EMF Protection – The Truth About Chips, Diodes, Neutralizers, Pendants, Amulets Etc.

There’s hardly a day goes by that someone doesn’t send me a message saying, “have you seen the xxx EMF harmonizer, does it work?” Or, “have you seen the xxx cell phone chip, does it work?” Or, “have you seen the xxx resonator?” And so on.

I reply and people then say “are you sure you don’t recommend it they’ve got research on their website, can you check their research?” They say “are you sure it doesn’t work there are lots of people that say it does.”

If you’re asking these kinds of questions and want to know what my answer is, then read on.

Why I’m Speaking Out About This

In the beginning ElectricSense was about me blowing steam off on a subject I believed in strongly (and still do). My health had suffered badly from supposedly “harmless” EMF exposures. It disgusted me to think of other people succumbing to ill health in the same way I had, having to live what I’d lived (particularly kids), when I could do something about it.

What disgusted me even more were the companies selling fake EMF protection devices seeking to make a quick buck out of all this. I’ve been taken in by the slick talk, the promises, over and over again. The bracelets, pendants, stickers, plug in harmonizers, USB resonators, software, etc that can somehow make my symptoms go away. Well here’s the thing. None of these solutions worked for me. That’s why I’m speaking out about this.

The Question On Everybody’s Lips

When people visit my website the number one question everybody has about EMF protection is “what works?” Some people are just curious, they want to safeguard their health. Others are desperate for a solution because they already have symptoms.

To answer this question and lay out what works I wrote an EMF protection Free Report. And to help people who already have symptoms I wrote a book on how to deal with electrical sensitivity.  Do you know what? Neither in my Free Report nor in my book do I recommend using these EMF gadgets.

Are These EMF Protection Gadgets Scams?

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines a scam as “a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation”. Are these companies intending to defraud or deceive? Well, none of the gadgets I’ve tried worked, and I’ve tried many.

There are literally hundreds of these products now on the market. The companies that are selling them say they work and they’ve got some very clever marketing surrounding these devices. Generally their claims are “backed-up” by research. They have to have the research, because without it they wouldn’t sell anything. So they pay to have the research done, but in reality they pay for a desired result. And they put testimonials on their website from people who sing the praises of what they’re selling.

Why Do People Say These Gadgets Work?

Ask yourself which people say they work. Do you know anyone that say they work? And how do you know the testimonials are real? Unscrupulous companies think nothing of using false testimonials or paying people to give positive testimonials.

And then there’s the placebo effect. People buy these devices with a very strong belief that they will work. Because they believe they work, sometimes they do. But in reality they don’t. It’s what’s known as the placebo effect. The beneficial effect of the fake EMF protection device is derived entirely from the expectations that the person has about the gadget working.

There are a lot of people that have reported apparent improved health when they first bought one of these gadgets (myself included) but then over time their health has deteriorated again.

What Do All These EMF Gadgets Have In Common?

What all these devices have in common is there’s virtually no way of knowing for sure if they work. Trying to measure with an EMF meter or similar will tell you nothing. All you’ve got is the company that’s selling them assurance that it works.

Compare this with classic (or direct) EMF protection which relies on taking measurable action. You buy an EMF meter, it gives a reading. Whatever you do to reduce these exposures you can then measure in a very concrete way by using your EMF meter to measure again. If necessary you shield some more and then you measure again. And so on and so forth.

There’s another thing. When you buy an EMF meter it tells you your exposure levels. When you do this you’re not just acknowledging the problem, you’re making an important first step towards facing up to reality. You’re saying “these are the EMFs in my environment”. You can’t kid yourself that this or that resonator or harmonizer has made things safer, your meter will tell you if it’s safer.

When you buy an EMF protection gadget the internal dialogue is completely different. You might be acknowledging the problem but you think can cheat it with a “money can solve anything approach.” But you can’t.

Are These Devices Dangerous?

They can be. It usually works something like this: You go out and buy your EMF protection gadget. You assume it works so you increase your use of EMF technologies. Which increases your EMF exposure. Eventually you fall ill.

For millions of years our bodies have evolved in an environment where the only significant EMFs present were those emanating from the earth itself. Our bodies haven’t evolved to deal with the man-made EMFs which have been thrust upon us in the last few decades or so.

Get Clear

There’s one thing you must get absolutely 100% clear on - the ONLY way to achieve true EMF protection is by respecting your body and respecting nature. You can’t cheat or outsmart nature.

The foundation of true EMF protection is measurement, avoidance and protection. It means minimizing your exposure to EMFs while simultaneously supporting your body with the raw materials it needs to protect and repair itself. It mean’s looking at the big picture. It’s what I call direct and indirect protection.

If anybody tells you any different view their motives with suspicion. No doubt they’re trying to sell you something.

If my motivations were monetary I’d just strike a deal with one of the companies selling these gadgets, tell my website visitors to buy xyz gadget and then live of the profits. It’s not about the money for me. I want people to know the truth.

