Mobile Phone Radiation Harms DNA, New Study Finds
http://www.reuters.co.uk/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=healthNews&storyID=7141560


Informant: NHNE


Omega see also:

EU REFLEX Project Report
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/436261/



THE PUBLIC NEEDS PROTECTION
OUR HEALTH AUTHORITIES NEED TO ACT NOW

Quote-did not prove that mobile phones are a risk to health but concluded that more research is needed to see if effects can also be found outside a lab.- Unquote

Outside of the lab -studies are on-going everyday.The results are being placed in boxes and placed six feet under ground !!

Robert Riedlinger


Thank you for your information.

Once again I take this opportunity to remind everyone (is anyone listening?) that EM radiation effects are CUMULATIVE !! Never lose sight of that word - 'cummulative.'

It sounds very simple and basic I know and not at all profound but when taken in to the over-all picture it is probably the single most important aspect of radiation. And I will continue to harass anyone at any opportunity in discussing EMR to remember that it is CUMULATIVE.

Also, EMR effects ALL living systems. Including birds. (Thankyou Milt - I owe you).

In order to raise awareness in the market we need to decribe 'cell-phones' as what they really are which is 'microwave phones'. We don't refer to trains, trucks and bus's as 'terrain re-locators' then why the hell do we refer to microwave phones by the name 'cel'? That only describes their geograhical coverage pattern?

Basic Cognitive Science.

Once the public (the $$market) is aware that microwave radiation can be dangerous it follows they will show concern about sticking a mini microwave oven in their collective ears.

The message is simple -

1. EMR is cumulative
2. microwave phones emit EMR.

There is not a single scientist on this planet today that can deny those two brief simple statements.

Basic Cognitive Science - it could be helpful.


Larry Blackhall
Aldergrove BC
Canada

--------

Omega concerning John Mulder see:

Mobile Phone (Cell Phone) Base Stations and Human Health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/436719/

Phone Makers Ask for More Research into DNA Damage
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/450822/


http://www.google.de/search?q=Mobile+Phone+Radiation+Harms+DNA&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:de-DE:official

For those like me who struggle to understand the effects of masts in scientific terms, I quote beneath a few paragraphs I came across in a book called Handbook of stress, medicine and health by an American doctor, Cary L. Cooper (editor) published here in 1996. This was in the open shelf section of the Bodleian library in Oxford intended for use by science/medical undergraduates. I find it interesting that these things are openly available and if this kind of understanding is part of mainstream science, then how can they dismiss the physiological effects of masts that some of us are senstitive enough to be able to feel?

The quote: There is a bit about the various methods by which cells in the body communicates, then he says:….in the final analysis, all (of these) messages are transmitted by means of weak energy transfers across cell membranes. These occur at an atomic rather than a molecular level. It has also become increasingly apparent that the cell membrane is more than a protective shield studded with receptor sites for antibodies, small neuropeptides and other molecules. It appears to be a powerful signal amplifier that provides an interactive window through which the cell senses and responds to its environment. Some substances can pass freely back and forth through certain channels, but for others, the cell membrane is an impenetrable barrier. When designated molecules fit into special receptor sites, a subtle signal produces a sudden change in electrical tension between the interior and exterior of the cell, allowing a new channel to open for a few thousandths of a second. During this period, although millions of ions pass back and forth, the total current generated is only a few billionths of an ampere!

I believe that cell membranes may have receptor sites for subtle energy signals which react exactly as they would to chemical/molecular stimuli. Electrical stimulation of highly specific areas in the pain pathway produces analgesia, and microinjections of morphine at these precise sites have the identical effect. Injection or stimulation a few millimetres away is worthless. However, combining suboptimal doses of morphine or electrical stimulation, which alone are too weak to reduce pain, results in a synergistic effect that does provide analgesia. This suggests that for some receptors, the effect of weak electrical stimulation are completely congruent with those of morphine. Furthermore, the specific locations at which either molecular or electrical signals relieve pain are precisely the sites of action of the endorphins. If feeble electrical forces can produce such profound physiologic effects, this might account for the association of malignancy with proximity to high power lines, increased birth defects when electric blankets are used during pregnancy and a variety of psychophysiologic effects due to geomagnetic influences, including cancer. Such observations cannot be explained in terms of Newtonian physics or any form of chemical/molecular communication. It is quite likely that energies of similar magnitude can be generated in the body that could also affect cell growth and malignant change.

