A Scientific Meeting about EMF Exposure and Public Health - A Report

In November, 2009, a scientific panel met in Seletun, Norway, for three days of intensive discussion on existing scientific evidence and public health implications of the unprecedented global exposures to artificial electromagnetic fields (EMF). EMF exposures (static to 300 GHz) result from the use of electric power and from wireless telecommunications technologies for voice and data transmission, energy, security, military and radar use in weather and transportation.

The Scientific Panel recognizes that the body of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to protection of public health; the growth and development of the fetus, and of children; and argues for strong preventative actions. New, biologically-based public exposure standards are urgently needed to protect public health worldwide.  This is their report:

http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Seletun-Statement-2010.pdf

Bees, Birds and Mankind. Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog’

"Today, unprecedented exposure levels and intensities of magnetic, electric, and electromagnetic fields from numerous wireless technologies interfere with the natural information system and functioning of humans, animals, and plants. The consequences of this development, which have already been predicted by critics for many decades, cannot be ignored anymore. Bees and other insects vanish; birds avoid certain places and become disorientated at others. Humans suffer from functional impairments and diseases. And insofar as the latter are hereditary, they will be passed on to next generations as pre-existing defects"  Ulrich Warnke

The full Report is here: http://www.kompetenzinitiative.net/assets/ki_beesbirdsandmankind_screen.pdf

Cellphones and Brain Tumors - 15 Reasons for Concern

“In a world where a drug cannot be launched without proof that it is safe, where the use of herbs and natural compounds available to all since early Egyptian times are now questioned, their safety subjected to the deepest scrutiny, where a new food cannot be launched without prior approval, the idea that we can use mobile telephony, including masts, and introduce WiFi and mobile phones without restrictions around our 5 year olds is double-standards gone mad. I speak, not just as an editor and scientist that has looked in depth at all the research, but as a father that lost his beloved daughter to a brain tumour.”

Chris Woollams M.A. Biochemistry (Oxon).

Editor Integrated Cancer and Oncology News (icon

magazine). CEO CANCERactive and one of this report’s endorsers.

See the whole  report here: http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/reasons_us.pdf

An EBEA Report into the Exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields, biological effects and health consequences (100 kHz-300 GHz)

This is a review of the scientific evidence on dosimetry, biological effects, epidemiological observations, and health consequences concerning exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields.  ICNIRP was established to advance non-ionizing radiation protection for the benefit of people and the environment.

ICNIRP is a non-governmental organization in non-ionizing radiation in formal relations with the World Health Organization and the International Labour Office. It maintains a close liaison and working relationship with all international bodies engaged in the field of non-ionizing radiation protection, and interacts with radiation protection professionals worldwide through its close collaboration with the International Radiation Protection Association and its national societies.


Work is conducted in four standing committees - on Epidemiology, Biology, Physics and Optical Radiation - and in conjunction with appropriate international and national health and research organizations as well as universities and other academic institutions.

This is a link to a European BioElectromagnetics Association (EBEA) article about the Exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields, biological effects and health consequences (100 kHz-300 GHz).

http://www.ebea.org/pdf/sc_docs/reviews/RFReview.pdf

What is the International EMF Project?

What is the International EMF Project?

Background

Potential health effects of exposure to static and time varying electric and magnetic fields need scientific clarification. Electromagnetic fields of all frequencies represent one of the most common and fastest growing environmental influences, about which there is anxiety and speculation are spreading. EMF exposure now occurs to varying degrees to all populations of the world, and the levels will continue to increase with advancing technology. Thus, even a small health consequence from EMF exposure could have a major public health impact.

Concerns have been expressed that exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields at power frequencies (50/60 Hz) could lead to an increased incidence of cancer in children and other adverse health effects. The evidence comes primarily from residential epidemiological studies. These studies suggest that children exposed to ELF magnetic fields have an associated increased risk of leukaemia.

Radio frequency (RF) fields are used to great benefits in many facets of everyday life, such as radio and TV transmission, telecommunications (eg mobile telephones), diagnosis and treatments of disease and in industry for heating and sealing materials. With the rapid introduction of mobile telecommunications devices, especially among the general public, there has been a focus on the problems associated with near field RF exposure to the head from the small radiating antenna of mobile phones. In addition, concerns persist that exposure to pulsed and amplitude modulated RF fields may cause specific health effects.