Where Does That Leave Us?

I take a firm line on this issue, that’s where it leaves me. This firm line is borne out of my own hard gained experience and research. Above all it’s borne out of my desire to do the right thing.

Where it leaves you is with a choice. You can go the EMF protection gadget route, that’s your choice. And I respect that.

I created this website to help people and share EMF protection solutions that I know work, not to debate the relative merits of these devices. So if you put a question to me on the website citing an EMF protection product name and asking my opinion, don’t be offended if I don’t answer.

Why This Firm Line?

There are several reasons:

• I know there are people that ask me genuine questions about these devices. But I’ve noticed that many comments made are just thinly veiled attempts at trying to sell a product: “hey I’ve tried this new sticker www.websiteaddress and it really works”. Because of the way the Internet works any lip service (comment of any kind) I give to these devices, even if it’s to advise people against the use of them, will give them free publicity – so please don’t cite EMF gadget product names in your comments.
• Most of these gadgets are about somehow making these EMFs safe. It’s the principle that’s wrong. High EMF exposures cannot be tampered with and made safe. EMF protection should not about artificially devising ways of enabling your body to endure higher and higher doses of EMF exposure. It goes against the laws of nature. Instead, focus on respecting and being in harmony with nature.
• studies say EMF exposures are cumulative. An EMF protection gadget that makes you feel as though you can’t feel these exposures might sound attractive. But even if its stops you from feeling the effects of these exposures what about their biological effects? Does it also stop the adverse bio effects of these EMF exposures? No it doesn’t – in any case there are no studies to support it does.
• its the whole philosophy of these EMF gadgets which is wrong. We’re back to the band-aid approach of masking symptoms. It’s much better to deal with these symptoms openly and honestly.

Above all because I have to do what I believe in. If I start to endorse EMF protection gadgets I don’t believe in this makes me no better than the people that are making zillions from peddling the wireless and other EMF technology when they know full well the harm they’re inflicting.

If you’ve sent me a question asking my opinion on this or that sticker, diode, resonator or harmonizer and I’ve directed you to this page, you now understand why I’ve sent you here.

source

The buzz about EMF

Many people are concerned these days about the effects of cell-phones, wifi and similar devices on bees. Most scientists that study pollinators are more concerned about pesticides, however. Indeed, the European Commission voted in April 2013 to ban the use of neonicotinoid pesticides in EU member countries, while no comparable action has been taken to address claims that radio frequency signals cause bee colony collapse. So what’s behind the buzz over cell-phones?

The experimental evidence is limited to a few studies that placed cordless phone bases or cell phones in honeybee hives and observed changes in behavior. In one study, bees made warning sounds (“piping”) in the presence of active cell phones. In another study, bees were less likely to return to hives where electronic devices had been installed.

Bees’ ability to detect and avoid an electromagnetic field (EMF) does not by itself establish that EMF harms bees. Beekeepers know that piping is a response to many kinds of foreign objects. Our own bodies sense heat far below the level at which it is harmful. We taste a grain of salt (not harmful) as well as a bucket of seawater (quite bad to drink), and we smell tiny traces of sulfur dioxide (“rotten eggs”) at well below hazardous levels.

Can so-called “electrosmog” (total ambient radio frequency EMF) interfere with bee navigation? Some animals appear to orient themselves and navigate using the earth’s magnetic field, including pigeons, fruit flies, and some bats. Radio frequency EMF is not magnetic, however; unlike the low frequency EMF generated by power lines. Honeybees and bumblebees appear to be mainly visual navigators, moreover, using the angle of the sun and internal biological clocks to compute their positions.

Bumblebees have also been observed making short test flights and looking back to their nests, apparently making visual maps of their vicinity. And a study just published last fall discovered that bumblebees compute the shortest routes to flower patches before they leave their nests!

When a bumblebee lands on a flower to collect nectar and pollen, it discharges the flower’s weak static electric charge. Research published earlier this year shows that bees avoid flowers that have been discharged. Presumably they can sense the charge, the way we humans sense static electricity in our hair. This still does not link bee behavior with radio frequency EMF, any more than the human ability to feel and hear static electricity demonstrates that we can feel radio frequency transmissions.

Dr. Albert Manville of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concluded in an official 2009 review of the science that “We simply do not know” how much EMF affects bees or other wildlife. He recommended further studies, but warned that they “must attempt to eliminate extraneous variables that may bias study results including diseases, parasites, weather and climatic events, pesticides, contaminants, and other mortality factors on insects and other wildlife.”

Few studies published thus far meet this test. A review of 113 studies, published earlier this year in the journal Environment International, found that while most of them reported some kind of harm from EMR, they were inconsistent with regard to the level of harm caused by any given level of EMR. If there is a direct cause-and-effect relationship between radio frequency signals and health, increasing or decreasing the electromagnetic dose should have a consistent effect on the amount of harm done.

