Mobile phone use in rural areas carries three times the cancer risk
Starmail - 17. Mai, 22:41
Wissenschaft zu Mobilfunk
17
Mai
2005
Mobile phone over-use leads to premature aging
Starmail - 17. Mai, 18:16
Everyone of us is part of a vast radiation experiment - result unknown
As the points Dr. Dave J Aldridge's makes in his published letter are applicable to other countries, I am sending it along to you for posting.
Imelda, Cork.
16/05/05
Everyone of us is part of a vast radiation experiment - result unknown
IN relation to the debate in your letters columns last month concerning the hazards of cell-phone and other non-ionizing radiation, I find it inconceivable that any responsible official or body would claim such radiation to be ‘safe.’
Certainly no one with a grasp of the complex science involved would do so.
The following points need sombre reflection:
1. Every man, woman and child in Ireland is taking part, involuntarily, in one vast and irreversible non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (NI-EMR) exposure experiment, the ethics of which are highly questionable, and the long-term outcome unknown.
2. Based on experience with microwave radiation over the last 50 years and my current investigations, I believe the current maximum permitted public exposure to low band (900 mhz) cellphone radiation is 4,500 times too high and 9,000 times too high for the cell-phone high band (1.8 ghz).
Lowering this to 1mw/m2 for public exposure in ‘living spaces’ and 100mw/m2 for ‘sleeping spaces’ would provide a starting point to protect the general population against those effects not covered by the International Committee Non-ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Guidelines (ICNIRP guidelines).
3. Government ministers and officials continue to claim cell-phone microwave radiation is ‘safe,’ quoting ICNIRP guidelines, and stating that the safety of this radiation is supported in ‘the literature.’
Yet, the actual text of the ICNIRP guidelines states something very different: that the only effect taken into consideration when framing the guidelines, and against which protection is provided, is heating effect and the guidelines are not intended to protect against cancer or other long-term effects.
I have been studying ‘the literature’ for some years - for the last five on a full-time basis.
Most of the published research has a serious shortcoming in that the sponsor of many of the projects going back the 1950s was the US military. They had - and still have - a strong interest in the denial of low-level bio-effects.
Controlling the funding, it insisted that experiments be designed to find ‘thermal only’ outcomes and that high power should be employed. Many of the investigators were not biologists, and there was extensive criticism of the behavioural test methods in the discussions of results.
For many experiments the power levels were such as to preclude observation of any bio-effects, and the behavioural tests used were so poorly selected and so insensitive as to render it impossible to detect a positive response if such occurred. When the data from a Department of Defence-sponsored experimental series claiming to show no bio-effects was re-analysed, it was shown that due to poor statistical technique and the use of the wrong mathematical model, observations of bio-effects had been conveniently lost in the ‘noise.’
If there are no low-level bio-effects, why is the US Defence Advances Research Projects Agency (DARPA) spending over $3 billion per year on EMR-based weapons research?
4. In addition to the well known microwave hearing ‘tinnitus’ effect, the list of EHS symptoms, as defined by the WHO, includes tingling of nerves, sleepiness, headache, dizziness, unconsciousness, pain, muscle spasms, palpitations, flushing, tachycardia or edema because of impairment of the circulatory system; pressure in ears, tooth pains, tightness in chest, dyspnea, nausea, belching, burning eyes and itching, burning or prickling skin.
5. Based on anecdotal evidence, I estimate that 20% of the Irish population is likely to be experiencing low-level EHS effects, and not identifying it as such. And, in turn, around 20% of that mildly affected 20% - or 4% of the total population - are experiencing it to such an extent that it effects their way of life beyond a point where it can’t be considered just inconvenient.
Since the average GP has no in-depth knowledge of EHS, one of the difficulties for the medical profession is that the symptoms mimic the onset of mental illness. Consequently, many EHS sufferers (possibly as high as 50%) are believed to have been misdiagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia.
6. Comparing AM, FM and TV broadcast signals is like comparing apples with plums and grapes. While they all are non-ionising radiation, only the 625-line TV signals in Ireland use microwaves, defined as wavelengths below 1 metre and extending from 300 mhz to 300ghz.
TV transmitters, however, due to the range required and massive power used, are placed on remote mountaintops. By contrast, cell-phone base stations are placed in close proximity to people, often against their objections.
7. The location of many cell-phone base station aerials and towers is ill advised. When possible, those aerials utilised by vets, gardaí, ESB, creameries, taxis, fire and ambulance services should be relocated from rooftops to remote hilltop bases. This measure would reduce the exposure level of the population to electro-smog and reduce the incidence of EHS effects.
The cell-phone base station, regardless of the aerial being placed on a building or tower, needs to be located in the centre of its ‘cell,’ yet its location requires careful consideration of the type of population and exposure created.
