http://www.electric-fields.bris.ac.uk/health.html
Posted 13th February 2009.
People with Alzheimer's disease typically show signs of memory loss, confusion, and impaired judgment. Other symptoms can include restlessness, a deterioration of language skills, and mood swings.
Adverse health effects associated with exposure to ELF electric and magnetic fields - assembly to scientific evidence and discussion of possible public health impact. Professors M. J. O'Carroll and D. L. Henshaw. DRAFT - WORK IN PROGRESS - Version 1 29/6/06.
6. Summary of the epidemiological and mechanistic evidence
6.1 Childhood Leukaemia
6.2 Adult leukaemia
6.3 Adult brain cancer
6.4 Miscarriage
6.5 ALS/motor neurone disease
6.6 Childhood brain cancer
6.7 Female breast cancer
6.8 Male breast cancer
6.9 Alzheimer’s Disease
6.10 Suicide
6.11 Heart disease
6.12 Depression
6.13 Direct epidemiological evidence or Electro-sensitivity
6.14 Universal carcinogen
6.15 Other reproductive
PhD to Present Research Demonstrating Increased Heart Rate from Wireless Radiation Exposure at the EMR Policy Institute’s Conference in Golden, CO, Sunday, November 8th
Monday, November 16, 2009
The Melatonin Story
http://www.electric-fields.bris.ac.uk/melatoninstory.html
Melatonin is a hormone produced by the pineal gland, which is situated at the base of the brain. Melatonin is known to act as a natural anti-cancer agent and reduced levels in the body have also been linked to increased risk of depression.
At night the absence of light is registered by the eye, which triggers the pineal gland to increase melatonin production. The nocturnal level is about 70 time higher than that during the day.
Compared with 100 years ago, we are exposed to considerable Light at Night (LAN) - in the evening from indoor lighting and at night-time from street lighting.
The presence of LAN is postulated to reduce nocturnal melatonin levels in the body which may in part be responsible for the significant increase in the incidence of certain cancers seen in recent decades.
Significantly, the presence of elevated magnetic fields has been shown to act in a similar way. There are now at least 9 studies showing that magnetic fields as low as 0.2 µT suppress melatonin production, especially at night.
Click for more detailed information on melatonin.
Electromagnetic fields (EMF) suppress the activity of the pineal gland and reduce melatonin production. EMF activity therefore disrupts the bodies circadian rhythms
http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_022.pdf
There is some evidence that RF fields can influence EEG patterns and sleep in humans.
Melatonin is a hormone produced by the pineal gland, which is situated at the base of the brain. Melatonin is known to act as a natural anti-cancer agent and reduced levels in the body have also been linked to increased risk of depression.
At night the absence of light is registered by the eye, which triggers the pineal gland to increase melatonin production. The nocturnal level is about 70 time higher than that during the day.
Compared with 100 years ago, we are exposed to considerable Light at Night (LAN) - in the evening from indoor lighting and at night-time from street lighting.
The presence of LAN is postulated to reduce nocturnal melatonin levels in the body which may in part be responsible for the significant increase in the incidence of certain cancers seen in recent decades.
Significantly, the presence of elevated magnetic fields has been shown to act in a similar way. There are now at least 9 studies showing that magnetic fields as low as 0.2 µT suppress melatonin production, especially at night.
Click for more detailed information on melatonin.
Electromagnetic fields (EMF) suppress the activity of the pineal gland and reduce melatonin production. EMF activity therefore disrupts the bodies circadian rhythms
http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_022.pdf
There is some evidence that RF fields can influence EEG patterns and sleep in humans.
Magnetic Fields and Health Effects
A Review of Selected Studies
In 1998, a National Institute on Environmental Health and Safety (NIEHS) panel classified electromagnetic fields (EMFs) as a "possible" human carcinogenic the same class as chloroform, lead, carbon tetrachloride, and DDT.
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE and EMFs
1996 Drs. Eugene Sobel and Zoreh Davanipour of the University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles. Medium-to-high occupational exposures result in a four-fold increase in the rate of Alzheimer's.
1996 Dr. Maria Feychting of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Five-times increased rate of Alzheimer's is reported with occupational exposures.
1996 An occupational study of the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety and Johns Hopkins University finds higher death rates from Alzheimer's with medium-to-high occupation exposures (2 mG and higher).
BREAST CANCER
1987 Dr. Richard Stevens, Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs, Richmond, WA. EMFs reduce levels of the cancer-fighting hormone, melatonin. Lower levels are associated with breast cancer.
1989-1992 Epidemiological studies show an increase in male breast cancer among exposed workers, especially for those under 30 years of age. Drs. Genevieve Matanoski of Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, Paul Demers of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, and Tore Tynes and Aage Andersen of the Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo.
1992 Dr. Sabine John of the Technical University of Munich, Germany. EMFs increase the rate of breast cancer mitochondrial activity.
1992 Dr. Robert Liburdy of the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA. Low levels of EMFs decrease the amount of melatonin.
1993 Dr. Wolfgang Loscher of the School of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover, Germany. EMFs increase the number of mammary tumors in laboratory animals in a dose-response relationship.
1993 Drs. Dana Loomis and David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Female electrical workers have twice the expected number of deaths from breast cancer.
1996- 1998 The Stevens and Liburdy melatonin studies are replicated. For the first time, a mechanism is demonstrated linking EMFs and cancer, i.e., that EMF reduce the amount of the cancer-fighting hormone, melatonin. Dr. Carl Blackman of the Environment Protection Agency, Dr. Richard Luben of the University of California, Riverside, CA, Dr. Larry Anderson of Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richmond, WA, and Drs. Scott Davis of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, and Dr. Richard Stevens of the Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs in Richland, WA.
1996 Dr. Patricia Coogan of Boston University School of public Health, Boston, MA. Another occupational study links female breast cancer and EMFs.
1997 Dr. Maria Feychting of Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Woman who are under 50 exposed to EMFs above 2 mG have 80% increased incidence of breast cancer. When limited to estrogen-receptor-positive women, the incidence is 7.4 times the risk of breast cancer above 1 mG.
CANCER, ADULT - OTHER THAN BREAST CANCER
1989 Drs. Genevieve Matanoski, Patrick Breysse, and Elizabeth Elliott, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. An occupational study shows increased rates of prostate, colon and lung cancers, leukemia and lymphoma.
1992 Dr. Birgitta Floderus of the National Institute of Occupational Health, Solna, Sweden. Men exposed to 3 mG at work have three times the expected rate of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
1992 Dr. Richard Lovely of the Battelle Pacific Northwest Lab, Richmond, WA. Men using electric razors have twice the rate of leukemia.
1994 Dr. Gilles Theriault of McGill University, Montreal. Hydro-Quebec workers exposed to magnetic fields have more brain tumors and leukemia. A second study shows that workers exposed to transients (intense pulses of high frequency radiation) have ten times the incidence of lung cancer compared to 1.6 increase for those exposed to magnetic fields alone.
1995 Drs. David Savitz and Dana Loomis of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Utility workers with the highest EMF exposures have more than twice the expected rate of brain cancer than the least exposed workers.
1995 Dr. Birgitta Floderus of the National Institute for Working Life, Solna, Sweden. Individuals exposed to EMFs on the job are found to have a small, but significant, elevation in risk for many types of cancer.
1995 Dr. Nancy Wertheimer, Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hills, and Ed Leeper find quadrupled rates of leukemia in houses where ground currents at the plumbing are present.
1997 Drs. Carin Stenlung and Birgitta Floderus, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Rates of testicular cancer are doubled for the 25% of male workers with the highest EMF exposures.
