-scale experiment. In some school districts, the technology is even ‘trialled’ in primary schools. Children are degraded to become test subjects

There are hardly any ways to legally raise objections: ‘WLAN equipment works within the legal guidelines’ is the official justification. However, the legal basis for this, the Electromagnetic Fields Ordinance of 1996 (!) set the guidelines only based on the thermal effects of this radiation. Yet, pulsed high frequency fields are proven to have effects at power flux densities much lower than the thermal threshold. They cause headaches, high blood pressure and lack of concentration and can lead to permanent health damage. The ECOLOG Institute in Hanover has produced a science review of more than 220 peer reviewed and published studies of the various health effects of electromagnetic fields [Translator’s note: commissioned by T-Mobile, Germany] and confirmed them on a scientific basis.

To protect public health it is therefore no longer sufficient to apply the old, inadequate guidelines, but to introduce a new precautionary guideline, which will take all influences on health known so far into account, and which would need to be categorically adhered to with regards to the assessment of all radiation exposure. Switzerland has already implemented this. There, the precautionary upper limit for power flux density is 0.1 W/m².This is 1/100 of the current guideline value in Germany [Translator’s note: and 1/100 of the current guideline value of the UK].

Based on their comprehensive science review, the ECOLOG-Institute recommends

0.01 W//m² as the precautionary upper limit. Even at this value, studies found negative influences on brain function – EEC, capacity to react, blood-brain-barrier permeability.

Eco-Test found exposures higher than these precautionary values in the vicinity of several laptops during their on-site studies.

Almost criminal assault

The uncritical IT equipment of schools with transmitters and radiation emitting laptops does not take into account that the main users are children and adolescents who will be exposed for many hours every day.

In the UK, the Independent Expert Group commissioned by the government in 2000 came to the conclusion that children – due to their not yet fully developed nervous system and a circa 60% higher susceptibility to energetic radiation – were far more vulnerable than adults.

Hence, there should be even stricter precautionary guidelines for children. To expose children knowingly to this danger is bordering criminal assault.

Also often ignored is the fact that it is not just one device emitting the pulsed high frequency radiation, but that there are usually 20 or more workstations per classroom. And this in an environment which is already riddled with further sources of unnatural radiation such as fluorescent lighting halogen lamps, mobile phones and transformers. It can therefore not be excluded that an overlap of these fields will cause the electromagnetic exposure at individual workstations to greatly exceed the precautionary guidelines.

Admittedly, the electromagnetic radiation of a single laptop is below that of a mobile phone. The effect of electromagnetic radiation being accumulative, it will however, increase the intensity of ‘electro-smog’. The duration of use also plays an important role: it can be many hours per day, especially for IT teachers and students. Particular protection must be provided for electrosensitive people, for whom electromagnetic radiation triggers allergic reactions. They account for 3 – 5 % of the population.

No transmitters in schools!

The summary of the arguments presented in this article should be sufficient to object to the WLAN project of the federal state government and the education authorities with a loud and clear ‘NO, no transmitters in schools and other public institutions!’ In addition to WLAN, this also includes wireless Bluetooth equipment, DECT and mobile phones. Cabled equipment results in higher data speeds and better results. Protection and precaution against health damage should be more important than the slightly ore convenient use of wireless equipment.

The Union for Education and Science and all the Union representatives on the federal state, town, council and school level must exert their influence to have policies in favour of wireless equipment revised and ensure that children and staff in schools are not knowingly exposed to additional health hazards from electromagnetic fields.

Admittedly, there is still a scientific debate about the assessment of the risk, however, in the meantime, the precautionary principle should prevail and human health should be in the centre of interest. Further research results can be expected from the REFLEX study, which was commissioned by the EU and is currently being conducted in participating countries across Europe. It examines amongst other things the effect of electromagnetic radiation on human tissue. Also the INTERPHONE mobile phone study of the WHO (Translator’s note: sponsored by the mobile operators) might yield further results. At least until the final reports of these further studies are published, any decisions about installing WLAN networks should be deferred

From the Union Magazine „GEW Hessen“, Nr I2/2003

Translated by Andrea Klein

--------

Health risks of Wi-Fi and WLAN on our health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1122031/

WLAN Sickness: Rubbish or Reasonable?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1692101/

WLAN, DECT in Schools and Kindergardens
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1579030/

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

Health risks of Wi-Fi and WLAN on our health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1122031/

WLAN Sickness: Rubbish or Reasonable?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1692101/

WLAN, DECT in Schools and Kindergardens
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1579030/

New Phones Danger
http://freepage.twoday.net/stories/1729779/

Here's that from Dr Oberfeld.