8. Co-location is a very bad idea as the radiation from each source is additive in its effects and creates ‘RF hotspots.’ It is questionable if network operators should continue to be permitted to duplicate each other’s coverage for this reason. What is needed is a national coverage plan and well documented ‘safe areas’ where NI-EMR levels are kept low. I know of a number of EHS sufferers who have built (wooden) houses in low signal level areas only to find now that their lives are being severely affected by radiation from new emitters, some far away and being transported and re-radiated by above-ground clutter such as rural ESB feed lines.
9. The Irish Doctors Environmental Association are to be applauded for their efforts in bringing the plight of EHS sufferers to the attention of the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.
However, that committee apparently does not have the mandate to deal with the wider aspects of EMR hazards, including the health hazards and risks of NI-EMR associated with its application and use. NI-EMR covers all radiation from static EM fields to ultraviolet. I believe a new joint committee will be needed. The Irish Doctors Environmental Association has been handicapped as a doctors’ group only without the benefits of a biophysicist to untangle the complexities of NI-EMR/human interactions.
I hope this helps to clear away the ‘spin’ originating from the Government and its officials, as well as cellphone and other players.
Dave J Aldridge
Cloonfane
Co Mayo
http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/opinion/Full_Story/did-sggiJr8VrR-UgsgadLjt5C321I.asp
Dave J Aldridge
The Irish Anti-War Movement: Community member
http://irishantiwar.org/shared/community-member.tcl?user_id=2562
Imelda, Cork.
16/05/05
Everyone of us is part of a vast radiation experiment - result unknown
IN relation to the debate in your letters columns last month concerning the hazards of cell-phone and other non-ionizing radiation, I find it inconceivable that any responsible official or body would claim such radiation to be ‘safe.’
Certainly no one with a grasp of the complex science involved would do so.
The following points need sombre reflection:
1. Every man, woman and child in Ireland is taking part, involuntarily, in one vast and irreversible non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (NI-EMR) exposure experiment, the ethics of which are highly questionable, and the long-term outcome unknown.
2. Based on experience with microwave radiation over the last 50 years and my current investigations, I believe the current maximum permitted public exposure to low band (900 mhz) cellphone radiation is 4,500 times too high and 9,000 times too high for the cell-phone high band (1.8 ghz).
Lowering this to 1mw/m2 for public exposure in ‘living spaces’ and 100mw/m2 for ‘sleeping spaces’ would provide a starting point to protect the general population against those effects not covered by the International Committee Non-ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Guidelines (ICNIRP guidelines).
3. Government ministers and officials continue to claim cell-phone microwave radiation is ‘safe,’ quoting ICNIRP guidelines, and stating that the safety of this radiation is supported in ‘the literature.’
Yet, the actual text of the ICNIRP guidelines states something very different: that the only effect taken into consideration when framing the guidelines, and against which protection is provided, is heating effect and the guidelines are not intended to protect against cancer or other long-term effects.
I have been studying ‘the literature’ for some years - for the last five on a full-time basis.
Most of the published research has a serious shortcoming in that the sponsor of many of the projects going back the 1950s was the US military. They had - and still have - a strong interest in the denial of low-level bio-effects.
Controlling the funding, it insisted that experiments be designed to find ‘thermal only’ outcomes and that high power should be employed. Many of the investigators were not biologists, and there was extensive criticism of the behavioural test methods in the discussions of results.
For many experiments the power levels were such as to preclude observation of any bio-effects, and the behavioural tests used were so poorly selected and so insensitive as to render it impossible to detect a positive response if such occurred. When the data from a Department of Defence-sponsored experimental series claiming to show no bio-effects was re-analysed, it was shown that due to poor statistical technique and the use of the wrong mathematical model, observations of bio-effects had been conveniently lost in the ‘noise.’
If there are no low-level bio-effects, why is the US Defence Advances Research Projects Agency (DARPA) spending over $3 billion per year on EMR-based weapons research?
4. In addition to the well known microwave hearing ‘tinnitus’ effect, the list of EHS symptoms, as defined by the WHO, includes tingling of nerves, sleepiness, headache, dizziness, unconsciousness, pain, muscle spasms, palpitations, flushing, tachycardia or edema because of impairment of the circulatory system; pressure in ears, tooth pains, tightness in chest, dyspnea, nausea, belching, burning eyes and itching, burning or prickling skin.
5. Based on anecdotal evidence, I estimate that 20% of the Irish population is likely to be experiencing low-level EHS effects, and not identifying it as such. And, in turn, around 20% of that mildly affected 20% - or 4% of the total population - are experiencing it to such an extent that it effects their way of life beyond a point where it can’t be considered just inconvenient.
Since the average GP has no in-depth knowledge of EHS, one of the difficulties for the medical profession is that the symptoms mimic the onset of mental illness. Consequently, many EHS sufferers (possibly as high as 50%) are believed to have been misdiagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia.