As societies develop, greater use of certain technologies leads to increasing exposure to static electric and magnetic fields. This is especially the case in industry, transport, power transmission, research and medicine. Possible health effects from static fields have never been properly assessed. Given the rapid expansion of medical devices and imminent introduction, potentially on a large scale, of magnetic levitation transport systems that use strong static magnetic fields, any health impacts need to be properly assessed.

As part of its charter to protect public health and in response to public concern over health effects of EMF exposure, the World Health Organization (WHO) established the International EMF Project in 1996 to assess the scientific evidence of possible health effects of EMF in the frequency range from 0 to 300 GHz. The EMF Project encourages focused research to fill important gaps in knowledge and to facilitate the development of internationally acceptable standards limiting EMF exposure.

Project objectives

Key objectives of the Project are to:

• provide a coordinated international response to concerns about possible health effects of exposure to EMF,
• assess the scientific literature and make a status report on health effects,
• identify gaps in knowledge needing further research to make better health risk assessments,
• encourage a focused research programme in conjunction with funding agencies,
• incorporate the research results into WHO's Environmental Health Criteria monographs where formal health risk assessments will be made on exposure to EMF,
• facilitate the development of internationally acceptable standards for EMF exposure,
• provide information on the management of EMF protection programmes for national and other authorities, including monographs on EMF risk perception, communication and management, and
• provide advice to national authorities, other institutions, the general public and workers, about any hazards resulting from EMF exposure and any needed mitigation measures.

Project activities

The mandate of the the International EMF Project is to assess the health and environmental effects of exposure to static and time varying electric and magnetic fields in the frequency range 0 - 300 GHz. For the purposes of the EMF Project, this range is divided into: static (0 Hz), extremely low frequency (ELF, >0-300 kHz), intermediate frequencies (IF, >300Hz to 10MHz), and radiofrequency (RF, 10 MHz-300 GHz) fields.

The EMF Project is located at the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, since this is the only United Nations organization with a clear mandate to investigate detrimental health effects from exposure of people to non-ionizing radiation. The project is part of the Department of Public Health and Environment (PHE) in the Health Security and Environment (HSE) cluster.

United Kingdom Contact Details

Department of Health

Contact name:
Mr Stuart Conney

Organization/address:
Department of Health
Legislation and Environmental Hazards
Wellington House
133-155 Waterloo Road
London, SE1 8UG
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0) 207 972 4179
Fax: +44 (0) 207 972 1244
Email: stuart.conney@dh.gsi.gov.uk

---

Health & Safety Executive

Contact name:
J Arwel Barrett
HM Principal Specialist Inspector

Organization/address:
Corporate Specialist Division Radiation Team
HSE
Bldg 4N3 Redgrave Court
Merton Road
Bootle. L20 7HS
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)151 951 4819
Fax: +44 (0)151 951 4845
Email: arwel.barrett@hse.gsi.gov.uk

---

Health Protection Agency - Radiation Protection Division

Contact name:
Dr Simon Mann

Organization/address:
Health Protection Agency
Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards
Chilton, Didcot
Oxfordshire
OX11 0RQ
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)1235 831600
Fax: +44 (0)1235 833891
Email: simon.mann@hpa.org.uk 
Web site: http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/

Measuring Wireless Radiation

Measuring Wireless Radiation

To be really empowered when it comes to electromagnetic fields one has to learn to measure the location with a meter or detector. Otherwise, one is guessing what the exposures might be.

The very best way to measure would be with a microwave ‘spectrum analyzer’ that can tell you what your exposures are, with specificity regarding the exact frequencies present. A spectrum analyzer can cost tens of thousands of dollars so they are mostly used in industry and government. It is not a practical tool for most consumers, nor is it necessary. Instead, meters that measure composite power density are used, without the specific details of what frequencies are present. It is a very rare case when a spectrum analyzer will need to be brought in to identify and resolve a problem.

For the layman, the basic Electrosmog Meter is a handy choice for both detecting and measuring radiation in the lower end of the microwave band where cell towers transmit. Its bandwidth (range: 50MHz to 3.5 GHz) is too high to detect AM radio or amateur radio (except VHF and higher frequencies), and too low to detect 5.8 GHz cordless phones, radar, and higher frequency microwave transmissions. But it will detect cell phone, cell towers, TV, and FM radio transmissions, as well as microwave ovens.