1997 Drs. Ching-Yi Li of Ju-Jen Catholic University in Taipei, Taiwan, Gilles Theriault of McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and Ruey Lin of National Taiwan University in Taipei. A 40% greater risk of leukemia and a 70% higher risk of ALL (acute lymphocytic leukemia) are found when the exposure is 2 mG or greater. A dose-response relationship is noted.
1996 Dr. Anthony Miller of the University of Toronto, Canada. The leukemia risk is 11 times as high for workers exposed to both electric and magnetic fields compared to 1.6 times for workers exposed to magnetic fields alone.
CELLULAR STUDIES
Dr. Ross Adey, formerly of the Veterans Administration Hospital, Loma Linda, CA. EMFs disrupt communication between healthy adjacent cells, with potential implication for Alzheimer's. Similar findings were reported by Drs. Carl Blackman of the Environmental Protection Agency, Robert Liburdy of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Ewa Lindstrom of the University of Umea, Sweden, and the National Institute of Occupational Health in Umea, Sweden.
1987 Drs. Craig Byus of the University of California, Riverside, and Ross Adey, formerly of the Veterans Administration Hospital, Loma Linda, CA. Weak EMFs increase the action of an enzyme linked to cell growth in tumors.
1995 Drs. Reba Goodman of Columbia University and Ann Henderson of Hunter College, New York City. Magnetic fields induce changes in gene expression.
1998 Dr. Faith Uckun of Wayne Hughes Institute, St. Paul, MN. EMFs alter the activity of protein kinases, enzymes involved in both normal cell function and cancer promotion.
1997-1998 Four laboratories report increased DNA breaks from power frequency EMFs, with implication for cancer. The hypothesis is that EMF-induced free radicals may lead to an increase in DNA breaks or to a disruption of an enzyme repair mechanism. Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra Singh of the University of Washington, Seattle, Jerry Phillips of the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA, Yog Raj Ahuga of Mahavir Medical Research Center, Hyderabad, India, and Britt-Marie Svendenstal of Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
CHEMICAL CARCINOGENS PROMOTED BY EMFs
1991 Dr. Chris Cain of the Veterans Administration Hospital, Lima Linda, CA. EMFs act with a known chemical carcinogen to promote tumor development.
1992 The incidence of breast tumors increases form both static and AC magnetic fields interacting with a known chemical carcinogen in Russian animal studies.
1995 Dr. Craig Byus of the University of California, Riverside. Laboratory animals treated with a chemical carcinogen develop more tumors in the presence of elevated EMFs.
CHILDHOOD CANCER STUDIES
1979 Dr. Nancy Wertheimer and Ed Leeper. For the first time, an increase in childhood cancer is linked with power line EMFs. This study is replicated in 1986 by Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
1990 The Environmental Protection Agency drafts a report concluding that EMFs are a possible potential carcinogen.
1991 Drs. Stephanie London and John Peters of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. An increased risk of childhood leukemia is found with use of electric hair dryers.
1992 Drs. Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden. Children exposed to 3 mG magnetic fields in their homes have three times the expected rate of leukemia.
1994 Dr. Allen Kraut of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg. A direct correlation is found in an epidemiology study comparing electricity usage in the provinces with the rates of childhood leukemia and brain cancers.
1996 Combined studies by Drs. Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm and Dr. Jorgen Olsen of the Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, show two times the rate of leukemia at exposures of 2 mG or more and five times the rate for exposures of 5 mG or higher.
1996 Dr. Daniel Wartenberg of the National Academy of Sciences finds consistency in eleven childhood cancer studies showing elevated risk of cancer for children living near power lines.
1997 Drs. Tore Tynes and Tor Haldorsen of the Institute of Epidemiological Cancer Research at the Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo. Children exposed to magnetic fields 0.5 mG or higher for three or more years during the first four years of life have an increased risk of leukemia.
1997 Drs. Jorg Michaelis and Joachim Schuz of the University of Mainz, Germany. Children living in magnetic fields above 2 mG have twice the risk of leukemia. Children under 4 years old have a seven times increased risk.
1998 Dr. Chung-Yi Li of the College of Medicine at the Pu-Jen Catholic University, Taipei, and Drs. Wei-Chin Lee and Ruey Shiung Lin of National Taiwan University, Taipei. A 2.7 times risk of childhood leukemia is found near power lines in magnetic fields 2 mG or higher.
1998 The National Cancer Institute studies appliance use by children and finds increased childhood leukemia rates with all 25 appliances. Appliances include video games, curling irons, microwave ovens, sound systems with headsets, electric blankets, hair dryers and TVs (sitting closer than 6 feet). There was no increased risk for use of stereos without headphones.
HEART EFFECTS
1998 Dr. Antonio Sastre, Midwest Research Institute (MRI), Kansas City, MO. EMFs reduce the extent of heart-rate variability (HRV) and are linked to increased risk of death from arrhythmia and heart attacks among utility workers.
1999 Dr. David Savitz publishes "Magnetic Field Exposure and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality Among Electrical Utility Workers," in the American Journal of Epidemiology, 149, pp.135-142, January 15, 1999.
LOU GEHRIG'S DISEASE (ALS - amyotrophic lateral sclerosis)
1997 Drs. Zoreh Davanipour and Eugene Sobel of the University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles. The most exposed workers have seven times the risk for ALS as those least exposed.
1997 Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. An occupational study finds two or three times the risk for ALS.
1998 Drs. Christoffer Johansen and Jorgen Olsen of the Danish Cancer Society. A Danish study finds two times the rate of ALS among utility workers.
NERVOUS AND IMMUNE SYSTEM ILLS
1998 Dr. Laurence Bonhomme-Faivre of Paul Brousse Hospital, Paris. EMF occupational exposure is linked to fatigue, depression, irritability, and diminished libido, as well as a significant reduction in white blood cells.
19998 Short-term memory effects are seen with power frequency exposure. A.W. Preece, K.A. Wesnes and G.R. Iwi. "The Effect of a 50 Hz Magnetic Field on Cognitive Function in Humans," International Journal of Radiation Biology, 74, pp.463-470, 1998.
1999 Dr. Ross Adey is to receive the 1999 Hans Selye Award from the American Institute of Stress for his work on biological effects of weak EMFs.
PREGNANCY-RELATED PROBLEMS
1988 Epidemiologists at Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA. Women using VDTs for twenty or more hours weekly during the early months of pregnancy have more than double the rate of miscarriage.
1990 Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Prenatal exposures to electric blankets result in higher risk for leukemia, brain tumors and other cancers.
1992 Dr. Mail Hietznen of the Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland. Women exposed to 3 mG magnetic fields from VDTs have close to three and a half times the expected rate of miscarriage.
1992 Dr. Jukka Juutilainen, University of Kuopio, Finland. Women in residences where magnetic fields at the front door are 6.3 mG or greater have a five fold increase in the rate of miscarriage.
1995 Dr. Claire Infante-Rivard, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Children whose mothers used sewing machines during pregnancy have up to a sevenfold increase in rates of leukemia.
1995 Dr. De-Kun Li of Kaiser Permanents, Oakland, CA, and Drs. Harvey Checkoway and Beth Mueller of the University of Washington, Seattle. Electric blanket usage is associated in low-fertility women with four times the rate of congenital urinary tract anomalies in their newborns.
1995 Dr. Jan Harry of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. In neonates, EMFs are associated with an increase in gene expression and subtle changes in the neural network of the brain.
1998 Dr. Kathleen Belanger of Yale University, New Haven, CT. A 5-year study shows twice the miscarriage rate for women using electric blankets.
1998 Dr. Jukka Juutilainen of the University of Kuopio, Finland. This study designed to detect early fetal loss shows five times the miscarriage rate for women using electric blankets.