6. Comparing AM, FM and TV broadcast signals is like comparing apples with plums and grapes. While they all are non-ionising radiation, only the 625-line TV signals in Ireland use microwaves, defined as wavelengths below 1 metre and extending from 300 mhz to 300ghz.
TV transmitters, however, due to the range required and massive power used, are placed on remote mountaintops. By contrast, cell-phone base stations are placed in close proximity to people, often against their objections.
7. The location of many cell-phone base station aerials and towers is ill advised. When possible, those aerials utilised by vets, gardaí, ESB, creameries, taxis, fire and ambulance services should be relocated from rooftops to remote hilltop bases. This measure would reduce the exposure level of the population to electro-smog and reduce the incidence of EHS effects.
The cell-phone base station, regardless of the aerial being placed on a building or tower, needs to be located in the centre of its ‘cell,’ yet its location requires careful consideration of the type of population and exposure created.
8. Co-location is a very bad idea as the radiation from each source is additive in its effects and creates ‘RF hotspots.’ It is questionable if network operators should continue to be permitted to duplicate each other’s coverage for this reason. What is needed is a national coverage plan and well documented ‘safe areas’ where NI-EMR levels are kept low. I know of a number of EHS sufferers who have built (wooden) houses in low signal level areas only to find now that their lives are being severely affected by radiation from new emitters, some far away and being transported and re-radiated by above-ground clutter such as rural ESB feed lines.
9. The Irish Doctors Environmental Association are to be applauded for their efforts in bringing the plight of EHS sufferers to the attention of the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.
However, that committee apparently does not have the mandate to deal with the wider aspects of EMR hazards, including the health hazards and risks of NI-EMR associated with its application and use. NI-EMR covers all radiation from static EM fields to ultraviolet. I believe a new joint committee will be needed. The Irish Doctors Environmental Association has been handicapped as a doctors’ group only without the benefits of a biophysicist to untangle the complexities of NI-EMR/human interactions.
I hope this helps to clear away the ‘spin’ originating from the Government and its officials, as well as cellphone and other players.
Dave J Aldridge
Cloonfane
Co Mayo
http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/opinion/Full_Story/did-sggiJr8VrR-UgsgadLjt5C321I.asp
Dave J Aldridge
The Irish Anti-War Movement: Community member
http://irishantiwar.org/shared/community-member.tcl?user_id=2562
Starmail - 17. Mai, 18:01
A preliminary study on ultra high frequency electromagnetic fields effect on black locust chlorophylls
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15813219
Informant: Iris Atzmon
Informant: Iris Atzmon
Starmail - 17. Mai, 17:53
Non-thermal DNA breakage by mobile-phone radiation (1800MHz) in human fibroblasts and in transformed GFSH-R17 rat granulosa cells in vitro
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15869902
Informant: Iris Atzmon
Informant: Iris Atzmon
Starmail - 17. Mai, 17:51
Krebsgefahr in ländlicher Idylle?
Wichtige Meldung fürs Volksbegehren Mobilfunk
Krebsgefahr in ländlicher Idylle?
Auf dem Land ist das Hirntumorrisiko dreimal so hoch. Nach einer schwedischen Studie kommt dies offenbar von einer dort höheren Handy-Eigenstrahlung. Für die Studie wurden 1400 Hirntumor-Patienten in Schweden nach ihren Handygebrauchsgewohnheiten befragt.
Das Forscherteam um den Krebs-Spezialisten Lennart Hardell von der Universitätsklinik Örebro vermutet, dass die starke Eigenstrahlung der Handys für den schädlichen Effekt verantwortlich ist. Sie liege auf dem Lande höher, weil die Relaisstationen der Funknetze dort weiter auseinander stünden als in den Städten.
Die Forscher aus Örebro warnten bereits mehrfach, dass intensiver und langfristiger Gebrauch der digitalen GSM-Funknetze die Wahrscheinlichkeit der Erkrankung an einem Hirntumor erhöhe.
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/artikel/264/53211/
In ländlichen Gebieten ist die Strahlenbelastung höher, fand eine schwedische Studie. Mehr Gehirntumore sind die Folge.
http://www.vnunet.de/testticker/news/detail.asp?ArticleID=20050517010&Topic=Newsticker&;Ref=pc-pro
Hintergrundinfos: Hohe Sendeleistung auf dem Land
http://www.izgmf.de/Aktionen/Meldungen/Archiv_04/PL-Statistik/pl-statistik.html
Nachricht vom Informationszentrum gegen Mobilfunk (IZGMF)
Zum gleichen Thema auch:
http://www.nachrichten.ch/detail/211689.htm
http://www.onlinekosten.de/news/artikel/17445
--------
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Hirntumor
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wissenschaft+zu+Mobilfunk/
Krebscluster in der Nähe von Funkantennen
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/227418/
Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/696799/
Krebsgefahr in ländlicher Idylle?