A step up from the basic Electrosmog Meter is the newer 8 Gigahertz Electrosmog Meter that runs about $500. The advantage over the basic meter is it will pick up a much broader range of exposures, including portable phones on the high end as well as some new forms of Wi-Fi that operate at 5 Gigahertz (most are at 2.4 Gigahertz). The meter’s range is 10 MHz to 8 Ghz.

Several experts have compared the Electrosmog Meters with far more expensive European meters that run into the thousands of dollars, and find the Electrosmog Meters to be comparable, thus they are a real value in making microwave radiation measurement affordable to larger audiences.

The meters are fairly user-friendly once one is walked through the basics of how to use it.  We are confident school personnel can learn to use these meters if given a scale for a frame of reference in order to understand what the readings mean. There are several units of measurement to choose from. I personally use ‘microwatts per meter squared’ unit of measurement on the meter so I can compare the readings obtained with the scale prepared by the Institute for Bau Biologie & Ecology.

Many experts do not recommend the popular Trifield Meter for microwave measurements, although note the Trifield is considered very reliable for magnetic field measurements (except in high RF environments). When it comes to RF meters in particular, its best to buy a brand trusted by experts who use these meters in the course of their daily life and understand their reliability and quirks.

Detecting vs. Measuring

For simply detecting radio frequency radiation, instead of measuring it, an excellent meter is the Zapchecker 185, www.zapchecker.com. The Zapchecker, though only displaying relative readings, is highly sensitive and was developed for security personnel to detect hidden bugs and cameras. Its range is far broader than the TES-92 Electrosmog Meter. It also has a vibrate mode for undercover detection. Its very fast analog needle display and blinking LED light make EMF detection obvious and easy. For simply finding RF or MW sources so one can know to shield oneself from these sources it is a highly sensitive, excellent choice.

The Cheapest Way of Detecting Radiofrequency

It is possible to use a portable AM radio to detect some RF sources. First turn the radio dial between stations where there is no radio signal. Move about, and turn the radio antenna in all directions. When you hear static this means there is a source of radiofrequency present. As an experiment, place the AM radio near a Compact Fluorescent Bulb and listen to what happens. Next check out what happens near an operating cell phone or other items with a low frequency and high electric field. An AM radio can be a useful initial screen when no meters are available, but note it won’t pick up all sources, such as Wi-Fi, which is too high a frequency and not a strong enough electric field. Nonetheless, a simple inexpensive AM radio can be a good initial scout for microwave and RF fields on a low budget.

The Different Types of Wireless Radiation

The Different Types of Wireless Radiation

The kinds of wireless and RF exposures to be aware of fall into three categories:
1) Wireless Technologies, 2) Dirty Electricity and 3) Radio Towers and Radar.
1. Wireless Technologies. The first exposure is what you would expect—wireless exposures from cell towers, cell phones, wireless routers and networks, wireless computer equipment (mice, printers, keyboards, etc.), microwave ovens, as well as wireless medical monitoring equipment, wireless energy management systems, “smart” utility meters and grids, etc. It also includes radiation emitted between the handset and base unit of a portable phone, though many people do not realize portable phones emit microwave radiation like cell phones.

2. Dirty Electricity. The second category of concern is radio frequency radiation (RF) that gets on the wiring in homes, offices and schools. One can think of it as radio frequency ‘noise’ superimposed upon a 60-hertz electrical current. This is called dirty power, dirty electricity or ‘high frequency transients.’ This noise is a result of various factors, including electronic equipment inside a building that must convert between alternating and direct current. Dirty electricity also gets onto wiring from high RF environments outside, and from dirty power associated with operation of cell towers in a neighborhood.

Compact fluorescent bulbs and dimmer switches also create dirty electricity, as do many other ‘green technologies,’ such as solar panels, though generally speaking the ‘green building’ field is mostly focused on ‘green materials’ and energy efficiency and not yet on electromagnetic fields. Dirty electricity is carried throughout the electrical circuit in a building irrespective of where it originated. So even if a compact fluorescent bulb is not being used in a given classroom, for example, or there is not electronic equipment in a room, if dirty electricity is being generated somewhere else along the electrical circuit serving that room from CFLs or electronics, children and teachers in that room are potentially impacted, as well.

3. Radio Towers and Radar. Finally, if you are near sources of radio transmission, such as emergency communications transmitters (police, fire, medical), a broadcast radio or TV tower, or even an amateur radio transmitter, it is important to check the levels of radio frequency exposure. Radar at airports, weather monitoring facilities, near highways or found aboard ferries, are also microwave sources to consider.