1998 The National Cancer Institute's childhood leukemia study shows elevated rates of leukemia in children whose mothers use electric blankets, heating pads, or humidifiers during pregnancy.
SELECTED QUOTATIONS
"The only thing that stands in the way of general acceptance [of EMF cancer connection] is for someone to demonstrate a plausible biological mechanism, because everything else is there. And this is not a requirement for the standard methods of epidemiology. In fact, we still don't have a biological mechanism for asbestos." Dr. David Ozonoff, Chair of the Department of Environmental Health at Boston University's School of Public Health. Microwave News, Vol. XVI No. 2, January/February 1996, p.5.
Dr. Russel Reiter of the University of Texas, San Antonio. "The wide variety of tumors represented [in the Floderus data] suggests the mechanism is a basic one - for example, involving free radicals and melatonin." Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 5, September/October 1995, p.8.
Dr. Gilles Theriault, McGill University: "We keep seeing smoke, but we have not identified the fire. And there is a fire out there. One day we will put our finger on it." Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 1, January/February 1995, p.8.
"The significance of the epidemiological studies is not that they point to a cancer epidemic. But they raise the question: If EMFs can cause even a small change in cancer rates, what other biological effects could they have?" Commentary, Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 4, July/August 1995, p.9.
Michael Herz of Pacific Gas & Electric, San Francisco, CA: "It's incredibly important to follow up and to answer the questions [relating to EMFs and heart rhythms] that have been raised." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.4.
Dr. Imre Gyuk of the Department of Energy in Washington: "It's getting harder and harder for skeptics to deny low-levels effects." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 4, July/August 1998, p.3.
"...we need to look at the combined risk of EMFs with both chemicals and ionizing radiation," Dr. Genevieve Matanoski, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. Microwave News, Vol. XII No. 4, July/August 1992, p.8.
"The NAS-NRC report may mislead the public into a false sense of security - for a while. But the real link between power lines and cancer must still be addressed, as must the evidence that points to EMFs." Commentary, Microwave News, Vol. XVI No. 6, November/December 1996, p.8.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences panel finds that EMFs are "possible" human carcinogens. "Now the public will know what the members of the EMF research community have known for years," said Dr. Michael Marron of the Office of Naval Research in Arlington, VA. Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 4, July/August 1998, p.5.
Dr. Nancy Wertheimer: "The most important aspect of our paper was that in looking at ground currents, we identified a type of EMF measurement that is significantly associated with the incidence of both childhood and adult cancer." Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 5, September/October 1995, p.2.
Dr. Robert McGaughy of the Environmental Protection Agency: "If this were a chemical and we had some mechanistic data, there is no doubt that we would have classified EMFs as a B1 carcinogen - a probable human carcinogen." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.2.
In a draft under review, the National Council on Radiation Protection reviewed the scientific literature and concluded that 2 mG would be a prudent limit not to be exceeded for prolonged exposure. Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 4, July/August 1995, p.12.
Dr. David Carpenter, dean of the School of Public Health at the NYS Department of Health in Albany, said in a talk to the New York City Bar Association on March 14th: "'In my judgment, we are 90-95% certain that there is a link between EMFs and cancer....' Setting standards can be a contentious process, but the 'logical number is 1 mG.'" Microwave News, Vol. XIV No. 2, March/April 1994, p.2.
Dr. Indira Nair of Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA: "Inaction is not an option." She "would err on the side of caution...because children are implicated." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.2.
Shirley Linde of the National EMF Advisory Committee: "It is reprehensible that research is stopping in the U.S. at a time when the NIEHS panel has pointed to a possible cancer risk." "How can we walk away when children are at risk?" Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.3.
Barbara Balaban, West Islip Breast Cancer Coalition: "If EMFs may present a risk, then what is the harm in educating people about those measures they can take to avoid unnecessary exposure?" Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.2.
The source of material for this review is Microwave News, available from 212-517-2800, for $325/year. In the New York area, this publication may be read at the NY Public Library, Library of Science and Industry, 188 Madison Avenue, NYC, and at the library of Brookhaven National Laboratory, 631-344-3483
In 1998, a National Institute on Environmental Health and Safety (NIEHS) panel classified electromagnetic fields (EMFs) as a "possible" human carcinogenic the same class as chloroform, lead, carbon tetrachloride, and DDT.
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE and EMFs
1996 Drs. Eugene Sobel and Zoreh Davanipour of the University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles. Medium-to-high occupational exposures result in a four-fold increase in the rate of Alzheimer's.
1996 Dr. Maria Feychting of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Five-times increased rate of Alzheimer's is reported with occupational exposures.
1996 An occupational study of the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety and Johns Hopkins University finds higher death rates from Alzheimer's with medium-to-high occupation exposures (2 mG and higher).
BREAST CANCER
1987 Dr. Richard Stevens, Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs, Richmond, WA. EMFs reduce levels of the cancer-fighting hormone, melatonin. Lower levels are associated with breast cancer.
1989-1992 Epidemiological studies show an increase in male breast cancer among exposed workers, especially for those under 30 years of age. Drs. Genevieve Matanoski of Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, Paul Demers of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, and Tore Tynes and Aage Andersen of the Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo.
1992 Dr. Sabine John of the Technical University of Munich, Germany. EMFs increase the rate of breast cancer mitochondrial activity.
1992 Dr. Robert Liburdy of the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA. Low levels of EMFs decrease the amount of melatonin.
1993 Dr. Wolfgang Loscher of the School of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover, Germany. EMFs increase the number of mammary tumors in laboratory animals in a dose-response relationship.
1993 Drs. Dana Loomis and David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Female electrical workers have twice the expected number of deaths from breast cancer.
1996- 1998 The Stevens and Liburdy melatonin studies are replicated. For the first time, a mechanism is demonstrated linking EMFs and cancer, i.e., that EMF reduce the amount of the cancer-fighting hormone, melatonin. Dr. Carl Blackman of the Environment Protection Agency, Dr. Richard Luben of the University of California, Riverside, CA, Dr. Larry Anderson of Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richmond, WA, and Drs. Scott Davis of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, and Dr. Richard Stevens of the Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs in Richland, WA.
1996 Dr. Patricia Coogan of Boston University School of public Health, Boston, MA. Another occupational study links female breast cancer and EMFs.
1997 Dr. Maria Feychting of Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Woman who are under 50 exposed to EMFs above 2 mG have 80% increased incidence of breast cancer. When limited to estrogen-receptor-positive women, the incidence is 7.4 times the risk of breast cancer above 1 mG.
CANCER, ADULT - OTHER THAN BREAST CANCER
1989 Drs. Genevieve Matanoski, Patrick Breysse, and Elizabeth Elliott, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. An occupational study shows increased rates of prostate, colon and lung cancers, leukemia and lymphoma.
1992 Dr. Birgitta Floderus of the National Institute of Occupational Health, Solna, Sweden. Men exposed to 3 mG at work have three times the expected rate of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
1992 Dr. Richard Lovely of the Battelle Pacific Northwest Lab, Richmond, WA. Men using electric razors have twice the rate of leukemia.
1994 Dr. Gilles Theriault of McGill University, Montreal. Hydro-Quebec workers exposed to magnetic fields have more brain tumors and leukemia. A second study shows that workers exposed to transients (intense pulses of high frequency radiation) have ten times the incidence of lung cancer compared to 1.6 increase for those exposed to magnetic fields alone.
1995 Drs. David Savitz and Dana Loomis of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Utility workers with the highest EMF exposures have more than twice the expected rate of brain cancer than the least exposed workers.
1995 Dr. Birgitta Floderus of the National Institute for Working Life, Solna, Sweden. Individuals exposed to EMFs on the job are found to have a small, but significant, elevation in risk for many types of cancer.