Auf dem Land ist das Hirntumorrisiko dreimal so hoch. Nach einer schwedischen Studie kommt dies offenbar von einer dort höheren Handy-Eigenstrahlung. Für die Studie wurden 1400 Hirntumor-Patienten in Schweden nach ihren Handygebrauchsgewohnheiten befragt.
Das Forscherteam um den Krebs-Spezialisten Lennart Hardell von der Universitätsklinik Örebro vermutet, dass die starke Eigenstrahlung der Handys für den schädlichen Effekt verantwortlich ist. Sie liege auf dem Lande höher, weil die Relaisstationen der Funknetze dort weiter auseinander stünden als in den Städten.
Die Forscher aus Örebro warnten bereits mehrfach, dass intensiver und langfristiger Gebrauch der digitalen GSM-Funknetze die Wahrscheinlichkeit der Erkrankung an einem Hirntumor erhöhe.
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/artikel/264/53211/
In ländlichen Gebieten ist die Strahlenbelastung höher, fand eine schwedische Studie. Mehr Gehirntumore sind die Folge.
http://www.vnunet.de/testticker/news/detail.asp?ArticleID=20050517010&Topic=Newsticker&;Ref=pc-pro
Hintergrundinfos: Hohe Sendeleistung auf dem Land
http://www.izgmf.de/Aktionen/Meldungen/Archiv_04/PL-Statistik/pl-statistik.html
Nachricht vom Informationszentrum gegen Mobilfunk (IZGMF)
Zum gleichen Thema auch:
http://www.nachrichten.ch/detail/211689.htm
http://www.onlinekosten.de/news/artikel/17445
--------
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Hirntumor
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wissenschaft+zu+Mobilfunk/
Krebscluster in der Nähe von Funkantennen
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/227418/
Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/696799/
Starmail - 17. Mai, 16:16
Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk
Study Title: Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk
Authors: L Hardell, M Carlberg and K Hansson Mild.
Published in the June 2005 Issue of Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
Summary: A new Swedish study has found a 3-fold increase in rural people who have used a digital mobile phone for at least 5 years.
Lennart Hardell and colleagues have continued to analyse their data on 1429 Swedish cell-phone users who were diagnosed with a brain tumour between January 1997 and June 2000. The major finding that they announced was a 1.5 fold (1.4/0.9) higher risk of brain tumours in rural users compared with users who used their phone mostly in urban settings, rising to a 3.5 fold (3.4/0.9) increased ratio for people who had used their digital phones for 5 years or more. This rose to a six-fold (8.4/1.4) difference when only malignant brain tumours were considered. They suggest that this difference may be due to the fact that mobile phones uses "adaptive power control" which reduces the transmitted microwave power when they are used close to base stations - as is usually the case in urban areas.
Digital GSM Handsets can radiate 1000 times more power when they have to communicate in a poor signal strength area compared to when they are close to a base station. They also normally use full power at all times while they are "dialing out" and waiting for the called person to answer their phone, so it is a good idea to hold the phone away from your head during this time.
More interesting, though not mentioned in the paper's abstract, are the latency time trends - that is the overall rates for all users depending on how many years they have used their phones over.
For analogue phone users, over all tumours, there is a 1.9-fold increase (i.e. almost a doubling) after using the phone for 10 years. This is especially the case for people who use their phone for over 90 minutes per week (about 15 minutes per day). Below that level of usage there are too few cases to meaningfully calculate an odds-ratio. For all users, combined, the OR is still 1.6 (1.1-2.5), which is a significant result. For malignant tumours only the result is stronger; overall showing a significant OR of 2.1 after 10 years (1.1-4.0)
For GSM users, data is not available for 10 years use. The overall results for 1 and 5 years are not significant, but do increase for people who use their phone for more than 10 minutes per day from 0.9 after one year to 1.4 after five years. Note that these are not heavy users.
For cordless phones (not clear if analogue or DECT or other type) there is a significant 1.4-fold increase after 5 years (1.5-fold in heavy user group), rising to a non-significant (too few cases) 2.1-fold increase after 10 years (0.7-6.3).
This study suggests that calls are best made in areas close to a base station for the particular handset's network, as that will reduce the microwave radiation levels the user will be exposed to.
However, Powerwatch's overall conclusion is that this study confirms that regular mobile and cordless phone use may well at least double the risk of developing a brain tumour over time, especially a malignant one, and that people should be advised to use such phones only when necessary and they should make most calls on an old-fashioned wired landline phone or wired (not Bluetooth) voice-over-internet (e.g. Skype) network.