Exposures to common  daily appliances and objects

Garage Door Openers	40 megahertz
Alarm Systems	40 megahertz
Cordless Phones	40-50 megahertz
Baby Monitors	49 megahertz
Radio controlled airplanes	72 megahertz
Radio controlled cars	75 megahertz
Wildlife tracking collars	215-220 megahertz
MIR space station	145 megahertz and 437 megahertz
Air Traffic Control Radar	960-1215 megahertz
Global Positioning system	1227 and 1575 megahertz
Microwave oven ( depends on the size)	2450 megahertz
Cell phones	824-829 megahertz

It is important to minimize all of the above types of fields because, other than the long-term effects not being fully understood, exposures have been linked to: ADD, memory difficulties, irritability, stress, interpersonal disorders, heart irregularities and much more.

Source: http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/emf-help-blog%E2%84%A2-3/

Australian Schools: Stop Exposing Children to Radiation from WiFi and 3G until long-term exposure is proven harmless

Why this is important

Australian school children are facing a massive health crisis if the government and education authorities continue to ignore the warnings on the potential long-term health effects from chronic exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from WiFi and 3G internet.

In 2011 the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), classified this form of electromagnetic radiation as “possibly carcinogenic” - wireless technologies are now considered as a possible cancer causing agent.

In Australian schools children are being involuntarily exposed to low-intensity radiation for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week. This is unacceptable as there are safer wired options.

Many scientists and medical experts warn that environmental exposure to man-made EMR interferes with the body’s internal bioelectrical signals which may lead to "loss of wellbeing, disease and even death." (BioInitiative Report 2012)

There are no specific scientific studies on the long-term health effects of WiFi on children, yet this technology is being vigorously rolled out in schools without parental consent.

Based on the overall scientific evidence of harm, the Council of Europe have called for a ban on WiFi use in schools and urge governments to act swiftly.Some responsible governments and authorities overseas have banned or warned against WiFi use in schools. They have taken the precautionary approach in order to minimise children’s exposure to wireless radiation.

We need to urgently send a strong message to the Australian government urging them to do the same, and to put children’s health ahead of convenience and short term profits.

With each passing day of government inaction Australian children are increasingly exposed to the potential long-term health effects from EMR.Children are also most vulnerable as they absorb more radiation due to their thinner skulls, bones and developing cells.

Even the Australian Radiation Protection Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) states "research relating to children is limited and the possibility of harm cannot be completely ruled out."

Just like the case with smoking, the possibility of illness manifesting may not be known until after years of chronic, low-level exposure to wireless radiation. It could take another 15-20 years before we have conclusive scientific proof

As the debate intensifies between pro-industry experts and independent groups of scientists about evidence of biological harm, the fact remains that this convenient, yet untested wireless technology has not been proven to be harmless for long-term use.

Given the recent WHO reclassification and the overall scientific evidence of harm,we need to act now before the damage proves to be extensive and irreversible to our children and future generations.

Let’s urgently raise our voices and build an unprecedented petition calling on the Australian government to take an immediate precautionary approach to reduce children’s exposure to wireless radiation.

Stop the use of WiFi and 3G internet in schools until conclusive evidence proves low intensity, long-term exposure to be harmless.

Please sign this urgent petition and share it widely.

For the facts on WiFi in schools and scientific evidence go to www.wifi-in-schools-australia.org

Source:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Australian_schools_Stop_Exposing_Children_to_Radiation_from_WiFi_and_3G_until_longterm_exposure_is_proven_harmless/?cQGgTdb

EMF: How close is too close?

E.M.F. Three little letters that strike terror into many hearts, but why?

Donna Shay, a Colorado citizen, asked Western to conduct an electric and magnetic field reading at her cabin that sits just outside a 115-kilovolt transmission line’s right-of-way. EMF readings determined about 1 milliGauss of exposure near her front door.

Mostly, it’s because we don’t understand electric and magnetic fields, or EMF.