Hope this is useful to people.

Ann


From Mast Network

http://www.verum-foundation.de/cgi-bin/content.cgi?id=euprojekte01


Informant: FEB - The Swedish Association for the ElectroSensitive



EU REFLEX Project Report
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/436261/

Neue Studie

Effekte eines 910MHz Elektromagnetischen Feldes auf Rattenknochenmark

Demsia G, Vlastos D, Matthopoulos DP.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/effect_of_910-MHz_electromagnetic_field_on_rat_bone_marrow2004.01.178.pdf

Um die Möglichkeit zu untersuchen ob elektromagnetische Felder (EMF), produziert durch nichtionisierende Strahlung, als schädliche Erreger dazu fähig sind, gentoxische Effekte in Menschen zu verursachen, haben wir in der vorliegenden Studie den Effekt von 910MHz EMF auf Rattenknochenmark untersucht.

Ratten wurden täglich 2 Stunden über eine Periode von 30 Tagen bestrahlt. Bei der Untersuchung von Knochenmark Schmieren von EMF exponierten und scheinexponierten Tieren haben wir eine fast dreifache Erhöhung von Microkernen (MN) in Polychomatischen Erythrozyten (PCE) nach EMF Exposition beobachtet. Ein Vorkommen von Microkernen wurde auch bei Polymorphkernigen Zellen beobachtet. Die Vorkommen von Microkernen in weiblichen Ratten war kleiner als die in männlichen Ratten. Die Ergebnisse zeigen auf, dass 910MHz EMF als ein schädlicher Erreger betrachtet werden kann, welcher in der Lage dazu ist, gentoxische Effekte zu produzieren.

Quelle: ScientificWorldJournal. 2004 Oct 20;4 Suppl 2:48-54.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15517102


Aus: Elektrosmognews vom 18.12.2004

ScientificWorldJournal. 2004 Oct 20;4 Suppl 2:48-54.


Effect of 910-MHz electromagnetic field on rat bone marrow.

Demsia G, Vlastos D, Matthopoulos DP.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/effect_of_910-MHz_electromagnetic_field_on_rat_bone_marrow2004.01.178.pdf

Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Management, Ioannina University, Seferi 2, Agrinio 30100, Greece. gntemsia@cc.uoi.gr

Aiming to investigate the possibility of electromagnetic fields (EMF) developed by nonionizing radiation to be a noxious agent capable of inducing genotoxicity to humans, in the current study we have investigated the effect of 910-MHz EMF in rat bone marrow. Rats were exposed daily for 2 h over a period of 30 consecutive days. Studying bone marrow smears from EMF-exposed and sham-exposed animals, we observed an almost threefold increase of micronuclei (MN) in polychromatic erythrocytes (PCEs) after EMF exposure. An induction of MN was also observed in polymorphonuclear cells. The induction of MN in female rats was less than that in male rats. The results indicate that 910-MHz EMF could be considered as a noxious agent capable of producing genotoxic effects.

PMID: 15517102 [PubMed - in process]

Microwave News is back!

Last September I attended the International Scientific Conference on Childhood Leukemia in London. At the end of the weeklong meeting, I was convinced, more than ever, that the time has come for precautionary policies to reduce exposures from power-frequency EMFs.

On further reflection, I realized that the reason simple and low-cost measures have yet to be adopted has less to do with resistance from the electric utility industry (what else would one expect?) than from the public health community.

Mike Repacholi of the World Health Organization¹s (WHO) International EMF Project, has been the #1 foot-dragger. Last month, he released a draft ³Precautionary Framework² with a case study on ELF EMFs. This came close to two years after Repacholi and his assistant Leeka Kheifets endorsed applying the Precautionary Principle to control EMF cancer risks --but they then quickly flip-flopped and withdrew the proposal. Sad to say, they have turned their small corner of the WHO into an industry outpost.

All the excuses not to protect children used by Repacholi, Kheifets and others at health agencies in the US and the UK are bogus. It¹s all explained in a special issue of Microwave News, now posted on our Web site: http://www.microwavenews.com/headlines.html#whoppemf

You can read it online or you can download a pdf of the complete special issue. Simply go to http://www.microwavenews.com .