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20050516_tumour.asp
Informant: Sylvie
--------
Tumour Risk For Rural Cell Phone Users
http://www.rense.com/general65/ceek.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/17/nmob17.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/05/17/ixhome.html
Informant: Iris Atzmon
--------
Thank you very much for this information!
I am happy to see Örjan Hallberg's and my own results*** now being much further substantiated by Hardell and his team! Remember that when our studies were published, we were heavily attacked by certain Swedish epidemiologist for being "wrong", for being "amateurs", for "publishing our results in the wrong journal", etc. It will be very nice now to rather read Hardell's and coworkers comments about our papers instead!
***e.g. Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Mobile handset output power and health", Electromag Biol Med 2004; 23: 229-239
and
Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "1997 - A curious year in Sweden", Eur J Cancer Prev 2004; 13: 535-538
Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
--------
This also appears in today's Daily Mail
Sandi
Today's Independent reports the latest analysis by Lennart Hardell, Sweden, published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Mobile phone use in rural areas carries three times the cancer risk
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/story.jsp?story=638936
Andy
From Mast Network
--------
Rural mobile phone use 'riskier'
http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=50
Mobile phone health risks greater for rural users
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Mobile+phone+health+risks+greater+for+rural+users
--------
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Hardell
Authors: L Hardell, M Carlberg and K Hansson Mild.
Published in the June 2005 Issue of Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
Summary: A new Swedish study has found a 3-fold increase in rural people who have used a digital mobile phone for at least 5 years.
Lennart Hardell and colleagues have continued to analyse their data on 1429 Swedish cell-phone users who were diagnosed with a brain tumour between January 1997 and June 2000. The major finding that they announced was a 1.5 fold (1.4/0.9) higher risk of brain tumours in rural users compared with users who used their phone mostly in urban settings, rising to a 3.5 fold (3.4/0.9) increased ratio for people who had used their digital phones for 5 years or more. This rose to a six-fold (8.4/1.4) difference when only malignant brain tumours were considered. They suggest that this difference may be due to the fact that mobile phones uses "adaptive power control" which reduces the transmitted microwave power when they are used close to base stations - as is usually the case in urban areas.
Digital GSM Handsets can radiate 1000 times more power when they have to communicate in a poor signal strength area compared to when they are close to a base station. They also normally use full power at all times while they are "dialing out" and waiting for the called person to answer their phone, so it is a good idea to hold the phone away from your head during this time.
More interesting, though not mentioned in the paper's abstract, are the latency time trends - that is the overall rates for all users depending on how many years they have used their phones over.
For analogue phone users, over all tumours, there is a 1.9-fold increase (i.e. almost a doubling) after using the phone for 10 years. This is especially the case for people who use their phone for over 90 minutes per week (about 15 minutes per day). Below that level of usage there are too few cases to meaningfully calculate an odds-ratio. For all users, combined, the OR is still 1.6 (1.1-2.5), which is a significant result. For malignant tumours only the result is stronger; overall showing a significant OR of 2.1 after 10 years (1.1-4.0)
For GSM users, data is not available for 10 years use. The overall results for 1 and 5 years are not significant, but do increase for people who use their phone for more than 10 minutes per day from 0.9 after one year to 1.4 after five years. Note that these are not heavy users.
For cordless phones (not clear if analogue or DECT or other type) there is a significant 1.4-fold increase after 5 years (1.5-fold in heavy user group), rising to a non-significant (too few cases) 2.1-fold increase after 10 years (0.7-6.3).
This study suggests that calls are best made in areas close to a base station for the particular handset's network, as that will reduce the microwave radiation levels the user will be exposed to.
However, Powerwatch's overall conclusion is that this study confirms that regular mobile and cordless phone use may well at least double the risk of developing a brain tumour over time, especially a malignant one, and that people should be advised to use such phones only when necessary and they should make most calls on an old-fashioned wired landline phone or wired (not Bluetooth) voice-over-internet (e.g. Skype) network.
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20050516_tumour.asp
Informant: Sylvie
--------
Tumour Risk For Rural Cell Phone Users
http://www.rense.com/general65/ceek.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/17/nmob17.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/05/17/ixhome.html
Informant: Iris Atzmon
--------
Thank you very much for this information!
I am happy to see Örjan Hallberg's and my own results*** now being much further substantiated by Hardell and his team! Remember that when our studies were published, we were heavily attacked by certain Swedish epidemiologist for being "wrong", for being "amateurs", for "publishing our results in the wrong journal", etc. It will be very nice now to rather read Hardell's and coworkers comments about our papers instead!