1995 Dr. Nancy Wertheimer, Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hills, and Ed Leeper find quadrupled rates of leukemia in houses where ground currents at the plumbing are present.
1997 Drs. Carin Stenlung and Birgitta Floderus, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. Rates of testicular cancer are doubled for the 25% of male workers with the highest EMF exposures.
1997 Drs. Ching-Yi Li of Ju-Jen Catholic University in Taipei, Taiwan, Gilles Theriault of McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and Ruey Lin of National Taiwan University in Taipei. A 40% greater risk of leukemia and a 70% higher risk of ALL (acute lymphocytic leukemia) are found when the exposure is 2 mG or greater. A dose-response relationship is noted.
1996 Dr. Anthony Miller of the University of Toronto, Canada. The leukemia risk is 11 times as high for workers exposed to both electric and magnetic fields compared to 1.6 times for workers exposed to magnetic fields alone.
CELLULAR STUDIES
Dr. Ross Adey, formerly of the Veterans Administration Hospital, Loma Linda, CA. EMFs disrupt communication between healthy adjacent cells, with potential implication for Alzheimer's. Similar findings were reported by Drs. Carl Blackman of the Environmental Protection Agency, Robert Liburdy of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, Ewa Lindstrom of the University of Umea, Sweden, and the National Institute of Occupational Health in Umea, Sweden.
1987 Drs. Craig Byus of the University of California, Riverside, and Ross Adey, formerly of the Veterans Administration Hospital, Loma Linda, CA. Weak EMFs increase the action of an enzyme linked to cell growth in tumors.
1995 Drs. Reba Goodman of Columbia University and Ann Henderson of Hunter College, New York City. Magnetic fields induce changes in gene expression.
1998 Dr. Faith Uckun of Wayne Hughes Institute, St. Paul, MN. EMFs alter the activity of protein kinases, enzymes involved in both normal cell function and cancer promotion.
1997-1998 Four laboratories report increased DNA breaks from power frequency EMFs, with implication for cancer. The hypothesis is that EMF-induced free radicals may lead to an increase in DNA breaks or to a disruption of an enzyme repair mechanism. Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra Singh of the University of Washington, Seattle, Jerry Phillips of the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA, Yog Raj Ahuga of Mahavir Medical Research Center, Hyderabad, India, and Britt-Marie Svendenstal of Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
CHEMICAL CARCINOGENS PROMOTED BY EMFs
1991 Dr. Chris Cain of the Veterans Administration Hospital, Lima Linda, CA. EMFs act with a known chemical carcinogen to promote tumor development.
1992 The incidence of breast tumors increases form both static and AC magnetic fields interacting with a known chemical carcinogen in Russian animal studies.
1995 Dr. Craig Byus of the University of California, Riverside. Laboratory animals treated with a chemical carcinogen develop more tumors in the presence of elevated EMFs.
CHILDHOOD CANCER STUDIES
1979 Dr. Nancy Wertheimer and Ed Leeper. For the first time, an increase in childhood cancer is linked with power line EMFs. This study is replicated in 1986 by Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
1990 The Environmental Protection Agency drafts a report concluding that EMFs are a possible potential carcinogen.
1991 Drs. Stephanie London and John Peters of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. An increased risk of childhood leukemia is found with use of electric hair dryers.
1992 Drs. Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden. Children exposed to 3 mG magnetic fields in their homes have three times the expected rate of leukemia.
1994 Dr. Allen Kraut of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg. A direct correlation is found in an epidemiology study comparing electricity usage in the provinces with the rates of childhood leukemia and brain cancers.
1996 Combined studies by Drs. Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm and Dr. Jorgen Olsen of the Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, show two times the rate of leukemia at exposures of 2 mG or more and five times the rate for exposures of 5 mG or higher.
1996 Dr. Daniel Wartenberg of the National Academy of Sciences finds consistency in eleven childhood cancer studies showing elevated risk of cancer for children living near power lines.
1997 Drs. Tore Tynes and Tor Haldorsen of the Institute of Epidemiological Cancer Research at the Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo. Children exposed to magnetic fields 0.5 mG or higher for three or more years during the first four years of life have an increased risk of leukemia.
1997 Drs. Jorg Michaelis and Joachim Schuz of the University of Mainz, Germany. Children living in magnetic fields above 2 mG have twice the risk of leukemia. Children under 4 years old have a seven times increased risk.
1998 Dr. Chung-Yi Li of the College of Medicine at the Pu-Jen Catholic University, Taipei, and Drs. Wei-Chin Lee and Ruey Shiung Lin of National Taiwan University, Taipei. A 2.7 times risk of childhood leukemia is found near power lines in magnetic fields 2 mG or higher.
1998 The National Cancer Institute studies appliance use by children and finds increased childhood leukemia rates with all 25 appliances. Appliances include video games, curling irons, microwave ovens, sound systems with headsets, electric blankets, hair dryers and TVs (sitting closer than 6 feet). There was no increased risk for use of stereos without headphones.
HEART EFFECTS
1998 Dr. Antonio Sastre, Midwest Research Institute (MRI), Kansas City, MO. EMFs reduce the extent of heart-rate variability (HRV) and are linked to increased risk of death from arrhythmia and heart attacks among utility workers.
1999 Dr. David Savitz publishes "Magnetic Field Exposure and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality Among Electrical Utility Workers," in the American Journal of Epidemiology, 149, pp.135-142, January 15, 1999.
LOU GEHRIG'S DISEASE (ALS - amyotrophic lateral sclerosis)
1997 Drs. Zoreh Davanipour and Eugene Sobel of the University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles. The most exposed workers have seven times the risk for ALS as those least exposed.
1997 Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. An occupational study finds two or three times the risk for ALS.
1998 Drs. Christoffer Johansen and Jorgen Olsen of the Danish Cancer Society. A Danish study finds two times the rate of ALS among utility workers.
NERVOUS AND IMMUNE SYSTEM ILLS
1998 Dr. Laurence Bonhomme-Faivre of Paul Brousse Hospital, Paris. EMF occupational exposure is linked to fatigue, depression, irritability, and diminished libido, as well as a significant reduction in white blood cells.
19998 Short-term memory effects are seen with power frequency exposure. A.W. Preece, K.A. Wesnes and G.R. Iwi. "The Effect of a 50 Hz Magnetic Field on Cognitive Function in Humans," International Journal of Radiation Biology, 74, pp.463-470, 1998.
1999 Dr. Ross Adey is to receive the 1999 Hans Selye Award from the American Institute of Stress for his work on biological effects of weak EMFs.
PREGNANCY-RELATED PROBLEMS
1988 Epidemiologists at Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA. Women using VDTs for twenty or more hours weekly during the early months of pregnancy have more than double the rate of miscarriage.
1990 Dr. David Savitz of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Prenatal exposures to electric blankets result in higher risk for leukemia, brain tumors and other cancers.
1992 Dr. Mail Hietznen of the Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland. Women exposed to 3 mG magnetic fields from VDTs have close to three and a half times the expected rate of miscarriage.
1992 Dr. Jukka Juutilainen, University of Kuopio, Finland. Women in residences where magnetic fields at the front door are 6.3 mG or greater have a five fold increase in the rate of miscarriage.
1995 Dr. Claire Infante-Rivard, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Children whose mothers used sewing machines during pregnancy have up to a sevenfold increase in rates of leukemia.
1995 Dr. De-Kun Li of Kaiser Permanents, Oakland, CA, and Drs. Harvey Checkoway and Beth Mueller of the University of Washington, Seattle. Electric blanket usage is associated in low-fertility women with four times the rate of congenital urinary tract anomalies in their newborns.