The truth is people come into contact with these fields every day. EMFs occur naturally, like the magnetic field caused by currents deep inside Earth’s molten core. Manmade fields are also created by common appliances and equipment we depend on every day, like talking on a cell phone or heating up lunch in a microwave

At Western, our high-voltage transmission lines and substations give off EMF, which sometimes concerns landowners with lines over and near their property. To help allay concerns, Western’s electrical engineers will test landowners’ EMF exposures from our transmission lines on request. Rocky Mountain Electrical Engineer Ron Padget is one such engineer who helps landowners determine the EMF exposure on their property. “They’ve heard about EMF, but they don’t know what it is,” he said. “So when I do a reading of their property, I let them know the physics of [EMF] and the fact that we don’t know if it’s dangerous or not.

In fact, there is no official accepted “safe level” for EMF exposure; there is still considerable controversy and uncertainty surrounding the risks and long-term effects of EMF, but many sources defer to 1 milligauss.

There is also an important distinction between magnetic and electrical fields. Padgett explained, “Research shows electrical fields don’t have a harmful effect on humans, but researchers are still looking at the effects of magnetic fields.”

Electrical fields versus magnetic fields: What’s the difference?

Electric Field	Magnetic Field
Produced by voltage (amount of energy)	Produced by current (flow of energy)
Easily shielded (weakened)	Not easily shielded (weakened)
Measured in volts per meter (V/m)	Measured in milliGauss (mG)

The World Health Organization is also conducting long-term studies into the effects of EMF, and you can learn more about EMF at the WHO’s EMF Project website.

Go the distance

To reduce exposure to EMF, distance is the key.

“While magnetic fields are not easily shielded by objects or barriers like walls, roofs and trees; the exposure drops significantly the farther you are from the source creating EMF,” said Padget. “It’s the inverse of the square rule. If you’re twice as far away from the source (like a transmission line) you only get a quarter of the exposure; it drops off very quickly.”

For example, if your exposure standing directly under a 230-kilovolt transmission line is 64 mG, then when you walk 52 feet away your exposure is only 16 mG; and if you stand 116 feet away then your exposure is only 4 mG.

Common EMF sources

• Electric blankets: Topping the list for worst EMF exposure is electric blankets because although the output is small, their close proximity to people increases EMF exposure. You’re unlikely to cuddle with your hairdryer or nap under a transmission line.
• Wireless electronics (cell phones, etc)
• Power Lines
• TVs and computers
• Electric clocks
• Hairdryers
• Electric razors
• Kitchen appliances

Check out other EMF sources and their exposure levels at the Environmental Protection Agency’s “EMF in Your Environment” booklet.

Prudent avoidance

While you can’t prevent EMF, you can limit your exposure by using what what the EPA calls “prudent avoidance.” In addition to not wrapping up in a plugged-in electric blanket, you might:

• Move your motor-driven electric clocks or other electrical devices (like cell phones) away from your bed.
• Stand away from an operating microwave oven or other appliances that use a lot of electricity.
• Sit away from the TV and at least an arm’s length away from the computer screen and processing unit.
• Decide to use a safety razor instead of an electric one.

Precautionary principles and reasonable ground for concern

The basic definition of a precautionary principle is to consider actions to avoid possible harm even if it’s uncertain it will occur. Throughout human history, keeping the spirit of precaution alive and well has been a good way to ensure public health. It takes a lot of time for science to provide new research results and it’s not uncommon experience those results identify previous scientific certainties as uncertainties and awareness of what we don’t know expands even more.

In the past, the assumption that new research and new knowledge can only reduce and not increase uncertainties has cost humanity greatly. History of tobacco and GMO awareness are perfect examples of what happens when awaiting for new evidence is practiced without taking precautionary measures in the meantime.

Preventing risks from known hazards is a far easier task than the implementation of precautionary measures. This is mainly because precautionary principles include decision making – does the existing range of evidence justify introduction of precautionary measures now, or further time and evidence is needed to know more clearly when they should be introduced and what will those measures consist of? This status quo is known as “paralysis by analysis” and it can greatly prolong dangerous exposure to harmful agents.

In the Precautionary Principles Dictionary, there are three levels of precautionary measures: primary, secondary and tertiary. These levels depend on the legitimacy and transparency of scientific evidence and the plausibility of serious threats to health or the environment, especially is those threats are irreversible and have greater chance to cost the society more than the precautionary measures.

Growing awareness of potential EMF radiation hazards; it’s complexity, on a world scale, possible irreversible impacts and an overload of data accompanied by insufficiency of knowledge, has brought EMF radiation into position of status quo, when it comes to the introduction of precautionary measures at governmental level. Luckily, with new evidence that is published every day, the situation is improving.  We hear phrases such as “no scientific evidence” is now being changed to “prove for a causal link” more and more often. New studies are being published, with clear information on connection between EMF radiation and health problems and this information is more transparent than years before.

