Naples parents protest cell phone tower at elementary school

NORTH NAPLES, Fla - Controversy over cell phone towers at school. A group of parents at Naples Park Elementary are fighting to keep the tower off school property and away from their kids. 

"I was shocked," says parent Kimberly Dunn of learning a cell phone tower may go up at her son's school. 

Stephanie Lucarelli will have two kids at Naples Park next school year. Afraid of the health effects a cell phone tower could have on her children she started an online petition. 

"We feel we don't know enough about the radiation coming from a cell phone tower to know whether or not 10-20 years from now our kids are going to see any health effects from this," says Lucarelli. 

Currently the School District has three cell phone towers. One at Lely High School and two at Naples High School. Together the district receives more than $58,000 from the three towers. 

"There's no monetary amount you could give us to expose our children to the chance of getting some childhood illness," says Lucarelli. 

According to the FCC, "there is no reason to believe that such towers could constitute a potential health hazard to nearby residents or students. 

Still, Kimberly Dunn isn't taking any chances. For her, this fight is personal and one she plans to continue until her voice is heard. 

"Spreading the word, spreading the information. It's going to be tough during the summer because school is out, says Dunn. "I feel it's going to be an uphill battle, but the more we speak up. It's our children."

A district spokesperson says staff will meet with parents in the fall to receive additional input before deciding on how to proceed.

Source: http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2013-06-17/Naples-parents-protest-cell-phone-tower-at-elementary-school#.UcUzeBZQSoV

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.

Important facts about mobile phones and radiation

Here are a few important facts about mobile phones

5 billion - The number of mobile phones in use around the world.

50% - The 10-year rise in tumours located in areas of the brain most vulnerable to mobile phone radiation.

25mm - The distance that BlackBerry recommends keeping its phones away from the body.

16 - The age under which people are advised by the NHS to keep mobile use to a minimum.

Most (97-99%) of the radiofrequency electromagnetic energy RFE emitted by mobile phones is absorbed in the hemisphere of the brain where the phone is held, with 50-60% absorbed by the temporal lobe2 which is situated closest to the ear.

Brain cancer rates in USA have increased by 25% since 1975. In 2001, 185,000 Americans were diagnosed with some form of brain cancer. A grade four brain tumor can grow from the size of a grape to tennis ball size in just 4 months.

Always read the small print: Official advice

Research is split on whether mobile phones pose a health hazard or not. Buried in the small print, companies already issue precautionary advice.

BlackBerry

BlackBerry's booklet states: "Use hands-free operation if available and keep the BlackBerry device at least 0.98in (25mm) from your body (including the abdomen of pregnant women and the lower abdomen of teenagers) when the BlackBerry is turned on and connected to the wireless network... reduce the amount of time spent on calls."

iPhone

The iPhone4 guide says: "...when using the iPhone near your body for voice calls or wireless data transmission over a cellular network, keep it at least 5/8inch (15mm) away from the body, and only use carrying cases, belt clips or holders that do not have metal parts and that maintain at least 5/8inch (15mm) separation between iPhone and the body."

UK Department of Health

A spokeswoman says: "As a precaution children should only use mobile phones for essential purposes and keep all calls short. We keep all scientific evidence under review."

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/a-close-call-why-the-jury-is-still-out-on-mobile-phones-7670543.html?origin=internalSearch

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 is EMF affecting our Pets?

Everyday we are being bombarded by Electromagnetic Fields, which are being thrown at us from every direction imaginable. But are we the only ones suffering the brunt of this assault? No, we are not.
Roughly 48% of all homes in the UK contain pets, and each of them is being affected by the Electromagnetic Fields that currently flood our homes and neighborhoods  I have already listed, over the course of several posts, the inherit dangers of EMF’s and yet I have only described the responses found in human cells, I have never mentioned the damage that can be done to animal cells.

Like us, Animals are constantly subjected to alternating EMF’s, occasionally more so. All electromagnetic fields are stationary (relative to the item producing them), and one of the most prevalent areas that produce EMF’s is the average household. As humans are able to leave the home whenever we want, we need not be exposed to these EMF’s constantly, whereas many household pets have no choice in the matter, occasionally left in for days at a time they have no way to escape the barrage of electromagnetic energy. In addition to this, many pets (dog’s mainly) have no choice in where they sleep, normally a kitchen or living room, two of the rooms that are often the epicenter of all EMF’s in your home.

So what is happening to our pets as we leave them surrounded by EMF’s? Much like in humans, constant barrages of electromagnetic fields cause animal cells to become damaged over time. Tests ran on chickens showed that, when exposed to a constant field of 30 kV/m, they became unable to eat as their beaks are constantly chattering, meaning they cannot pick up grain (these hens were removed from the testing grounds and fed later), as you can see, these results are shocking (Pun intended).

Although more conclusive tests have not yet been completed, many scientists work on the theory that animal cells will develop similar weakness to the diseases that affect humans as long as they are exposed to powerful electromagnetic fields for long periods of time. The question is raised, how can we lower the amount of damage our pets are being dealt?

The first thing to do is to minimize the amount of damage being dealt to them as they sleep, either by moving them, or cleaning the area around them. I for instance, allow my Dog to sleep in my room, (I admit I did this before I started writing about EMF’s, but the point remains) the room with the lowest level of EMF’s in my home. I understand however that many people do not like to have pets sleep in the same room as them, so here are a few ways you can lower the EMF levels in their sleeping area:

• Minimize the amount of Electronic devices in close proximity to the animal. Or an alternative solution would be to shut off all electronic devices in proximity to the animal at the plug overnight.
• Remove any cordless phones from the room and replace them with corded phone, which produce a much lower power EMF, as well as not producing a WiFi signal.
• By moving the animals sleeping area at least three feet away from any form of electrical outlet will help protect your pet from overrunning electromagnetic fields.
• Remove metallic fabrics from the animals sleeping area, like aluminium laced blankets.
• Turn off WiFi routers at night.

 

Another way you may be able to protect your pets from the effects of electromagnetic fields is by the utilization of magnetic jewellery. A magnetic ball on a collar for example, magnets have a unique effect on EMF’s, acting as a minor blocker against low levels of electromagnetic energy. This may sound counterproductive, but let me explain why; when you were a child did you ever try and hold two magnets together only to find they repel each other? The same happens with the magnetic energy from both the Electromagnetic energy and the magnetic field projected by the collar/jewellery, why this happens is due to the atomic rotation of the particles that make up the magnetic fields of both opposing energies.

You see, a field is produced by millions of particles all moving in the same directional rotation several thousand times per second, for two magnetic energies to attract towards each other, these particles must be moving in opposite directions, to achieve a molecular balance, much like a the earths need for a north and south directional pull. In comparison, when two magnetic energies with the same directional rotation interact, they are unable to find a balance and push against each other, making it impossible for full contact between the two magnetic forces.

In short, when certain electromagnetic fields come into contact with the field produced by the small amount of magnetic energy your pet carries with them, the two magnetic energies will conflict with each other, causing the damaging energy of the field to never come into contact with zed pet.

A third piece of advice I can give, is to read through the rest of this blog and see how you can protect your home against EMF’s more effectively, after all, anything that can protect you, will protect any pets you may have. 

By addressing the amount of Electromagnetic fields hitting your pets in the home, they should show renewed energy as well as a healthier appearance. In conjunction, all of the information I have given can also apply to you and others, not specifically pets.
  

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.