Dear Mrs. ...,

thanks for sending me the letter again. Please find attached the text within an official layout of the Salzburg Government.

http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/wlan_dect_in_schools_and_kindergardens.pdf

I hope it will be helpful.

Best regards

Dr. Gerd Oberfeld

Dr. med. univ. Gerd Oberfeld
Amt der Salzburger Landesregierung Landessanitätsdirektion Referat Gesundheit, Hygiene und Umweltmedizin
Postanschrift: Postfach 527, 5010 Salzburg, ÖSTERREICH
Adresse: Pfeifergasse 3
Tel. ++43 (0)662) 8042 - 2969
Fax ++43 (0)662) 8042 - 3056
gerd.oberfeld@salzburg.gv.at http://www.salzburg.gv.at/umweltmedizin

--------

Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005
From: Olle Johansson
olle.johansson@ki.se
Subject: Re: WLAN in schools


Dear Concerned Parent/Governor/Teacher

I have read with great interest your letter below, and I certainly agree with your corrections. To begin with, one can not help wondering why children should need wireless networks. My experience is that they need knowledge, support, confirmation, help, understanding, tenderness and love under the guidance of responsible and mature grown-ups in the form of teachers and parents.

One may think that the WLAN computer networks only use "low power radio transmitters", but compared to the natural background fields, in which living cells have developed during the last 3.8 billion years, these electromagnetic fields are actually very, very strong. It is, thus, wrong to believe that evolution has furnished us with a safety protection shielding layer against such WLAN signals, it has not.

Regarding the "potential educational benefits", my experience is that such have never been properly evaluated and definitely not proven.

If it is "impossible to give absolute guarantees of safety when dealing with new technology", or if a definite risk can not be calculated, such technologies must be reconsidered. Also, do not forget the new EU recommendations about the "producer's legal responsibility", i.e. in this case - since the school is producing the teaching - one must hold the school fully responsible for any negative, short- or long-term, effects. Lack of knowledge can not be used as an excuse to use a certain technology!

"Radio waves have been used for over 100 years". This is not true and, as you point out dear Parent, we are dealing with amplitude-modulated or pulsed microwaves in the 2.45 GHz range (or nearby), in a form which has only been around to any extent for the last 10-15 years.

"At present there is no scientific evidence of any harm from such systems". This is not true, e.g. in my research group at the Karolinska Institute we have published a series of papers dealing with FM radio and cancer, mobile telephony and cancer, mobile telephony and long-term sickness, general health, the impairment electro hypersensitivity, etc. See, for instance, the following recent papers:

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Melanoma incidence and frequency modulation (FM) broadcasting", Arch Environ Health 2002; 57: 32-40

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Cancer trends during the 20th century", J Aust Coll Nutr & Env Med 2002; 21: 3-8

Johansson O, "Screen dermatitis and electro sensitivity: Preliminary observations in the human skin", In: Electromagnetic Environments and Health in Buildings (ed. D Clements-Croome), Spon Press, London & New York, 2004, pp 377-389

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Malignant melanoma of the skin - not a sunshine story!", Med Sci Monit 2004; 10: CR336-340

Johansson O, "Electro hypersensitivity: Observations in the human skin of a physical impairment", Symposium on "Electrical Sensitivity in Human Beings", Royal Society of Medicine, London, U.K., September 11, 2004 (abstr.)

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Does GSM 1800 MHz affect the public health in Sweden?", In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop "Biological Effects of EMFs", Kos, Greece, October 4-8, 2004

Johansson O, "Electro hypersensitivity: Observations in the human skin of a physical impairment", WHO Workshop on "Electrical Hypersensitivity", Prague, Czech Republic, October 25-27, 2004 (abstr.)