Past studies also exposed animals to unrealistically high levels of radio frequency EMF, comparable to talking on a cell-phone for hours to days without a break. Some humans do expose themselves to that much power, but ambient levels of total RF-EMF in the environment are significantly lower.

We measured EMF levels on Lopez one June afternoon. The highest we recorded was, not surprisingly, about 50 feet from the base of the cell-phone tower: average power density per square meter was 0.4 microwatts with fluctuations to 15.8 microwatts. A few hundred feet away, at the Golf Club, average power density fell to 0.3 microwatts. Lopez Library was 0.2 microwatts and Lopez Village less than 0.1 microwatt. Except for some brief “spikes” near the base of the cell tower, our measurements were one-millionth of the exposure levels you can expect from “pressed to head” cell-phone use.

All life on earth depends on two kinds of EMR: visible light and heat (infrared). Like many other essentials of life, including electrolytes in our diet, EMF can be harmful at high doses. Very bright light harms our eyes, high heat denatures our body’s proteins, too much sodium raises our blood pressure, and high potassium levels can stop our heart. EMF is not inherently harmful. The question is: how much of any particular kind of EMF is too much?

Meanwhile, homeowners in San Juan County continue to buy products containing the neonicotinoid compound Imidacloprid, which unquestionably kills bees and has now been banned in Europe. We could tackle that threat to local bees immediately.

Kwiaht researchers are conducting baseline inventories of native pollinators in the islands. Barsh is the director of Kwiaht and Murphy is a botanist at Kwiaht. To find out more, and how you can help, write kwiaht@gmail.com.

Source: http://www.islandsweekly.com/news/212490671.html

Israeli cell phone company to compensate customer who contracted cancer

Partner Communications, which operates in Israel under the name Orange, will pay NIS 400,000 to a customer who contracted cancer in his ear.

The customer, who is in his 50s, sued Partner in May, claiming that intensive use of the device resulted in an aggressive lymphoma near his left ear. Partner agreed to pay NIS 400,000 in an out-of-court compromise settlement.

The customer is an attorney who had converted the secure room – a reinforced room that doubles as a bomb shelter and is common in most new Israeli homes – into an office. He claimed that he conducted a great deal of phone calls and business from the room, where cellular reception was low. In places without good phone reception, such as elevators and secure rooms, the electromagnetic radiation from cellular phones is higher than usual.

Partner’s settlement is a rare act. The company says they opted to pay the customer as a humanitarian gesture, saying in a statement, “The company is very meticulous about adhering to the guidelines of the World Health Organization, the Health Ministry, the Communications Ministry and all the relevant bodies. No scientific or medical basis was found to the claim and it was rejected by the court. Beyond the letter of the law, in light of [the man's] personal story, the company decided on an exceptional humanitarian gesture. We wish him good health.”

Regardless of their statement, the customer’s lawsuit included a medical opinion linking mobile phone use and his disease, which raises questions about Partner. Was it concerned the opinion would be legally validated if the case when to court? Was it worried about a precedent? Did it prefer to sign the compromise agreement to save face in the media?

Israel’s other cellular companies have less to fear from lawsuits because their rules are relatively strict when held up alongside international standards. Every device comes with a brochure detailing safety precautions, which include using an earpiece and refraining from taking in locations with poor reception.

Israelis are among the heaviest cell phone users in the world. According to a Partner report issued last week, its customers speak for 450 minutes a month on average. Customers with unlimited packages speak for about 700 minutes a month.

The debate about radiation damages has been around since the establishment of the cellular companies. Until now most of the battle has been over radiation from antennas. The present compromise is unusual because it focuses on radiation from the cellular device itself. Two months ago a survey found increasing evidence of the link between the use of cell phones and brain tumors.

This particular settlement by Partner is liable to have an effect on cell phone companies and open the floodgates to a barrage of individual and class-action lawsuits, providing plenty of work for lawyers specializing in the field. Following a ruling in the United States requiring tobacco companies to pay damages for cancer patients who had smoked, lawsuits poured in and the value of tobacco companies plummeted as a result.

Cell phone radiation - Can we protect ourselves?

There are 5 billion mobile phones in the world. Many people, especially the young, use mobile phones without taking into account the alleged potential health risks involved. But since last May the International Agency for Research on Cancer has been giving clear warnings about a possible causal relationship between mobile phone use and a malignant type of brain cancer: the glioma.

Australia's Research Shows Interphone Flaws

Professor Bruce Armstrong

Another Interphone researcher is expressing concern over the tumor risks associated with the long-term use of mobile phones. "I think the evidence that is accumulating is pointing towards an effect of mobile phones on tumors," Professor Bruce Armstrong of the University of Sydney School of Public Health told "TodayTonight," an Australian current affairs show on Channel 7, a national network.

"I would not want to be a heavy user of a mobile phone," Armstrong said. "People might be shocked to hear that the evidence does seem to be coming more strongly in support of harmful effects."

The ten-year Interphone data has clearly changed Armstrong's outlook. A few years ago, he told the Sydney Morning Herald that "there is no consistent evidence that there is an increased risk of cancer," but even then he allowed that "it could be 15 years before we see an effect."