1995 Dr. Jan Harry of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. In neonates, EMFs are associated with an increase in gene expression and subtle changes in the neural network of the brain.
1998 Dr. Kathleen Belanger of Yale University, New Haven, CT. A 5-year study shows twice the miscarriage rate for women using electric blankets.
1998 Dr. Jukka Juutilainen of the University of Kuopio, Finland. This study designed to detect early fetal loss shows five times the miscarriage rate for women using electric blankets.
1998 The National Cancer Institute's childhood leukemia study shows elevated rates of leukemia in children whose mothers use electric blankets, heating pads, or humidifiers during pregnancy.
SELECTED QUOTATIONS
"The only thing that stands in the way of general acceptance [of EMF cancer connection] is for someone to demonstrate a plausible biological mechanism, because everything else is there. And this is not a requirement for the standard methods of epidemiology. In fact, we still don't have a biological mechanism for asbestos." Dr. David Ozonoff, Chair of the Department of Environmental Health at Boston University's School of Public Health. Microwave News, Vol. XVI No. 2, January/February 1996, p.5.
Dr. Russel Reiter of the University of Texas, San Antonio. "The wide variety of tumors represented [in the Floderus data] suggests the mechanism is a basic one - for example, involving free radicals and melatonin." Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 5, September/October 1995, p.8.
Dr. Gilles Theriault, McGill University: "We keep seeing smoke, but we have not identified the fire. And there is a fire out there. One day we will put our finger on it." Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 1, January/February 1995, p.8.
"The significance of the epidemiological studies is not that they point to a cancer epidemic. But they raise the question: If EMFs can cause even a small change in cancer rates, what other biological effects could they have?" Commentary, Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 4, July/August 1995, p.9.
Michael Herz of Pacific Gas & Electric, San Francisco, CA: "It's incredibly important to follow up and to answer the questions [relating to EMFs and heart rhythms] that have been raised." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.4.
Dr. Imre Gyuk of the Department of Energy in Washington: "It's getting harder and harder for skeptics to deny low-levels effects." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 4, July/August 1998, p.3.
"...we need to look at the combined risk of EMFs with both chemicals and ionizing radiation," Dr. Genevieve Matanoski, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. Microwave News, Vol. XII No. 4, July/August 1992, p.8.
"The NAS-NRC report may mislead the public into a false sense of security - for a while. But the real link between power lines and cancer must still be addressed, as must the evidence that points to EMFs." Commentary, Microwave News, Vol. XVI No. 6, November/December 1996, p.8.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences panel finds that EMFs are "possible" human carcinogens. "Now the public will know what the members of the EMF research community have known for years," said Dr. Michael Marron of the Office of Naval Research in Arlington, VA. Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 4, July/August 1998, p.5.
Dr. Nancy Wertheimer: "The most important aspect of our paper was that in looking at ground currents, we identified a type of EMF measurement that is significantly associated with the incidence of both childhood and adult cancer." Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 5, September/October 1995, p.2.
Dr. Robert McGaughy of the Environmental Protection Agency: "If this were a chemical and we had some mechanistic data, there is no doubt that we would have classified EMFs as a B1 carcinogen - a probable human carcinogen." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.2.
In a draft under review, the National Council on Radiation Protection reviewed the scientific literature and concluded that 2 mG would be a prudent limit not to be exceeded for prolonged exposure. Microwave News, Vol. XV No. 4, July/August 1995, p.12.
Dr. David Carpenter, dean of the School of Public Health at the NYS Department of Health in Albany, said in a talk to the New York City Bar Association on March 14th: "'In my judgment, we are 90-95% certain that there is a link between EMFs and cancer....' Setting standards can be a contentious process, but the 'logical number is 1 mG.'" Microwave News, Vol. XIV No. 2, March/April 1994, p.2.
Dr. Indira Nair of Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA: "Inaction is not an option." She "would err on the side of caution...because children are implicated." Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.2.
Shirley Linde of the National EMF Advisory Committee: "It is reprehensible that research is stopping in the U.S. at a time when the NIEHS panel has pointed to a possible cancer risk." "How can we walk away when children are at risk?" Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.3.
Barbara Balaban, West Islip Breast Cancer Coalition: "If EMFs may present a risk, then what is the harm in educating people about those measures they can take to avoid unnecessary exposure?" Microwave News, Vol. XVIII No. 5, September/October 1998, p.2.
The source of material for this review is Microwave News, available from 212-517-2800, for $325/year. In the New York area, this publication may be read at the NY Public Library, Library of Science and Industry, 188 Madison Avenue, NYC, and at the library of Brookhaven National Laboratory, 631-344-3483
Expressions of Concern from Scientists, Physicians, Health Policy Experts & Others
http://electromagnetichealth.org/
William Rea, MD
Founder & Director of the Environmental Health Center, Dallas
Past President, American Academy of Environmental Medicine
“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”.
Martin Blank, PhD
Associate Professor, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics,
Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons; Researcher in Bioelectromagnetics; Author of the BioInitiative Report’s section on Stress Proteins.
“Cells in the body react to EMFs as potentially harmful, just like to other environmental toxins, including heavy metals and toxic chemicals. The DNA in living cells recognizes electromagnetic fields at very low levels of exposure; and produces a biochemical stress response. The scientific evidence tells us that our safety standards are inadequate, and that we must protect ourselves from exposure to EMF due to power lines, cell phones and the like, or risk the known consequences. The science is very strong and we should sit up and pay attention.”
Olle Johansson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Author of the BioInitiative Report’s section on the Immune System.
“It is evident that various biological alterations, including immune system modulation, are present in electrohypersensitive persons. There must be an end to the pervasive nonchalance, indifference and lack of heartfelt respect for the plight of these persons. It is clear something serious has happened and is happening. Every aspect of electrohypersensitive peoples’ lives, including the ability to work productively in society, have healthy relations and find safe, permanent housing, is at stake. The basics of life are becoming increasingly inaccessible to a growing percentage of the world’s population. I strongly advise all governments to take the issue of electromagnetic health hazards seriously and to take action while there is still time. There is too great a risk that the ever increasing RF-based communications technologies represent a real danger to humans, especially because of their exponential, ongoing and unchecked growth. Governments should act decisively to protect public health by changing the exposure standards to be biologically-based, communicating the results of the independent science on this topic and aggressively researching links with a multitude of associated medical conditions.”
David Carpenter, MD
Professor, Environmental Health Sciences, and Director, Institute for Health and the Environment, School of Public Health, University of Albany, SUNY
Co-Editor, The BioInitiative Report (www.BioInitiative.org)
Electromagnetic fields are packets of energy that does not have any mass, and visible light is what we know best. X-rays are also electromagnetic fields, but they are more energetic than visible light. Our concern is for those electromagnetic fields that are less energetic than visible light, including those that are associated with electricity and those used for communications and in microwave ovens. The fields associated with electricity are commonly called “extremely low frequency” fields (ELF), while those used in communication and microwave ovens are called “radiofrequency” (RF) fields. Studies of people have shown that both ELF and RF exposures result in an increased risk of cancer, and that this occurs at intensities that are too low to cause tissue heating. Unfortunately, all of our exposure standards are based on the false assumption that there are no hazardous effects at intensities that do not cause tissue heating. Based on the existing science, many public health experts believe it is possible we will face an epidemic of cancers in the future resulting from uncontrolled use of cell phones and increased population exposure to WiFi and other wireless devices. Thus it is important that all of us, and especially children, restrict our use of cell phones, limit exposure to background levels of Wi-Fi, and that government and industry discover ways in which to allow use of wireless devices without such elevated risk of serious disease. We need to educate decision-makers that ‘business as usual’ is unacceptable. The importance of this public health issue can not be underestimated.”