The World Health Organization recommends precautionary measures where there is possibility of serious or irreversible damage to health or environment, and where scientific evaluation has identified a threat but based on available data has not proved inconclusively the existence of that threat or it’s level. According to this recommendation, EMF radiation is a clear case of sufficient evidence to introduce precautionary measures on global scale.

On a more personal level, a choice of staying informed and up to date about EMF radiation is an individual and personal one. There are EMF radiation protection measures and EMF protection products we can easily put into practice and use in our daily lives to decrease significantly EMF radiation exposure and risk of developing EMF caused health problems.

“Where there is uncertainty as to the existence or extent of risks to human health, the institutions may take protective measures without having to wait until the reality and seriousness of those risks become fully apparent” (Christoforou, 2002)

Source: http://personalbioprotector.com/blog/2013/01/25/precautionary-principles-and-reasonable-ground-for-concern/

Avoid Radiation Exposure with an EMF Shield

Concern for the effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) first began in the 1960s with the introduction of high voltage power lines. These large electrical lines were greeted with hesitation due to their destruction of natural land and the proximity to residential homes. EMF Services cites Epidemiologist, Nancy Wertheimer, as the first scientist to draw interest to the dangers of electromagnetism. She researched the number of childhood leukemia cases in the Denver metropolitan area and found that children with leukemia were twice as likely to live near power lines with strong electromagnetic fields. Wertheimer’s research set in motion hundreds of studies to follow about the link between exposure to EMFs and the associated health risk. Since then, there have been great advances in research, innovation and response to Electromagnetic Radiation, including the introduction of an EMF shield, EMF home evaluations and several other shielding devices.

Modern times have presented this generation with electrical overload. Merely everything, from mobile phones, to hair dryers, lights, radios and laptops emit Electromagnetic Radiation. The levels of EMF are difficult to test due to various factors, including time spent in field range, field variability, field intensity and interference. Test meters can be used to measure field strength, though the accuracy of reading is still questionable. Several precautions can be taken to lower the concentration of Electromagnetic Radiation in a household. “Prudent avoidance”, coined by Professor Granger Morgan of Carnegie Mellon University in 1989, is a principle of risk management, claiming to make reasonable effort to minimize all potential risk if the degree of risk is unknown. Applied to electromagnetic radiation, it means finding a balance between the potential health risks of radiation and the costs of mitigation or steps to reduce exposure. Given the amount of evidence showing the negative effects of Electromagnetic Radiation, the effort to minimize exposure should be considerable, including safeguards such as an EMF shield.

Given the amount of evidence showing the negative effects of Electromagnetic Radiation, the effort to minimize exposure should be considerable, including safeguards such as an EMF shield."

An EMF shield is a broad term used to refer to any material form of shielding against electromagnetic fields. Consisting of any size, EMF shields can be used inside and outside homes. The shield is made from various conductive materials that divert or absorb the radiation. While most large-scale shields can be cost ineffective, smaller lifestyle shields like The DefenderPad™ EMF shield can be used. These slim and compact shields allow for easy portable protection against EMFs.

Certain groups are more susceptible to EMF radiation than others. According to Physicians for Social Responsibility, “The biological effect of radiation depends greatly on age, sex, size and genetic factors. In general, fetuses, infants, and children are most susceptible to radiation, and women are more susceptible than men.” Children are believed to be at greater risk due to their rapidly dividing cells, making them an easy target for radiation damage. This also applies to unborn fetuses. These groups and people in general should exercise awareness of their vulnerability by taking necessary precautions, including limiting use of electrical devices, increasing distance away from EMF fields and making a prudent investment in an EMF shield like The DefenderPad™ for the devices they use every day.

Source: http://www.defenderpad.com/avoid-radiation-exposure-emf-shield/

Cheap DIY EMF Protection for Your Cell Phone!

Ken Rohla shows us a really cheap way to protect yourself from your cell phone's microwave radiation.

While researching some designs for some new devices he was inventing, Ken Rohla was looking at the principes of Faraday Cages.  A Faraday Cage, is essentially a cage of wire mesh, which shields whatever it covers, from external fields like EMF.