Armstrong, who is leading the Australian component of the Interphone project, is the second principal investigator of the 13 country teams to urge precaution. Last December, Siegal Sadetzki of the Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Israel told Haaretz, a national newspaper, that, "The time is past when it could be said that this technology does not cause damage; apparently it damages health."

Elisabeth Cardis

Neither the Australian nor the Israeli results on brain tumor or acoustic neuroma risks have yet been made public. Sadetzki has reported a significant increase of parotid gland tumors after ten years of cell phone use. Her paper appeared in the February 15th issue of theAmerican Journal of Epidemiology.

Meanwhile, the final Interphone paper is still not finished. Just a few days ago, Elisabeth Cardis, who leads the overall Interphone study, told Microwave News that she hopes that the combined results from all 13 countries will be submitted for publication "in the not too distant future." Cardis recently left IARC to join the Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL) in Barcelona.

The nine-minute piece also features an interview with Chris Zombolas, the technical director of EMC Technologies. In measurements commissioned by the TV show, Zombolas found that a number of cell phones do not meet the 2 W/Kg SAR standard when placed in a pocket and used with a hands-free set or a BlueTooth transmitter. The worst of the four phones tested was a Nokia E65. Zombolas measured an SAR of 3.35 W/Kg at 1800 MHz and an SAR of 5.84 W/Kg at 2100 MHz. The Australian SAR standard is 2 W/Kg.

A mans war on EMF radiation

John Patterson was a successful cell antenna engineer that became ill from over-exposure to the harmful radio waves that are emitted by the towers. He tried to warn the governing authorities about the dangers of living too close to the towers but no one paid attention and he was fired when he started to tell the public. 

No one in the media would listen to him, so in July 2007, John Patterson decided to take the extreme measure of driving a friends tank through a number of transmitter installations, and was subsequently arrested, charged and jailed for 20 months. If this reminds you of Greenpeace activism it's unfortunate that this man had to go to these extremes to get the media to take notice of them. In this case his story made nationwide publicity in Austrailia.

Upon his release John has decided to carry on in the telecommunication industry but now makes a career of bringing awareness to this issue by measuring the harmful electromagnetic fields in peoples homes and offices.

Report Links Power Lines to Cancer

After looking at a database of 850 patients diagnosed with lymphatic and bone marrow cancers between 1972 and 1980, researchers from the University of Tasmania and Britain‘s Bristol University found that living near high-voltage power lines might increase the risk of leukemia, lymphoma, and related conditions later in life.

People who lived within 328 yards of a power line up to the age of five were five times more likely to develop cancer. Those who lived within the same range to a power line at any point during their first 15 years were three times more likely to develop cancer as an adult.

Internal Medicine Journal September 2007; 37(9):614-9.  Physorg.com August 24, 2007

EMF - What The Professionals Think

Professional Concern

What the Leading Experts Say about Electromagnetic Pollution

“The problem is, man-made electromagnetic exposures aren't “normal.” They are artificial artifacts, with unusual intensities, signaling characteristics, pulsing patterns, and wave forms, that don’t exist in nature. And they can misdirect cells in myriad ways. Every aspect of the ecosystem may be affected, including all living species from animals, humans, plants and even microorganisms in water and soil.”
B. Blake Levitt Former New York Times journalist and author Electromagnetic Fields, A Consumer’s Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Ourselves and Editor of Cell Towers, Wireless Convenience? Or Environmental Hazard?

“Very recently, new research is suggesting that nearly all the human plagues which emerged in the twentieth century, like common acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children, female breast cancer, malignant melanoma and asthma, can be tied to some facet of our use of electricity.  There is an urgent need for governments and individuals to take steps to minimize community and personal EMF exposures.”

Samuel Milham MD, MPH Medical epidemiologist in occupational epidemiology.
Researcher The first scientist to report increased cancers in electrical workers and to link childhood leukemia with the spread of residential electrification.

“Federal and State public heath agencies are not officially addressing what many concerned scientists and medical doctors now see as an emerging public health problem. There are no health surveillance or remedial response systems in place to advise citizens about electromagnetic radiation  exposure (EMR). As wireless technology evolves, ambient background levels increase, creating electrical pollution conditions which are becoming ubiquitous and more invasive.”
Libby Kelley, MA Managing Secretariat International Commission For Electromagnetic Safety; Founder, Council on Wireless Technology Impacts; EMF environmental consultant,
Co-Producer of documentary, “Public Exposure: DNA, Democracy and the Wireless Revolution”; 

The January 2008 report issued by the National Academy of Sciences committee whose task was to examine the needs and gaps in the research on the biological effects of exposure to these antennas points out that the research studies to date do not adequately represent exposure realities. … A federal research strategy to address these very serious inadequacies in the science on which our government is basing health policy is sorely needed now.”