Let's hope for better in 2005.

Best,
Louis Slesin, PhD
Editor
Microwave News, A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation
155 East 77th Street
New York, NY 10021, USA
Phone: +1 (212) 517-2800; Fax: +1 (212) 734-0316
E-mail: mwn@pobox.com
Internet: http://www.microwavenews.com

--------

Subject: WHO dragging its feet on precautionary principle
To: "Louis Slesin, Microwave News" info@microwavenews.com

Louis: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp is also dragging its feet! They ordered a study of EMF levels in Canadian Housing in 1995 and never published it when it came out in 1996! When ELF magnetic fields were classified 2B, I convinced them to give me a copy: they hired me to do a summary which was suppposed to be published as a research highlight, but they still haven't published it.

However, research head Jim Robar authorized me to publish it in my magazine in Dec. 2001. It can be of great use to many, but it's in French: http://www.21esiecle.qc.ca/CEMcanadiennes.htm

Original author Andrew Michrowski still has not been paid for his work. He's at pacenet@canada.com . He found very high levels in children's bedrooms. Quebec may have the highest exposure rates in the world as more than 70% of homes use electric heat. Grounding on the water main is a big problem, especially with net current circulating in urban row-house developments. Andrew's paper shows simple ways to reduce exposure. I'm still putting pressure on CMHC: Researcher Christopher Ives cives@cmhc-schl.gc.ca , who hired Andrew, is a good guy, but his boss Robar no longer returns my calls. Seems utilities put too much pressure on him, but as Andrew says, their power lines are rarely the main cause of the problem. Wiring erros by electricians are the main cause!

Keep up your good work and take care,

Andre Fauteux, Editor/Publisher
La Maison du 21e siecle magazine
Tel./Fax: (450) 228-1555
afauteux@securenet.net -
info@21esiecle.qc.ca
2955 lac Lucerne, Ste-Adele Qc J8B 3K9 Canada
http://www.21esiecle.qc.ca



http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Andre+Fauteux

Industrie und Politik gehen gegenwärtig von der Vorstellung aus, dass 1) bis heute ein kausaler Zusammenhang zwischen der Entstehung von Erkrankungen oder auch nur Befindlichkeitsstörungen und der Einwirkung elektromagnetischer Felder (RF-EMF) aus dem Telekommunikationsbereich nicht bewiesen ist, 2) bis heute keine biologischen Mechanismen bekannt sind, die durch RF-EMF unterhalb der geltenden Sicherheitsgrenze ausgelöst werden und zur Krankheitsentstehung beitragen können und 3) Vorsorgemaßnahmen als Folge dieser Überlegungen keine Berechtigung haben, weil sie die Angst in der Bevölkerung eher schüren als vermindern. Die Ergebnisse des REFLEX-Projektes, die belegen, dass RF-EMF unterhalb der geltenden Sicherheitsgrenzen in isolierten menschlichen Zellen Gene schädigen und ihre Funktion verändern können., lassen sich mit einer solchen Denkweise schwerlich in Einklang bringen. Durch das Aufdecken von Mechanismen, die bei der Entstehung z. B. von Krebs und anderen chronischen Erkrankungen eine maßgebliche Rolle spielen, ist zwar nicht bewiesen, dass RF-EMF das Krankheitsrisiko erhöht, die Plausibilität für eine solche Annahme, für die die Ergebnisse mehrerer epidemiologischer Studien sprechen, wird jedoch verstärkt. Deshalb wäre es an der Zeit, dass die Entscheidungsträger in Politik und Industrie das Vorsorgeprinzip zum Schutz der Bevölkerung im Umgang mit RF-EMF anerkennen, bis die Erkenntnislage eine einigermaßen zuverlässige Beurteilung erlaubt.

Damit dies nicht zu lange dauert, ist zu fordern, dass der Wissenschaft in einem nächsten Schritt vorrangig Mittel zur Verfügung gestellt werden um abzuklären, ob die in isolierten Zellen im Reagenzglas nachgewiesenen Genschäden auch in den Organen z. B. im Gehirn von RF-EMF-exponierten Tieren auftreten. Sollte dies der Fall sein, was immerhin im Bereich des Möglichen liegt, haben wir unzweifelhaft ein ernstes Problem.