Magda Havas, PhD
Associate Professor, Environment & Resource Studies, Trent University, Canada.
Expert in radiofrequency radiation, electromagnetic fields, dirty electricity and ground current.
“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. Current guidelines urgently need to be re-examined by government and reduced to reflect the state of the science. There is an emerging public health crisis at hand and time is of the essence.”
Whitney North Seymour, Jr., Esq.
Retired Attorney; Former New York State Senator & United States Attorney, Southern District of NY
Co-Founder, Natural Resources Defense Council
“Electromagnetic radiation is a very serious human and environmental health issue that needs immediate attention by Congress. The BioInitiative Report is a major milestone in understanding the health risks from wireless technology. Every responsible elected official owes it to his or her constituents to learn and act on its finding and policy recommendations.”
B. Blake Levitt
Former New York Times journalist and author of Electromagnetic Fields, A Consumer’s Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Ourselves, and Editor of Cell Towers, Wireless Convenience? Or Environmental Hazard?
Ambient man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs), across a range of frequencies, are a serious environmental issue. Yet most environmentalists know little about it, perhaps because the subject has been the purview of physicists and engineers for so long that biologists have lost touch with electromagnetism’s fundamental inclusion in the biological paradigm. All living cells and indeed whole living beings, no matter what genus or species, are dynamic coherent electrical systems utterly reliant on bioelectricity for life’s most basic metabolic processes. It turns out that most living things are fantastically sensitive to vanishingly small EMF exposures. Living cells interpret such exposures as part of our normal cellular activities (think heartbeats, brainwaves, cell division itself, etc.) 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. We are already seeing problems in sentinel species like birds, bats, and bees. Wildlife is known to abandon areas when cell towers are placed. Radiofrequency radiation (RF)—the part of the electromagnetic spectrum used in all-things-wireless today—is a known immune system suppressor, among other things. RF is a form of energetic air pollution and we need to understand it as such. Humans are not the only species being affected. The health of our planet may be in jeopardy from this newest environmental concern—added to all the others. Citizens need to call upon government to fund appropriate research and to get industry influence out of the dialogue. We ignore this at our own peril now.”
Eric Braverman, MD
Brain researcher, Author of The Edge Effect, and Director of Path Medical in New York City and The PATH Foundation. Expert in the brain’s global impact on illness and health.
“There is no question EMFs 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”.
Abraham R. Liboff, PhD
Research Professor
Center for Molecular Biology and Biotechnology
Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida
Co-Editor, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine
“The key point about electromagnetic pollution that the public has to realize is that it is not necessary that the intensity be large for a biological interaction to occur. There is now considerable evidence that extremely weak signals can have physiological consequences. These interactive intensities are about 1000 times smaller than the threshold values formerly estimated by otherwise knowledgeable theoreticians, who, in their vainglorious approach to science, rejected all evidence to the contrary as inconsistent with their magnificent calculations. These faulty estimated thresholds are yet to be corrected by both regulators and the media.
The overall problem with environmental electromagnetism is much deeper, not only of concern at power line frequencies, but also in the radiofrequency range encompassing mobile phones. Here the public’s continuing exposure to electromagnetic radiation is largely connected to money. Indeed the tens of billions of dollars in sales one finds in the cell phone industry makes it mandatory to corporate leaders that they deny, in knee-jerk fashion, any indication of hazard.
There may be hope for the future in knowing that weakly intense electromagnetic interactions can be used for good as well as harm. The fact that such fields are biologically effective also implies the likelihood of medical applications, something that is now taking place. As this happens, I think it will make us more aware about how our bodies react to electromagnetism, and it should become even clearer to everyone concerned that there is reason to be very, very careful about ambient electromagnetic fields.”
Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD
Professor at University Hospital, Orebro, Sweden.
World-renowned expert on cell phones, cordless phones, brain tumors, and the safety of wireless radiofrequency and microwave radiation.
Co-authored the BioInitiative Report’s section on Brain Tumors by Dr. Hardell
“The evidence for risks from prolonged cell phone and cordless phone use is quite strong when you look at people who have used these devices for 10 years or longer, and when they are used mainly on one side of the head. Recent studies that do not report increased risk of brain tumors and acoustic neuromas have not looked at heavy users, use over ten years or longer, and do not look at the part of the brain which would reasonably have exposure to produce a tumor.”
Samuel Milham MD, MPH
Medical epidemiologist in occupational epidemiology.
First scientist to report increased leukemia and other cancers in electrical workers and to demonstrate that the childhood age peak in leukemia emerged in conjunction with the spread of residential electrification.
“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.”
Libby Kelley, MA
Managing Secretariat International Commission For Electromagnetic Safety; Founder, Council on Wireless Technology Impacts; Co-Producer of documentary, “Public Exposure: DNA, Democracy and the Wireless Revolution”; EMF environmental consultant and leading appellant in challenging the FCC Radio Frequency Radiation human exposure guidelines, 1997-2000. (www.icems.eu)
“Radiofrequency radiation human exposure standards for personal wireless communications devices and for environmental exposure to wireless transmitters are set by national governments to guide the use of wireless communications devices and for wireless transmitters. In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Communications Commission set these standards. The Council on Wireless Technology Impacts considers these exposure standards to be inadequate as they are based on heating effects and do not accommodate the low level, cumulative exposure conditions in which the public now lives. These standards are also designed for acute, short term exposure conditions and do not acknowledge the medical evidence pointing to increased risks and actual harm that results from chronic, intermittent exposure. 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. We strongly encourage consumers, manufacturers, utility providers and policymakers to reduce, eliminate and mitigate EMR exposure conditions and to support biologically based standards.”
James S. Turner, Esq.
Chairman of the Board, Citizens for Health
Co-author, Voice of the People: The Transpartisan Imperative in American Life
Attorney, Swankin-Turner, Washington, DC
“According to the BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields—from electrical and electronic appliances, power lines and wireless devices such as cell phones, cordless phones, cellular antennas, towers, and broadcast transmission towers—we live in an invisible fog of EMF which thirty years of science, including over 2,000 peer reviewed studies, shows exposes us to serious health risks such as increased Alzheimer’s disease, breast cancer, Lou Gehrig disease, EMF immune system hypersensitivity and disruption of brain function and DNA. The public needs to wake up politicians and public officials to the need for updating the decades old EMF public health standards. This report tells how.”
Camilla Rees, MBA
CEO, Wide Angle Health, LLC
Patient education and advocacy
“The U.S. spends over $2 trillion dollars on health care each year, of which about 78% is from people with chronic illnesses, without adequately exploring and understanding what factors—including EMF/RF—contribute to imbalances in peoples’ bodies’ in the first place. After reading The BioInitiative Report, it should come as no surprise to policymakers, given the continually increasing levels of EMF/RF exposures in our environment, that close to 50% of Americans now live with a chronic illness. I grieve for people who needlessly suffer these illnesses and hold out the hope that our government leaders will become more cognizant of the role electromagnetic factors are playing in disease, health care costs and the erosion of quality of life and productivity in America.”
L. Lloyd Morgan, BS Electronic Engineering
Director Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, Member Bioelectromagnetics Society, Member Brain Tumor Epidemiological Consortium *
“There is every indication that cell phones cause brain tumors, salivary gland tumors and eye cancer. Yet, because the cell phone industry provides a substantial proportion of research funding, this reality is hidden from the general public. The Interphone Study, a 13-country research project, substantially funded by the cell phone industry has consistently shown that use of a cell phone protects the user from risk of a brain tumor! Does anything more need to be said? It is time that fully independent studies be funded by those governmental agencies whose charter is to protect its citizens so that the truth about the very damaging health hazards of microwave radiation becomes clear and well known.”