Janet Newton President, The EMR Policy Institute www.EMRPolicy.org

“We are compelled to confirm the existence of non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields on living matter, which seem to occur at every level of investigation from molecular to epidemiological. Recent epidemiological evidence is stronger than before. We recognize the growing public health problem known as electrohypersensitivity. We strongly advise limited use of cell phones, and other similar devices, by young children and teenagers, and we call upon governments to apply the Precautionary Principle as an interim measure while more biologically relevant exposure standards are developed.” (partial statement)
The Venice Resolution, initiated by the International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS) on June 6, 2008, and now signed by nearly 50 peer reviewed scientists worldwide

We are constantly being bathed in an increasing sea of radiation from exposure to the above, as well as electrical appliances, computers, Bluetooth devices, Wi-Fi installations and over 2,000 communications satellites in outer space that shower us with signals to GPS receivers. New WiMax transmitters on cell phone towers that have a range of up to two square miles compared to Wi-Fi’s 300 feet will soon turn the core of North America into one huge electromagnetic hot spot. Children are more severely affected because their brains are developing and their skulls are thinner.”
Paul J. Rosch, MD Clinical Professor of Medicine and Psychiatry, New York Medical College; Honorary Vice President International Stress Management Association; Diplomate, National Board of Medical Examiners; Full Member, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences; Fellow, The Royal Society of Medicine; Emeritus Member, The Bioelectromagnetics Society

“Radio frequency radiation and other forms of electromagnetic pollution are harmful at orders of magnitude well below existing guidelines. Science is one of the tools society uses to decide health policy. In the case of telecommunications equipment, such as cell phones, wireless networks, cell phone antennas, PDAs, and portable phones, the science is being ignored.
Magda Havas, PhD Associate Professor, Environment & Resource Studies, Trent University, Canada.

“Sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation is the emerging health problem of the 21st century.  It is imperative health practitioners, governments, schools and parents learn more about it. The human health stakes are significant”. 
William Rea, MD Founder & Director of the Environmental Health Center, Dallas Past President, American Academy of Environmental Medicine

“There is no question EMF's have a major effect on neurological functioning. They slow our brain waves and affect our long-term mental clarity. We should minimize exposures as much as possible to optimize neurotransmitter levels and prevent deterioration of health”.
Eric Braverman, MD Brain researcher, Author The Edge Effect, and Director of Path Medical in New York City and The PATH Foundation.


Source: http://www.safespaceprotection.com/EMF-News-and-Info-Article/news-public-and-professional-concern-about-electromagnetic-pollution.aspx

Bluetooth: Is Its Radiation Harmful?

It is a matter of concern for many people that the carrier waves used by Bluetooth´s transmitters use the same frequency range as microwave owens (Bluetooth uses 2.402 GHz to 2.480 GHz). What does it feel like to get in the path of such waves?

Actually, the transmitting power is far too weak to be noticeable for humans. Moreover, the radiation is not concentrated in a beam, but dispersed more or less in all directions. When using a wireless phone or a Bluetooth device, some of the emitted RF energy is absorbed by the body. The penetration depth is about 1.5 cm at 2450 MHz (about 2.5 cm at 900 MHz), which means that the absorption is very superficial. The main absorption mechanism is fieldinduced rotation of polar molecules (for example H2O), which generates heat through molecular "friction".

Heating by means of radio frequencies is possible over a broad frequency range. This is taken advantage of in microwave ovens at 2450 MHz using very high power levels (up to 1,000,000 times the power used by Bluetooth devices). However, 2450 MHz is not a resonance frequency of water. But does exposure to Bluetooth RF emission heat the human body? No it does not. The output power of a Bluetooth-enabled device is far too low to cause any detectable temperature increase. Again, in comparison, the maximum increase from handheld cellular phones is less than 0.1°C.

There is, however, another side to this; some people are demonstrably over-sensitive to electromagnetic radiations. Long exposure to strong fields make some individuals so sensitive, after a few years, that they can no longer be near such fields without considerable discomfort. Bluetooth fits into a general development pattern where antennas for GSM-transmission and other sources of electromagnetic radiations become more and more prevalent in our cities. The future will show whether this is a healthy development.

Source: http://www.swedetrack.com/images/bluet05.htm

EMR - The Health Crisis of our Time

This is a fascinating interview with Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt PhD about Smart Meters and "EMR - The Health Crisis of our Time".  Dr. Klinghardt refers to EMR as the catalyst of many diseases of our generation, from Autism to Fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome - all exacerbated by the wireless revolution.

"Based upon a study of 10 autistic cases and 10 normal cases, the pregnant mothers who gave birth to autistic children slept in a location in which microwave radiation was 20.7x HIGHER, on average, than pregnant mothers who gave birth to non-autistic children."

COSMOS - Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health

The cohort study on mobile communications (COSMOS) forms part of the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) Programme. The international study will run for 20-30 years and will follow the health of at least 250,000 participants aged 18-69 in five European countries. The UK arm of COSMOS is being led by a research team from Imperial College London.