***e.g. Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Mobile handset output power and health", Electromag Biol Med 2004; 23: 229-239
and
Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "1997 - A curious year in Sweden", Eur J Cancer Prev 2004; 13: 535-538
Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
--------
This also appears in today's Daily Mail
Sandi
Today's Independent reports the latest analysis by Lennart Hardell, Sweden, published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Mobile phone use in rural areas carries three times the cancer risk
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/story.jsp?story=638936
Andy
From Mast Network
--------
Rural mobile phone use 'riskier'
http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=50
Mobile phone health risks greater for rural users
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Mobile+phone+health+risks+greater+for+rural+users
--------
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Hardell
Starmail - 17. Mai, 13:37
15
Mai
2005
Auf dem 54. Deutschen Ärztekongress in Berlin wurde am 9. Mai 2005 die Naila-Studie vorgestellt
Dr. med. Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam Pfingsten 2005
Karl-May-Str. 48
96049 Bamberg
Tel.0951/12300 Fax 0951/2972506
peter.selsam@t-online.de
Ein wichtiger Schritt in der Mobilfunkdiskussion ist erfolgt:
Auf dem 54. Deutschen Ärztekongress in Berlin wurde am 9. Mai 2005 die Naila- Studie vorgestellt.
Fünf Hausärzte aus Naila hatten in einer retrospektiven Pilotstudie festgestellt, dass der Anteil von neu aufgetretenen Krebsfällen bei den Patienten, die während der letzten zehn Jahre in einem Abstand bis zu 400 Meter um die seit 1993 betriebene Mobilfunksendeanlage gewohnt hatten, gegenüber weiter entfernt lebenden Patienten signifikant höher war und die Patienten in durchschnittlich jüngerem Alter erkrankt waren. Für die Jahre 1999 bis 2004 – also nach fünf und mehr Jahren Betriebszeit des Senders – hatte sich das Malignomrisiko für die näher an der Sendstation lebende Bevölkerungsgruppe im Vergleich mit der Gruppe im Nailaer Außenbereich verdreifacht.
Ergänzend berichtete Dr. H.Eger auf dem Ärztekongress von ähnlichen bedrückenden Beobachtungen im Jahr 2004 in Österreich, Israel und England:
-Müllendorf ( Österreich )
In der Ortschaft mit 1200 Einwohnern kam es zu einer Verdreifachung von neuaufgetretenen Krebsfällen nach 5 Jahren Latenzzeit nach Installation des 1. Sendemastes ( Vortrag Dr. W. Jandrisovits auf dem Bamberger Mobilfunksymposium Januar 2005).
-Netanya ( Israel)
In der im Journal of Cancer Prevention April 2004 veröffentlichten Studie wurde das Neuauftreten von Krebserkrankungen in der Nähe eines Mobilfunksenders im Vergleich mit einer unbestrahlten Region untersucht. Die Autoren R. und D. Wolf finden bereits nach einem Jahr Laufzeit gegenüber der Gesamtbevölkerung und der Kontrollgruppe vierfach erhöhte Krebsraten bei Frauen, die sich im Folgejahr wiederholt.
- West Midlands ( England )
Bei einer Erhebung, an der Dr. J. Walker beteiligt war, zeigt sich eine ungewöhnliche Krebshäufung im Bereich der höchsten Strahlungsintensität um eine seit 8 Jahren sendende Basisstation. Die Untersuchung der Krebscluster in Verbindung mit der geschätzten und gemessenen Strahlenintensität wurde von Dr.Walker bereits mehrfach mit demselben Ergebnis durchgeführt.
Dr. P.M. Wiedemann (Jülich) stellte eine neue Risikoanalyse vor. Wissenschaftler hätten Studien aus den Jahren 2000 bis 2004 bewertet und hätten keine Belege für Gesundheitsschäden gefunden. Wiedemann musste in der Diskussion jedoch einräumen, dass in Deutschland außer in Naila keine Untersuchungen an Mobilfunkstandorten durchgeführt worden sind. Also fehlt der Risikoanalyse die wissenschaftliche Grundlage.
Obwohl sich seit 10 Jahren erkrankte Menschen von vielen Standorten verzweifelt an das Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, an die Strahlenschutzkommission und an das Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit wendeten, wurden die entscheidenden Fragen wissenschaftlich nicht untersucht:
Wie geht es den Menschen, die in der Nähe von Mobilfunkanlagen leben oder arbeiten, gesundheitlich?
Wie wirkt sich das Vorhandensein eines DECT-Telefones auf Bewohner und Nachbarn aus?
Von den Naturwissenschaftlern wurde es unterlassen, zu den vielen Erkrankten zu gehen und Studien durchzuführen. Daher haben sie keine wissenschaftliche Legitimation eine Bewertung des Gesundheitsrisikos vorzunehmen.
Die Ergebnisse ärztlicher Untersuchungen, die mangels offizieller Studien von etlichen Ärzten durchgeführt wurden, sind erschütternd:
- Seit Jahren erkranken viele Menschen z.T. schwer durch gepulste hochfrequente elektromagnetische Felder.