*For identification purposes only: All statements are mine and mine alone and do not represent positions or opinions of the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, the Bioelectromagnetics Society or the Brain Tumor Epidemiological Consortia.
Janet Newton
President, The EMR Policy Institute
www.EMRPolicy.org
“The radiofrequency radiation safety policy in force in the United States fails to protect the public. Currently in the US there are more than 260 million wireless subscribers, the demand that drives the continuing build-out of antenna sites in residential and commercial neighborhoods, including near schools, daycare centers, and senior living centers and in the workplace. 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. Specifically, the studies 1) assume a single antenna rather than the typical arrangements of a minimum of four to six antennas per site, thereby underestimating exposure intensities, 2) do not pertain to the commonly used multiple-element base station antennas, thereby not taking into account exposures to multiple frequencies, 3) lack models of several heights for men, women, and children of various ages for use in the characterization of Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) distributions for exposures from cell phones, wireless PCs, and base stations and 4) do not take into consideration absorption effects of exposures from the many different radio frequency emitting devices to which the public is often simultaneously exposed. 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.”
Prof. Livio Giuliani, PhD
Spokesperson, International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (www.icems.eu)
Deputy Director, Italian National Institute for Worker Protection and Safety, East Venice and South Tyrol; Professor, School of Biochemistry of Camerino University, Italy
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, states in part, “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.”
Professor Jacqueline McGlade
Executive Director, European Environmental Agency
Advisor to European Union countries under the European Commission
“There are many examples of the failure to use the precautionary principle in the past, which have resulted in serious and often irreversible damage to health and environments. Appropriate, precautionary and proportionate actions taken now to avoid plausible and potentially serious threats to health from EMF are likely to be seen as prudent and wise from future perspectives.”
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
Claims that cell phones pose no health hazards are supported solely by Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) limits safety standards written by the telecommunications industry decades ago based on studies they funded. These have made the erroneous assumption that the only harm that could come from cell phone radiofrequency emissions would be from a thermal or heating action, since such non thermal fields can have no biological effects. The late Dr. Ross Adey disproved this three decades ago by demonstrating that very similar radiofrequency fields with certain carrier and modulation frequencies that had insufficient energy to produce any heating could cause the release of calcium ions from cells. Since then, numerous research reports have confirmed that non thermal fields from cell phones, tower transmitters, power lines, and other man made sources can significantly affect various tissues and physiologic functions.
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. A two-minute call can alter brain function in a child for an hour, which is why other countries ban their sale or discourage their use under the age of 18. In contrast, this is the segment of the population now being targeted here in a $2 billion U.S. advertising campaign that views “tweens” (children between 8 and 12 years old) as the next big cell phone market. Firefly and Barbie cell phones are also being promoted for 6 to 8-year-olds.
It is not generally appreciated that there is a cumulative effect and that talking on a cell phone for just an hour a day for ten years can add up to 10,000 watts of radiation. That’s ten times more than from putting your head in a microwave oven. Pregnant women may also be at increased risk based on a study showing that children born to mothers who used a cell phone just two or three times a day during pregnancy showed a dramatic increase in hyperactivity and other behavioral and emotional problems. And for the 30% of children who had also used a cell phone by age 7, the incidence of behavioral problems was 80% higher! Whether ontogeny (embryonic development) recapitulates phylogeny is debatable, but it is clear that lower forms of life are also much more sensitive. If you put the positive electrode of a 1.5 volt battery in the Pacific Ocean at San Francisco and the negative one off San Diego, sharks in the in between these cities can detect the few billionths of a volt electrical field. EMF fields have also been implicated in the recent massive but mysterious disappearance of honeybee colonies essential for pollinating over 90 commercial crops. As Albert Einstein warned, “If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe, then man would only have four years of life left.”
Finally, all life on earth evolved under the influence of solar radiation and geomagnetic forces that we have learned to adapt to and in some instances even utilize. The health of all living systems (ranging upward from a cell, tissue, organ or person, to a family, organization or nation) depends on good communication – good communication within, as well as with the external environment. All communication in the body eventually takes place via very subtle electromagnetic signaling between cells that is now being disrupted by artificial electropollution we have not had time to adapt to. As Alvin Toffler emphasized in Future Shock, too much change in too short a time produces severe stress due to adaptational failure. The adverse effects of electrosmog may take decades to be appreciated, although some, like carcinogenicity, are already starting to surface. This gigantic experiment on our children and grandchildren could result in massive damage to mind and body with the potential to produce a disaster of unprecedented proportions, unless proper precautions are immediately implemented. At the same time, we must acknowledge that novel electromagnetic therapies have been shown to benefit stress related disorders ranging from anxiety, depression and insomnia, to arthritis, migraine and tension headaches. As demonstrated in Bioelectromagnetic Medicine, they may also be much safer and more effective than drugs, so we need to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Breastfeeding may lower risk of cancer
Those who have known me, have known this for years that I was always advocating women to breast feed their babies and stating that Breast Cancer is also related to not breast feeding.
Imagine, all the milk the breast produces, and without it being excreted, it has a new unwanted chemistry in the breast cells, which the nature did not factor in.
What would happen to those unwanted chemicals and is it not logical and natural to think they producing toxicity in the body? Does not toxicity relate to Cancer?
For me it was so obvious but strange is the way of Modern Medicine that these obvious things need research by experts, whose domain paths also cross with the artificial products they need to push for their employers.
Courtesy
Time Magazine
Breastfeeding may lower risk of cancer
Posted by Laura Blue Monday, August 10, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Submit a Comment • Trackback (0) • Related Topics: body, cancer, parenting, breast cancer, breastfeeding
Women who breastfeed appear to have lower risk of developing pre-menopausal breast cancer than those who don't, according to a new study released today in in the Archives of Internal Medicine. The stats are especially compelling for women with a family history of the disease. Among that group, women in the study who'd breastfed had just 41% the disease risk of women who did not breastfeed.
The results come from researchers at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. They used data from 60,075 women who'd had at least one baby, and who were monitored between 1997 and 2005 as part of the Nurses' Health Study II. The researchers wanted to see what kind of an effect breastfeeding had on cancer risk, once they'd controlled for other known risk factors, including body weight, age at first period, oral-contraceptive use and alcohol consumption.
The breastfeeding effect was strong, at least among those women with a family history of breast cancer. But it's still not clear why or how, exactly, giving milk might prevent cancers from forming. Breastfeeding is of course correlated with oodles of other lifestyle factors, so it's always possible that one of those is responsible for the observed effect. (Remember, too, that breast-cancer risk increases with age until women are well into their 70s, so pre-menopausal breast cancer should not be your only concern.) And yet the researchers behind this new study do have one good reason to think that the link they've found could be causal. It seems that women who used drugs to suppress lactation got the very same benefit. The researchers hypothesize, therefore, that something in the breast really does respond badly when milk goes unused. In particular, they write, "if a woman does not breastfeed, she experiences abrupt engorgement [of the breast right after childbirth], and mammary tissue may become progressively inflamed." They believe this inflammation could play some role in cancer formation.
Imagine, all the milk the breast produces, and without it being excreted, it has a new unwanted chemistry in the breast cells, which the nature did not factor in.
What would happen to those unwanted chemicals and is it not logical and natural to think they producing toxicity in the body? Does not toxicity relate to Cancer?
For me it was so obvious but strange is the way of Modern Medicine that these obvious things need research by experts, whose domain paths also cross with the artificial products they need to push for their employers.