There are currently over six billion mobile phone devices in use worldwide, with over 70 million in use in the UK, which has a population of 61 million people.

Studies of short term use of mobile phones and health have been reassuring, other than well known associations with risk of motor accidents. However, there are still some uncertainties about the health effects of mobile phone use, since some diseases take many years to develop and so far few people have been using mobile phones for that period of time.

Dr Mireille Toledano, co-Principal Investigator of the study from the School of Public Health at Imperial College London, said: "For the benefit of current users and for future generations, it is important for us to carry out long-term health monitoring of a large group of mobile phone users so that we can identify if there are any possible health effects from this new and widespread technology that has become so central to our everyday lives."

Professor Paul Elliott, Principal Investigator of the study from the School of Public Health at Imperial College London, said: "Scientists have been looking at the effects of mobile phones on health for several years and so far, reviews of the research have been reassuring with respect to mobile phone use and health problems in the short term. However, as mobile phones have only been in widespread use for a relatively short time, we haven't been able to carry out long-term studies until now.

The Imperial team aims to recruit 100,000 mobile phone users to the COSMOS study

"COSMOS aims to fill in important gaps in our knowledge of mobile phones and health. By looking at large numbers of people across Europe over a long period of time, we should be able to build up a valuable picture of whether or not there is any link between mobile phone use and health problems over the long term," added Professor Elliott.

Through four major mobile phone operators, the COSMOS project team from Imperial College London is inviting 2.4 million mobile phone users in the UK to take part in the study.

"We can only do this study and find out whether mobile phones are affecting our health in the long term with the help of the public willing to take part. Through contributing a small amount of time to this study, participants will make a big difference to our understanding of mobile phones and health. Anyone who wants to find out more and get in touch with us can visit our website at www.ukcosmos.org," said Dr Toledano.

Participants who agree to take part in the study will complete an on-line questionnaire about their mobile phone use, health and lifestyle. The researchers will monitor participants' mobile phone use and any health problems they might develop, e.g., cancers and neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, for at least the next 20 years. They will also analyse whether any changes in the frequency of symptoms, such as headaches and sleep disorders, are related to mobile phone usage.

"Over the past decade, mobile phones have become a normal part of everyday life for the majority of people in Britain. The COSMOS study is the largest research study worldwide investigating mobile phone use and health and is a very important step towards finding out whether there are health implications of using a mobile phone over a long period of time," said Dr Toledano.

Professor Lawrie Challis from the MTHR Programme Management Committee said "We still cannot rule out the possibility that mobile phone use causes cancer. The balance of present evidence does not suggest it does but we need to be sure. The best way of doing this is through a large cohort study such as COSMOS and I am very pleased that the UK is to play an important part in this international endeavour."

Source: http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_22-4-2010-13-52-53

More info: http://www.ukcosmos.org/aboutus.html

Belgium leads the way in combatting EMF

Belgium is known for many things; waffles, chocolate, beer and the Smurfs.  Three out of four can’t be bad!

But they are also leading the way in Europe in the initiative to combat EMF radiation from mobile phones.

Didier Bellens, president of Begacom, Belgium's largest mobile phone company, has banned WiFi technology on the 27th floor of the company's skyscraper, occupied by management. He also asks people to phone him on his landline rather than his mobile.

In a meeting with schoolchildren, in December this year, he spoke to them about the dangers of using mobiles to access the Internet. He explains that GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) is dangerous - (Sudpresse - 25/11/2011), a threat to health. He continues "During the day, it is better to use a headset because the GSM, it heats. The waves are dangerous. At night, it is better to shut it off. If you use your phone as an alarm clock, you should also turn it off."

And now Belgium has also banned the sale of mobile phones specifically designed for young children up to the age of 7.

In February 2013, the Belgian Public Health Minister, Laurette Onkelinx announced that mobile phones sale to under 7s will be banned in shops and on the Internet, because of the dangers of radiation. The 2012 report of the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization (WHO) considers that RF exposure (such as from mobile phones) is "possibly carcinogenic for humans". "If a risk exists, protection is necessary," declared Laurette Onkelinx, to RTBF. This is her initiative, along with that of her colleague in charge of consumer protection, Johan Vande Lanotte.

It is not easy to see how this will be enforced, as the sales will obviously be made to adults, and will only remove the phones that are being sold especially aimed at the very young end of the market. Adults will still be able to buy phones for the under 7s.

Adverts during children's programmes on TV, radio and the Internet will be banned. This is a practical possibility, and could easily be done in other countries.

Research shows that in Belgium two out of three children under 10 years have a mobile phone. At 12 years they nearly all have one.

The Minister for Health has also announced the drafting, between now and the end of the year, of another legislative measure aimed at rendering obligatory the sale of a headset with mobile phones.

Now if only the rest of Europe would follow suit!

I'm still not sure about the Smurfs though?