- Die behandelnden Ärzte erkannten die Ursache der Erkrankung oft nicht, da nach geltender Lehrmeinung eine Auswirkung auf die Gesundheit nicht für möglich gehalten wird.
- Wenn die Betroffenen selbst einen Zusammenhang mit der Hochfrequenz vermuteten (aus zeitlichen und räumlichen Gründen) wurden sie oft lächerlich gemacht, zu Psychotherapeuten geschickt und ihrem Schicksal gnadenlos überlassen.
Die Forschergruppe von Prof. Dr.R.Tauber, Berlin, die an der renommierten REFLEX-Studie mitgearbeitet hatte, stellte die Auswirkungen von EMF unterhalb der gültigen Grenzwerte auf die Erbsubstanz und auf Proteinkonzentrationen vor. Auch wenn aus diesen Laborbefunden nicht direkt auf Gesundheitsschäden geschlossen werden kann, sind diese Ergebnisse aus ärztlicher Sicht so beunruhigend, dass sofortiger Handlungsbedarf besteht.
Ein Naturwissenschaftler forscht.
Ein Arzt muss vorbeugen und heilen.
Vorbeugung und Heilung ist nur möglich durch Beendigung der Hochfrequenzexposition.
Bamberg, den 15.5.05
Dr. med. Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam
Ärzteinitiative Bamberger Appell
Nachricht von Christine Kind
--------
Die Programmgruppe Mensch, Umwelt, Technik des Forschungszentrums Jülich, ist eine sehr industrienahe Institution, deren Mitarbeiter sich seit Jahren durch Verharmlosung von Umweltgefahren hervortun und im Auftrag von Mobilfunk- und Atomindustrie durch die Lande ziehen und bei Veranstaltungen und in Fernsehsendungen auftreten, um die Sorgen besorgter Bürger herunterzuspielen. Die Programmgruppe Mensch Umwelt Technik (MUT) wird von Dr. Peter M. Wiedemann geleitet, Psychologe und in der Vergangenheit bereits in ähnlicher Weise für die Atomindustrie tätig. Als Partner der Programmgruppe werden beispielsweise T-Mobil und Vodaphone Produktentwicklung angegeben. http://tinyurl.com/7tmjr
Krebs Cluster
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Krebs+Cluster
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cornelia+Waldmann-Selsam+
Karl-May-Str. 48
96049 Bamberg
Tel.0951/12300 Fax 0951/2972506
peter.selsam@t-online.de
Ein wichtiger Schritt in der Mobilfunkdiskussion ist erfolgt:
Auf dem 54. Deutschen Ärztekongress in Berlin wurde am 9. Mai 2005 die Naila- Studie vorgestellt.
Fünf Hausärzte aus Naila hatten in einer retrospektiven Pilotstudie festgestellt, dass der Anteil von neu aufgetretenen Krebsfällen bei den Patienten, die während der letzten zehn Jahre in einem Abstand bis zu 400 Meter um die seit 1993 betriebene Mobilfunksendeanlage gewohnt hatten, gegenüber weiter entfernt lebenden Patienten signifikant höher war und die Patienten in durchschnittlich jüngerem Alter erkrankt waren. Für die Jahre 1999 bis 2004 – also nach fünf und mehr Jahren Betriebszeit des Senders – hatte sich das Malignomrisiko für die näher an der Sendstation lebende Bevölkerungsgruppe im Vergleich mit der Gruppe im Nailaer Außenbereich verdreifacht.
Ergänzend berichtete Dr. H.Eger auf dem Ärztekongress von ähnlichen bedrückenden Beobachtungen im Jahr 2004 in Österreich, Israel und England:
-Müllendorf ( Österreich )
In der Ortschaft mit 1200 Einwohnern kam es zu einer Verdreifachung von neuaufgetretenen Krebsfällen nach 5 Jahren Latenzzeit nach Installation des 1. Sendemastes ( Vortrag Dr. W. Jandrisovits auf dem Bamberger Mobilfunksymposium Januar 2005).
-Netanya ( Israel)
In der im Journal of Cancer Prevention April 2004 veröffentlichten Studie wurde das Neuauftreten von Krebserkrankungen in der Nähe eines Mobilfunksenders im Vergleich mit einer unbestrahlten Region untersucht. Die Autoren R. und D. Wolf finden bereits nach einem Jahr Laufzeit gegenüber der Gesamtbevölkerung und der Kontrollgruppe vierfach erhöhte Krebsraten bei Frauen, die sich im Folgejahr wiederholt.
- West Midlands ( England )
Bei einer Erhebung, an der Dr. J. Walker beteiligt war, zeigt sich eine ungewöhnliche Krebshäufung im Bereich der höchsten Strahlungsintensität um eine seit 8 Jahren sendende Basisstation. Die Untersuchung der Krebscluster in Verbindung mit der geschätzten und gemessenen Strahlenintensität wurde von Dr.Walker bereits mehrfach mit demselben Ergebnis durchgeführt.