REFLEX* - ein Projekt gefördert von der EU im Fünften Rahmenprogramm für Forschung und Entwicklung, Themenbereich "Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources", Key Action 4 "Environment and Health": QLK4-CT-1999-01574 - wurde von 12 Arbeitsgruppen aus sieben europäischen Ländern von 2000 bis 2004 durchgeführt. Die Kosten betrugen insgesamt 3,2 Mio.Euro. Der Abschlussbericht des Forschungsvorhabens ist demnächst im Internet verfügbar.

*Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Energy Electro-magnetic Field (EMF) Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods

Quelle: EU-Kommission akzeptiert Abschlussbericht des REFLEX-Projektes über biologische Wirkungen elektromagnetischer Felder:
http://www.verum-foundation.de/cgi-bin/content.cgi?id=aktuelles


Nachricht von Jeannot Pesché



Schockstudie der EU: Handys knacken die DNS und bewirken schwere Zellschädigung
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/482751/

Lies, Damn Lies and the WHO
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/lies_damn_lies_and_the_who.htm

The report sent has yet again been updated (page 1 -2 only) and the absolute final version is now on my web site as a pdf file.

http://www.emfacts.com/papers/moscow_conf.pdf

Don Maisch



Exactly the same happened at the meeting on heat-shock proteins in Helsinki earlier this year. You may remember the discussion referred to in Louis Slesin's newsletter. The final conclusion from that meeting was written by a hand lead by the telecommunication industry i.e. Motorola and all the others. This statement completely ignored and left out other opinions and scientific facts mentioned during the discussions, as it did not suit them.

At the meeting in Kos, WHO's Mike Repacholi also said that scientists should certainly not address the public directly and worse of all politicians and the press. If scientists wanted to tell something, this should be done through the authorized bodies like WHO, ICNIRP etc.

Sianette Kwee


Omega see also:

Workshop on Biological Effects of EMF, Kos, Greece
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/363969/

Letter and attachment to the WHO in response to its Precautionary Framework
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/473990/

http://omega.twoday.net/stories/436261/


Project Progress Summary

Section 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

Title of the project: Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Energy

Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods

Acronym of the project: REFLEX

Type of contract: Shared Cost RTD Total project cost (in euro)

3.149.621 ?

Contract number Duration (in months) EU contribution (in euro)

QLK4-CT-1999-01574 52 Months 2.059.450 ?

Commencement date

1 February 2000

Period covered by the progress report

1 February 2000 - 31 May 2004

PROJECT COORDINATOR

Name
Prof. Dr. Franz Adlkofer
Title
Executive Director
Address
Pettenkoferstr. 33
D-80336 München
Telephone
+49 89 5309880
Telefax
+49 89 53098829

E-mail address
prof.adlkofer@verum-foundation.de

Key words (5 maximum - Please include specific keywords that best describe the project.).

Electromagnetism, Bioeffects, Risk to Health

World wide web address (the project's www address ) ---

List of participants Provide all partners' details including their legal status in the contract i.e., contractor, assistant contractor (to which contractor?)

1. Prof. Dr. Franz Adlkofer, VERUM - Stiftung für Verhalten und Umwelt, Pettenkoferstrasse 33, D-80336 München, Germany,

Tel: +49 89 5309880 / Fax: +49 89 53098829 / E-mail:
prof.adlkofer@verum-foundation.de (contractor)

2. Prof. Dr. Rudolf Tauber, Institut für Klinische Chemie, Universitätsklinikum Benjamin Franklin, Hindenburgdamm 30,
D-12200 Berlin, Germany, Tel: +49 30 84452555 / Fax: +49 30 84554152 /
E-mail: Tauber@ukbf.fu-berlin.de (contractor)

3. Prof. Dr. Hugo W. Rüdiger, Abteilung für Arbeitsmedizin, Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin IV, Währinger Gürtel 18-20,
A-1090 Wien, Austria, Tel: +43 1 404004701 / Fax: +43 1 4088011 / E-mail: hugo.ruediger@akh-wien.ac.at (contractor)

4. Dr. Anna M. Wobus, Institut für Pflanzengenetik und Kulturpflanzenforschung, Corrensstrasse 3, D-06446 Gatersleben,
Germany, Tel: +49 39482 5256 / Fax: +49 39482 5481 / E-mail:
wobusam@ipk-gatersleben.de (contractor)