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "1997 - A curious year in Sweden", Eur J Cancer Prev 2004; 13: 535-538

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Long-term sickness and mobile phone use", J Aust Coll Nutr & Env Med, 2004; 23: 11-12

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Mobile handset output power and health", Electromag Biol Med 2004; 23: 229-239

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "FM broadcasting exposure time and malignant melanoma incidence", Electromag Biol Med 2005; 24: 1-8

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Alzheimer mortality - why does it increase so fast in sparsely populated areas?", Europ Biol Bioelectromag 2005, in press

Finally, dear Parent , you state yourself that "There are many adverse health effects reported in the scientific literature as well as clusters of cancer around phone masts." As a matter of fact, the number of scientific articles (in the thousands) is such, that one rightfully has to ask: When is it enough? Do we not know enough already about microwaves and biological and medical effects, enough to actually say "STOP"?!

With my very best regards

Yours sincerely Olle Johansson

(Olle Johansson, Assoc. Prof. The Experimental Dermatology Unit Department of Neuroscience Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm Sweden)


Dear Prof Johansson

Thanks you for saying you would help.

I have some specific questions relating to WLAN computer networks as follows.

The HPA in the UK have issued, in my opinion a very misleading statement as follows

referring to wireless networks they state 'these systems require low power radio transmitters in the building and people should consider the potential educational benefits as well as any possible risks. It is impossible to give absolute guarantees of safety when dealing with new technology, but radio waves have been used for over 100 years and, at present there is no scientific evidence of any harm from such systems.'

I wonder if you could comment on my points as follows and if you could add any more information or advice on the matter?

Firstly the WLAN network gives off microwave radiation of a similar frequency to that of a microwave oven and the new 3G phone network. The radiation is amplitude modulated or pulsed. In this form it has only been around to any extent for the last 12 years. There are many adverse health effects reported in the scientific literature as well as clusters of cancer around phone masts. We would advise that a WLAN system should not be used in a school. The radiation intensity from transmitters in each classroom could often be similar to the intensity received from a nearby phone mast.

I look forward to your reply

Regards

Concerned Parent

--------

Masts Inside Your HOME, Tumours in Your Head: The Downsides of the Mobile/Wireless 'Revolution'
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1723342/

DECT/Wi-Fi info leaflet now available
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1827600/

Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs) and Bluetooth
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1447225/

WLAN Sickness: Rubbish or Reasonable?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1692101/

Concerns over WLANS in the classroom
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1447221/

WLAN radiation and health hazard distances
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1447199/

WLANs in schools
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1145992/

Mr Fox and WLAN in schools
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1764443/

Health Dangers From Wireless Laptops
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1755556/

Health risks of Wi-Fi and WLAN on our health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1122031/

Cordless phones could raise risk of tumours - Cordless home phones sparks radiation fear
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1521344/

Masts INSIDE Your House?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1451396/

Hazardous product warning: DECT phones
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1368511/

DECT phones and health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/564447/

ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS "DECT" ARE PSYCHOLOGICAL ARMS
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/226533/

Wi-Fi's electric shock
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1673543/

Wi-Fi has a negative impact on our health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1122014/

Suit alleges health risks of Wi-Fi
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1121968/

Terrible technology: White boards fill the classroom with pulsing microwaves
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1040526/

Schools with Wi-Fi
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1641879/

Health fears lead schools to dismantle wireless networks
http://freepage.twoday.net/stories/2957963/

School sued for installing a wireless computer network
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1121957/

Wi-Fi, Health Care, and HIPAA: WLAN Management in the Modern Hospital
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/461735/

Wi-Fi mobilize your Chromosomes in Hospital
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/245599/

Suit Alleges Health Risks Of Wi-Fi
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1830269/

Children and mobile phones
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1063256/



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi

From:
Eileen O'Connor
eileen@smokestackltd.co.uk
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 16:17:36 -0000
To: Sarah Purdy
Subject: EU reseacrh

Take a look at the white research EU paper it looks at European Countries.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_determinants/environment/EMF/brochure_en.pdf


Take care,

Eileen