Dr. P.M. Wiedemann (Jülich) stellte eine neue Risikoanalyse vor. Wissenschaftler hätten Studien aus den Jahren 2000 bis 2004 bewertet und hätten keine Belege für Gesundheitsschäden gefunden. Wiedemann musste in der Diskussion jedoch einräumen, dass in Deutschland außer in Naila keine Untersuchungen an Mobilfunkstandorten durchgeführt worden sind. Also fehlt der Risikoanalyse die wissenschaftliche Grundlage.
Obwohl sich seit 10 Jahren erkrankte Menschen von vielen Standorten verzweifelt an das Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, an die Strahlenschutzkommission und an das Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit wendeten, wurden die entscheidenden Fragen wissenschaftlich nicht untersucht:
Wie geht es den Menschen, die in der Nähe von Mobilfunkanlagen leben oder arbeiten, gesundheitlich?
Wie wirkt sich das Vorhandensein eines DECT-Telefones auf Bewohner und Nachbarn aus?
Von den Naturwissenschaftlern wurde es unterlassen, zu den vielen Erkrankten zu gehen und Studien durchzuführen. Daher haben sie keine wissenschaftliche Legitimation eine Bewertung des Gesundheitsrisikos vorzunehmen.
Die Ergebnisse ärztlicher Untersuchungen, die mangels offizieller Studien von etlichen Ärzten durchgeführt wurden, sind erschütternd:
- Seit Jahren erkranken viele Menschen z.T. schwer durch gepulste hochfrequente elektromagnetische Felder.
- Die behandelnden Ärzte erkannten die Ursache der Erkrankung oft nicht, da nach geltender Lehrmeinung eine Auswirkung auf die Gesundheit nicht für möglich gehalten wird.
- Wenn die Betroffenen selbst einen Zusammenhang mit der Hochfrequenz vermuteten (aus zeitlichen und räumlichen Gründen) wurden sie oft lächerlich gemacht, zu Psychotherapeuten geschickt und ihrem Schicksal gnadenlos überlassen.
Die Forschergruppe von Prof. Dr.R.Tauber, Berlin, die an der renommierten REFLEX-Studie mitgearbeitet hatte, stellte die Auswirkungen von EMF unterhalb der gültigen Grenzwerte auf die Erbsubstanz und auf Proteinkonzentrationen vor. Auch wenn aus diesen Laborbefunden nicht direkt auf Gesundheitsschäden geschlossen werden kann, sind diese Ergebnisse aus ärztlicher Sicht so beunruhigend, dass sofortiger Handlungsbedarf besteht.
Ein Naturwissenschaftler forscht.
Ein Arzt muss vorbeugen und heilen.
Vorbeugung und Heilung ist nur möglich durch Beendigung der Hochfrequenzexposition.
Bamberg, den 15.5.05
Dr. med. Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam
Ärzteinitiative Bamberger Appell
Nachricht von Christine Kind
--------
Die Programmgruppe Mensch, Umwelt, Technik des Forschungszentrums Jülich, ist eine sehr industrienahe Institution, deren Mitarbeiter sich seit Jahren durch Verharmlosung von Umweltgefahren hervortun und im Auftrag von Mobilfunk- und Atomindustrie durch die Lande ziehen und bei Veranstaltungen und in Fernsehsendungen auftreten, um die Sorgen besorgter Bürger herunterzuspielen. Die Programmgruppe Mensch Umwelt Technik (MUT) wird von Dr. Peter M. Wiedemann geleitet, Psychologe und in der Vergangenheit bereits in ähnlicher Weise für die Atomindustrie tätig. Als Partner der Programmgruppe werden beispielsweise T-Mobil und Vodaphone Produktentwicklung angegeben. http://tinyurl.com/7tmjr
Krebs Cluster
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Krebs+Cluster
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cornelia+Waldmann-Selsam+
Starmail - 15. Mai, 23:09
14
Mai
2005
Lloyd Morgan of the Brain Tumour Registry
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/lloyd_morgan_of_the_brain_tumour_registry.doc
.....sent by Milt Bowling, Hans Karow.
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:31 PM
Subject: Lloyd Morgan of the Brain Tumour Registry
This is brilliant. Enjoy.
Milt
Cancer Clusters in Vicinity to Cell-Phone Transmitter Stations
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/580224/
.....sent by Milt Bowling, Hans Karow.
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:31 PM
Subject: Lloyd Morgan of the Brain Tumour Registry
This is brilliant. Enjoy.
Milt
Cancer Clusters in Vicinity to Cell-Phone Transmitter Stations
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/580224/
Starmail - 14. Mai, 15:18