5. Dr. Angeles Trillo, Insalud, Ramon y Cajal Hospital, Carretera Colmenar km.9, E-28034 Madrid, Spain, Tel: +34 91 3368699 / Fax: +34 91 3368171 / E-mail: angeles.trillo@hrc.es (contractor)

6. Prof. Dr. Dariusz Leszczynski, Radiobiology, STUK - Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Laippatie 4, FIN-0881 Helsinki, Finland, Tel: +358 9 75988694 / Fax: +358 9 75988556 / E-mail: dariusz.leszczynski@stuk.fi (contractor)

7. Prof. Dr. Hans-Albert Kolb, Institut für Biophysik, Universität Hannover, Herrenhäuser Strasse 2, D-30419 Hannover, Germany,
Tel: +49 511 7622612 / Fax: +49 511 7623830 / E-mail: kolb@mbox.biophysik.uni-hannover.de (contractor)

8. Prof. Dr. Ferdinando Bersani, Universita degli Studi di Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 6/2, I-40127 Bologna, Italy, Tel: +39 (0)51 2095122 / Fax: +39 (0)51 2095050 / E-mail: bersani@gpxbof.df.unibo.it (contractor)

9. Dr. Isabelle Lagroye, Laboratoire PIOM, ENSCPB, 16 Av. Pey Berland, F-33607 Pessac Cedex, France, Tel: +33 (0)5 40002821 / Fax: +33-(0)5 40006631 / E-mail: i.lagroye@enscpb.fr (contractor)

10. Prof. Dr. Niels Kuster, Institut für Integrierte Systeme, ETH Zentrum, Gloriastrasse 37/39, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland, Tel: +41 1 632 2737 / Fax: +41 1 632 1057 / E-mail: niels.kuster@ifh.ee.ethz.ch (contractor)

11. Prof. Dr. Francesco Clementi, Cattedra di Farmacologia, Universita degli Studi di Milano, Via Vanvitelli 32, I-20129 Milano, Italy, Tel: +39 (0)2 50316962 / Fax: +39 (0)2 7490574 / E-mail: f.clementi@in.cnr.it (contractor)

12. Dr. Christian Maercker, Ressourcenzentrum für Genomforschung GmbH (RZPD), TP3 EG, Im Neuenheimer Feld 580, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany; Tel: +49 6221 424741 / Fax: +49 6221 424704 / E-mail: c.maercker@dkfz.de

Section 2: Project Progress Report NOT CONFIDENTIAL

Objectives: Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) in relation to health is a controversial topic throughout the industrial world. So far epidemiological and animal studies have generated conflicting data and thus uncertainty regarding possible adverse health effects. This situation has triggered controversies in communities especially in Europe with its high density of population and industry and the omnipresence of EMF in infrastructures and consumer products. These controversies are affecting the siting of facilities, leading people to relocate, schools to close or power lines to be re-sited, all at great expense. The causality between EMF exposure and disease can never be regarded as proven without knowledge and understanding of the basic mechanisms possibly triggered by EMF. To search for those basic mechanisms powerful technologies developed in toxicology and molecular biology were to be employed in the REFLEX project to investigate cellular and sub-cellular responses of living cells exposed to EMF in vitro.

Results and Milestones: The strengths of REFLEX are based firstly on the adoption of a common technological platform for ELF-EMF and RF-EMF exposures that allow the replication of positive findings between the collaborating partners. Secondly, on the adoption of the post-genomic technologies (DNA microarrays and proteomics) that enables very large numbers of potential cellular effects to be examined simultaneously without prejudice as to mechanisms. The data obtained in the course of the REFLEX project showed that ELF-EMF had genotoxic effects on primary cell cultures of human fibroblasts and on other cell lines. These results were obtained in two laboratories and confirmed in two additional laboratories outside the REFLEX project, while no such effects could be observed in a further laboratory. ELF-EMF generated DNA strand breaks at a significant level at a flux density as low as 35 µT. There was a strong positive correlation between both the intensity and duration of exposure to ELF-EMF and the increase in single and double strand DNA breaks and micronuclei frequencies. Surprisingly this genotoxic effect was only observed when cells were exposed to intermittent ELF-EMF, but not to continuous exposure. Responsiveness of fibroblast to ELFEMF increased with the age of the donor and in the presence of specific genetic repair defects. The effect also differed among the other types of cells examined. In particular, lymphocytes from adult donors were not responsive. Chromosomal aberrations were also observed after ELF-EMF exposure of human fibroblasts. The following observations were made in different REFLEX laboratories:

1) ELF-EMF at a flux density of about 2 mT upregulated the expression of early genes, such as p21, c-jun and egr-1, in p53-deficient mouse embryonic stem cells, but not in healthy wildtype cells;

2) ELF-EMF (0.1 mT) increased the proliferation rate of neuroblastoma cells; and

3) ELF-EMF (0.8 mT) enhanced the differentiation of mouse stem cells into cardiomyocytes. However, no clear-cut and unequivocal effects of ELF-EMF on DNA synthesis, cell cycle, cell differentiation, cell proliferation and apoptosis were found.

With respect to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF), data showed that RF-EMF produced genotoxic effects in fibroblasts, granulosa cells and HL60 cells. Cells responded to RF-EMF exposure between SAR level 0.3 and 2 W/kg with a significant increase in single and double strand DNA breaks and in micronuclei frequency. Chromosomal aberrations in fibroblasts were observed after RF-EMF exposure. RFEMF at a SAR of 1.5 W/kg downregulated the expression of neuronal genes in neuronal precursor cells and upregulated the expression of early genes in p53-deficient embryonic stem cells, but not in wildtype cells.

Proteomic analyses on human endothelial cell lines showed that exposure to RF-EMF changed the expression and phosphorylation of numerous, largely unidentified proteins. Among these proteins is the heat shock protein hsp27, a marker for cellular stress responses. There was no evidence that RF-EMF affected processes such as cell proliferation, apoptosis or immune cell functionality.

For both ELF-EMF and RF-EMF, the results of the whole genome cDNA micro-array and proteomic analyses indicated that EMF may activate several groups of genes that play a role in cell division, cell proliferation and cell differentiation. At present the biological relevance of these findings can not be assessed.

Benefits and Beneficiaries: The REFLEX data have made a substantial addition to the data base relating to genotoxic and phenotypic effects of both ELF-EMF and RF-EMF on in vitro cellular systems. The data neither preclude nor confirm a health risk due to EMF exposure nor was the project designed for this purpose. Its value lies in providing new data that will enable mechanisms of EMF effects to be studied more effectively than in the past. Furthermore, the REFLEX data provide new information that will be used for risk evaluation by WHO, IARC and ICNIRP.

Future Actions: The REFLEX project has created novel results. From a scientific point of view, it has to be stated very clearly that the REFLEX data do not prove a causal link between EMF exposure and any adverse health effects. The genotoxic and phenotypic effects, which have been reported within REFLEX, clearly require further studies. These studies should include extensive external replications of the key observations reported, initially using the same technological platform. A further objective should be the extension of REFLEX investigations to appropriate animal models (e.g. genetically modified mice) and human volunteer studies.


Informant: Daniele

--------

http://www.verum-foundation.de/cgi-bin/content.cgi?id=euprojekte01

REFLEX Project Summary
http://www.verum-foundation.de/www2004/html/pdf/euprojekte01/REFLEX_ProgressSummary_231104.pdf

REFLEX Final Report Part 1
http://www.verum-foundation.de/www2004/html/pdf/euprojekte01/REFLEX_Final%20Report_Part%201.pdf

REFLEX Final Report Part 2
http://www.verum-foundation.de/www2004/html/pdf/euprojekte01/REFLEX_Final%20Report_Part%202.pdf

REFLEX Final Report Part 3
http://www.verum-foundation.de/www2004/html/pdf/euprojekte01/REFLEX_Final%20Report_Part%203.pdf

REFLEX Final Report Part 4
http://www.verum-foundation.de/www2004/html/pdf/euprojekte01/REFLEX_Final%20Report_Part%204.pdf

REFLEX List of Publications
http://www.verum-foundation.de/www2004/html/pdf/euprojekte01/QLK4-CT-1999-01574_REFLEX_Publications.pdf

--------

Mobile Phones Break DNA And Scramble Genomes
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/476242/