Courtesy
Time Magazine
Breastfeeding may lower risk of cancer
Posted by Laura Blue Monday, August 10, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Submit a Comment • Trackback (0) • Related Topics: body, cancer, parenting, breast cancer, breastfeeding
Women who breastfeed appear to have lower risk of developing pre-menopausal breast cancer than those who don't, according to a new study released today in in the Archives of Internal Medicine. The stats are especially compelling for women with a family history of the disease. Among that group, women in the study who'd breastfed had just 41% the disease risk of women who did not breastfeed.
The results come from researchers at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. They used data from 60,075 women who'd had at least one baby, and who were monitored between 1997 and 2005 as part of the Nurses' Health Study II. The researchers wanted to see what kind of an effect breastfeeding had on cancer risk, once they'd controlled for other known risk factors, including body weight, age at first period, oral-contraceptive use and alcohol consumption.
The breastfeeding effect was strong, at least among those women with a family history of breast cancer. But it's still not clear why or how, exactly, giving milk might prevent cancers from forming. Breastfeeding is of course correlated with oodles of other lifestyle factors, so it's always possible that one of those is responsible for the observed effect. (Remember, too, that breast-cancer risk increases with age until women are well into their 70s, so pre-menopausal breast cancer should not be your only concern.) And yet the researchers behind this new study do have one good reason to think that the link they've found could be causal. It seems that women who used drugs to suppress lactation got the very same benefit. The researchers hypothesize, therefore, that something in the breast really does respond badly when milk goes unused. In particular, they write, "if a woman does not breastfeed, she experiences abrupt engorgement [of the breast right after childbirth], and mammary tissue may become progressively inflamed." They believe this inflammation could play some role in cancer formation.
Friday, March 13, 2009
A Letter to Friend Trying To Help Her Child
Hi Vxxxxx.
What I wanted to share with you was following:
a. RF Modulated EMF can cause RNA/DNA Replication and mess with Cellular Division, including Metabolism. This can causes all kinds of Health issues. Reducing it and Eliminating can help body help to some extent. It has shown to cause Autism. This is besides the Slow Frequency EMF causing Cancer, and High Frequency like Microwaves causing Ionization, breaking of water molecule into H2 and O2 as the Resonant Frequency of Water is the same as Microwave and WiFi/802.11g as well as some Chordless Phones.
b. Loud Noises can mess with children growth, specially when they are developing, and very true for child in the womb. The reaction of the brain cells is confusion, and shutting off themselves. Then resonating sound frequencies (remember soldiers walking in sync can bring down a bridge) can also severe the neural synapses.
I think in case of Txxxxx, the "b" happened, with brain cells getting confused. Remember X-Files experience, which I once watched with you folks together, but I was still not on this path of seeking the Truth. So removing those factors should also help Txxxxx in the long run.
There could be other combination, and one hint is you should get her Pituitary checked, and associated Harmones. There is nothing much can be done except for Hormone Treatment.
I know some folks may laugh at it but I can defend a lot scientifically.
BTW, I have been blessed with some Yogic Powers, like suspension of mechanical breath for 2-3 hours (metabolically I still breath but with minimum), can shut my nostrils at will without using my hands, and churn my alimentary canals inside without moving much of the stomach, grow my hand/fingers and feet/toes, which ever you want, by 1cms in 15 to 30 seconds, temporarily, and children have said this about height, and also feel the index finger of one hand writing the other hand's palm away from 4 inches, as part of my experiment to transfer EMF (Pranic) energy. Most of this tricks some of my friends have seen, including my PCP and Cardio. A and his family have seen the one form of Telekinesis.
All I am saying not to show off, but to convince you to help the Bitya Txxxxx. I know the pain of a parent when the child has to struggle. Sometimes not all parents feel the pain, as it was in the cae of Jxxxxxx (we all grow at different rates from self centric *fun* view to an egalitarian *pain sensitive* view).
Knowing Ixxxx, I know he would not be convinced easily, as he is a different part of life, and nothing is wrong, as we all are there once. Could you believe me I would be here, if you had seen me in IIT or even Bombay?
BTW, the seeking of Truth is part of my scientific query as well, and I have written a paper on Gravity, as part of my quest searching for an answer since 1991, and then now I am trying to close on a Unified Theory of Everything. I have the empirical and philosophical summary and details, but busy doing sanity check with Modern Mathematical Developments which Modern Physics (which is still having disparity between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity) heavily relies on.
The Standard Atomic Model is breaking, and my theory predicts that, and you can check all the world's Linear Accelerators would keep finding new Atomic Particles, and breaking the Standard Model, developed by the likes of Feynman.
I sharing this so that you know I am not just BS'ing. The one form of Telekinesis is part of the General Relativity Experiment I have to show. ;-)
Take care.
Love and Regards,
Sunil.
What I wanted to share with you was following:
a. RF Modulated EMF can cause RNA/DNA Replication and mess with Cellular Division, including Metabolism. This can causes all kinds of Health issues. Reducing it and Eliminating can help body help to some extent. It has shown to cause Autism. This is besides the Slow Frequency EMF causing Cancer, and High Frequency like Microwaves causing Ionization, breaking of water molecule into H2 and O2 as the Resonant Frequency of Water is the same as Microwave and WiFi/802.11g as well as some Chordless Phones.
b. Loud Noises can mess with children growth, specially when they are developing, and very true for child in the womb. The reaction of the brain cells is confusion, and shutting off themselves. Then resonating sound frequencies (remember soldiers walking in sync can bring down a bridge) can also severe the neural synapses.
I think in case of Txxxxx, the "b" happened, with brain cells getting confused. Remember X-Files experience, which I once watched with you folks together, but I was still not on this path of seeking the Truth. So removing those factors should also help Txxxxx in the long run.
There could be other combination, and one hint is you should get her Pituitary checked, and associated Harmones. There is nothing much can be done except for Hormone Treatment.
I know some folks may laugh at it but I can defend a lot scientifically.
BTW, I have been blessed with some Yogic Powers, like suspension of mechanical breath for 2-3 hours (metabolically I still breath but with minimum), can shut my nostrils at will without using my hands, and churn my alimentary canals inside without moving much of the stomach, grow my hand/fingers and feet/toes, which ever you want, by 1cms in 15 to 30 seconds, temporarily, and children have said this about height, and also feel the index finger of one hand writing the other hand's palm away from 4 inches, as part of my experiment to transfer EMF (Pranic) energy. Most of this tricks some of my friends have seen, including my PCP and Cardio. A and his family have seen the one form of Telekinesis.
All I am saying not to show off, but to convince you to help the Bitya Txxxxx. I know the pain of a parent when the child has to struggle. Sometimes not all parents feel the pain, as it was in the cae of Jxxxxxx (we all grow at different rates from self centric *fun* view to an egalitarian *pain sensitive* view).
Knowing Ixxxx, I know he would not be convinced easily, as he is a different part of life, and nothing is wrong, as we all are there once. Could you believe me I would be here, if you had seen me in IIT or even Bombay?
BTW, the seeking of Truth is part of my scientific query as well, and I have written a paper on Gravity, as part of my quest searching for an answer since 1991, and then now I am trying to close on a Unified Theory of Everything. I have the empirical and philosophical summary and details, but busy doing sanity check with Modern Mathematical Developments which Modern Physics (which is still having disparity between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity) heavily relies on.
The Standard Atomic Model is breaking, and my theory predicts that, and you can check all the world's Linear Accelerators would keep finding new Atomic Particles, and breaking the Standard Model, developed by the likes of Feynman.
I sharing this so that you know I am not just BS'ing. The one form of Telekinesis is part of the General Relativity Experiment I have to show. ;-)
Take care.
Love and Regards,
Sunil.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)