Sources

http://www.emfields.org/news/20130307-mobile-phones-children-banned-belgium.asp

http://www.emfields.org/news/20130125-belgium-danger-mobile.asp

How to protect yourself from Electromagnetic stress

I am a stressed man, and who can blame me? I have a kid on the way, trying to manage all my debts and at the same time I read and write about all the dangers radiation and EMF pose to us. In addition to this, I’m pretty sure all of the excess Electromagnetic energy being produced can’t be doing much good.

Let’s think about it for a minute, ten years ago, there was hardly any wireless technology out, the occasional phone and television remote being the only things that immediately pop into mind, as well as the few overhead power cables.

Now, let’s compare that to these days, we have Mobile phones, Mp3 Players and Laptops all of which are producing electromagnetic fields. A tangle of wires hang over our heads, telephone cables, power lines and the such, all leaking their own EMF’s. Towering telephone masts and Cell phone towers loom over us, showering us with radiation. In short, compared to then, there is so much more technology projecting waves that damage us on a cellular level.

I’m not sure about anyone else, but ten years ago, I felt much healthier and a lot less stressed (this may have been because I was 10 but who knows…) now a possible cause of all this is the aforementioned EMF, which constantly bombard our bodies. These fields actively attack our cells, damaging them on a molecular level, causing us to become fatigued, our metabolism to slow and lower our resistances to disease. And because of all this we become more and more stressed, so they key to alleviating this stress falls into making our bodies more resistant to the damage these EMF’s are unavoidably doing.

The most obvious way to combat the damage is to minimize the amount of time we expose ourselves to these EMF’s. By spending less time using our phones and other wireless electronics, we can decrease strength of EMF’s we are exposed to.

As an example, I play a lot of video games, mainly on the Xbox, so I was regularly holding onto a wireless controller for several hours on end, when I started to read about EMF’s however I immediately went out and bought a wired control. It wasn't much, but I did feel a very slight improvement in my health, whereas I used to feel run down after a couple of hours of playing, I now felt fine, well worth the money.

Another obvious way of minimizing the strength of the EMF’s, is to make sure you live far away from Cell phone towers and other powerful EMF producers, it may seem a trivial matter but it will make all the difference. In addition, by wearing magnetic jewellery you can help to counteract some EMF fields, a simple magnetic bracelet can make a world of difference.

You know how metal conducts electricity correct? Well

many of us have metal filling, and the EMF’s react with them the way you would expect it to. When the EMF passes through your body, the metallic fillings conduct trace amounts of the electromagnetic pulse, and does so repeatedly, gathering its own EMF overtime, producing it in your own mouth and I need not describe how that is damaging. If you can have these replaced with tooth-colored composite fillings, you should as it will lead to less damage from EMF overtime.

By improving your immune system your cells will naturally be more resistant to the damage the EMF’s will do. There are dozens of ways to improve your natural immune system, drinking lots of water and eating raw vegetables are both simple ways to give yourself a little boost. Upping your vitamin intake will help in more ways than one, as will taking several Probiotics over the course of a week.

To continue on the theme of Probiotics, the bodily stress caused by the EMF’s will cause your body to power through the good bacteria in your body, causing you to become more and more susceptible to diseases and illnesses, so by using Probiotics you can replenish the good bacteria at rate that should hopefully match the rate that the EMF’s cause them to die off.

When your body is regularly hit by powerful EMF’s it causes the micro-organisms in your body to produce an excess of neurotoxins as a response to the mass of minor infections your body has to start to defend itself against and due to the prior damage already caused, your body cannot cope with the mass of neurotoxins now flooding your system. So be sure to regularly purge your body of toxins, or the build up will cause further cell determination which in turn causes your body to create more neurotoxins, a never ending cycle.

Remember when your parents used to say, “Don’t sit to close to the TV, or your eyes will go square” well, they weren't far off. Newer televisions produce a much stronger EMF’s than older televisions, so sitting further away will cause the EMF produced by the TV to deal less damage to your body. The same idea also goes for computer screens, even now as I write this I’m leaning back in my chair, a kind of unconscious way of minimizing the damage done, other than sitting across the room of course.

As I mentioned in my previous post “Is an Apple that healthy?” your room should be one of the cleanest areas in your home, both physically and on a molecular level. So here are a few tips to decrease the amount of Radiation and the strength of the EMF’s in your room:

• Remove any electrical wires than run under your bed.
• Avoid having wireless devices in your room.
• Substitute automatic electronic devices for manual non-electronic variants.
• Swap any cordless phones for corded versions.

So with only a few alterations in your room, you can massively alter the strength of the EMF’s where you sleep. Never underestimate the damage that can be done whilst you sleep, because you aren't moving the EMF’s affect you far more directly, damaging the cells over the time you sleep.

With a few of these changes, you should be able to lessen the amount of EMF that effect you, which will be minimize the damage the done by the electromagnetic fields that run rampant across our landscapes. On a secondary note, there have been proven methods that can minimize or sometimes even neutralize EMF’s harmful effects, so in time, a more widespread way of neutralize the damage may become available. But until then, I hope the tips I have given you prove to be helpful!