Having been asked if commercial EMF protectors for cell phones work; like the screen mesh bags you can buy that you can carry your phone in your pocket and it shields you from harmful EMF.  They do work, but they can also be expensive.  There must be a cheaper method of protection available?

Using a tri-field meter Ken was able to show the vast amount of radio and microwave radiation being emitted by a mobile phone.

Wrapping the mobile phone in a single layer of silver foil, he showed the foil blocked ALL radio and microwaves coming in and out of the phone.  But what if you need to be in communication with someone?  What if you need to make and receive calls but still want the benefit of EMF protection?

Simple, TURN IT OFF!  Only turn the phone on now and again to receive any voice messages that you may have missed with the phone turned off.  Make any necessary return calls and then turn it off again.

It costs nothing!  And it saves you electricity and reduces your phone bill!

You can also buy EMF protectors to go inside your phone.  The AamoraA EMF Protector uses nano crystals embedded in a laminate that creates a localized field in the phone, making the EMF less noisy and chaotic, without affecting cellular communication.

When a phone isn't protected in any way, they create a random chaotic microwave field that interferes with the body's cellular communication, it heats tissue, homeopathically it damages the structure of the water in your body tissues, and it interferes with a  whole lot of energetics in your body; electrical impulses, electro-chemical impulses and sound frequencies.

Source: thanks to Ken Rohla at www.freshandalive.com

For more information about cell phones and EMF: http://www.electricsense.com/

Protect Your Children From Cellphone Radiation

How Can You protect your Children?

In a new report published this week, John Wargo, Ph.D. professor of Environmental Risk and Policy at Yale University, lead author of the report said, “The scientific evidence is sufficiently robust showing that cellular devices pose significant health risks to children and pregnant women.”

Studies show that the developing organs of a child, lower bone density of the skull, lower body weight, and a less effective blood brain barrier make  children particularly vulnerable to the effects of cell phone radiation (de Salles 2006; Gandhi 1996; Kang 2002; Wang 2003; Wiart 2008). Other studies show there is also the risk of a longer lifetime of exposure compounding the effects.  The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) came to the conclusion that EMF’s could be possibly carcinogenic, which was then adopted as a World Health Organization recommendation. There is also a risk of induction and progression of cancer in children who are exposed to carcinogenic agents.  A 2008 study in Denmark revealed that 54% of children born of mothers who were cell phone users had behavioral issues. If the children grew up to be frequent cell phone users, that percentage rose to 80%.

How Can You protect your Children?

EMFs cannot be eliminated but exposures can be minimized.  Here are some practical tips to get you started:

1. Discourage unnecessary use of cell phones

Use of mobile phones exposes the tissue adjacent to the antenna to levels of EMF much higher than you would normally encounter even at a base station. Discourage your kids from using mobile phones unless it is absolutely necessary. Explain to them so that they can fully understand the dangers. Encourage them to use a hardwired phone connection whilst in the house and to prefer texting when out of the house.

2. Make their bedroom a low EMF zone

Night time is especially important for children because their cells regenerate and repair. EMFs are particularly harmful at night because they affect this necessary function. Switch off all electronic equipment and unplug them from the sockets. Keep all cell phones off and out of kids’ bedrooms during the night. Assess your kid’s room; an inexpensive gaussmeter can be useful for this. If an electronic gadgets can can be used outside the bedroom, move it to another room.

3. Beware of the dangers in your kitchen

Although the exposure is short-term in most cases, the kitchen is a high EMF area due to the number of devices. The worst culprit is invariably the microwave oven. Avoid using your microwave when your kids are nearby. Electric cookers, dishwashers and mixers can also give off fairly high levels of EMFs.

4. Prefer low EMF lighting

Generally throughout the home, but particularly in your children’s bedroom, replace compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) with light emitting diodes (LEDs). LEDs do not emit dangerous UV light and are less dangerous because they do not contain mercury.

5. Avoid Wireless Video Games

Wireless video games like the Nintendo Wii and the Sony Playstation operate using Bluetooth emit radiation. Choose wired versions where possible.

The basic principle of healthy living is to create a safe environment. Make sure you include exposure to EMFs when determining what is safe. As parents, you owe your children the right of protection. This includes protection from EMFs. Ignorance is not bliss. Our homes can be healthy in an EMF way, and that choice belongs to us parents. You have your chance: Make it count!

Huge thanks to Lloyd Burrell for the information in this article.

Source: http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-02-08/how-to-protect-your-kids-from-electromagnetic-fields/