Is an Apple really that healthy? The Radiation Damage Caused by Apple Products.

In the current day and age, almost everyone is running around with an Apple product hanging at their hip. Be it the “Brand new” iPhone, or the latest incarnation of iPod, or the top of the line iPad. Apple has been proclaiming itself the greatest innovator in the world for years, but the important question is, “How safe are their products?”

To measure the amount of ambient radiation an object produces, we need to use a RF meter, which scans a nearby area to determine how many Microwatts of radiation are being generated per square metre. For a more educated estimation of the dangers being posed by these machines, I should explain in deeper detail the danger levels related to microwatts/m2.

• Less than 0.10 microwatts/m2 provide no risk of danger, or concern as cosmic background radiation (Of which we are all affected) remains in these levels.
• 0.10-10 microwatts/m2 is of slight concern, authorities in the field of radiation recommend that sleeping areas be kept below 10 microwatts/m2 for the safety of the occupants.
• 10 – 1000 microwatts/m2  Can be considered a risk to health, with 100 microwatts/m2 falling into the average scale for living areas within a home and the proposed safety limit for Europe, levels higher than this considered hazardous to human cells.
• More than 1000 microwatts/m2 is an incredibly dangerous amount of ambient radiation, a minimum of ten times the maximum safe human limit.

With these base danger levels established, we can begin the test to see the average microwatts/m2 output of several apple products.

Apple iPhone:

The ambient Microwatts/m2 level of the iPhone being used in this test, is 14.8, placing it in an area of slight concern, not however, in immediate danger, keep in mind that this level will also be affected by the ambient Microwatts/m2 of the room. Upon turning the devices Wifi on however, the levels jumped sporadically, increasing in bursts every few seconds. At this point, the lowest level displayed was 1.092, which was periodically lower than the phones average ambient Microwatts/m2, however this low level lasted less than a few seconds before leaping up into the hundreds. Within the first few second of turning the Wifi on, the Microwatts/m2 registered at 853.0, more than 8 times the maximum safe limit! Topping off at 990.7 Microwatts/m2, the iPhone proves to be a highly dangerous device.

In call, the Microwatts/m2 will tend towards the upper scale of 1000, keeping in mind that when in call, many people will hold their phone close to their head, which can and will cause the cells in your cranial cavity to rapidly heat, causing untold damage.

Apple IPod:

Being the same device as an iPhone, simply lacking the apparatus needed to make or receive phone calls, the iPod output similar Microwatts/m2 levels. When the Wifi is switched on, the iPod began to generate dangerous amounts of radiation, causing cells nearby to heat in a similar fashion to the iPhone. However, there is a single defining factor that divides the iPod from the iPhone, location. Traditionally, the iPod spends far more time in ones pocket than the iPhone, seeming as the default setting of the iPods Wifi is ON, the device is sending out levels of Microwatts/m2 measuring in the hundreds constantly, whilst affecting the entire mid section of the carrier, ranging from the stomach to the genitals.

Apple iPad:

At the start of the test you can see the iPad is producing no ambient Radiation level, a good sign to start the test on. As the device is switched on, the Radiation level slowly increases; however, it does so within safe levels. The iPads Microwatts/m2 levels reach their highest at 33.30, far below the maximum safe levels for Human use. This does comfortably place the iPad as the safest of the three devices being used on a regular basis, which in my mind, is a surprise as I personally expected the iPad to be generating the highest ambient radiation level, but this is a good show of an uneducated guess being highly inaccurate.

After thoughts:

After running a test on each, we can safely judge in the inbuilt risks of using these devices, with each kicking a significant amount of radiation out, with the iPhone generating a truly dangerous level of ambient radiation. Whilst it is known that all phone companies, (Apple included) package each phone with a small safety leaflet that roughly states “When the device is in use, hold at least four inches from the head”. This demonstrates the company is aware of the innate risks a mobile phone produces; yet, even holding the device a few inches from the head is not enough, as the measurement “Microwatts/m2” demonstrates, these devices project Radiation waves with a radius of at least a squared meter.

In the end, I can answer the question I posed myself and you, the reader, at the beginning of this article. “Are Apple products safe?” the answer being, on the whole, No.

The iPhone product, is the most sold device that Apple produces, also making up 70% of all owned mobile phones, with roughly 2100000000 calls being made daily across the world on them. Each and every call generating dangerous levels of radiation for an average time of 3 minutes and 15 seconds each time, so it is evident the amount of damage that is being done.

My personal recommendation, if you must own an Apple product, try and keep to the iPad, as it is simply the safest of each device.

Although, to be fair to Apple, it is not just them producing mobiles and other devices that produce exceedingly dangerous levels of radiation, all mobile companies produce this cloud of radiation that is damaging us, and none of them seem to making much of an effort to minimize the radiation levels that currently plague our world.

I hope that this article has been of use and will help guide you to a slightly cleaner, Radiation free lifestyle.