jump to navigation

Sleep Problems, the use of CPAP and BIPAP machines, and Electromagnetic Concerns April 2, 2007

Posted by healthyself in Bioeffects, Biological Activity, Biological Dentistry, Biological Effects, BIPAP, Blogroll, Brainwave Interference, Buzzing, Central Nervous System, Chronic Exhaustion, Chronic Fatigue, Consciousness, CPAP, Cytotoxic Effects, Decision Making, Definitions, Electrical Components, Electrical Pulses, Electrical Surges, Electrical Wiring, Electromagetic pollution, Electromagnetic Interference, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic Radiation, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, Emergency Medicine, EMF's, Employees, EMR, Energy Centers, Environment, Epidemiologists, Epidemiology, Exposure, Frequencies, grams of tissue, Health, Health and Safety Officer, Health related, Homes, Hospitals, HOuseholds, HRD, Human Resources, Hz, Inflammation, Insomnia, Interdisciplinary, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Medical Research, Melatonin, Men's Health, Metabolic Changes, MF, MHz, Microwave exposure, Mitigation, Neural Electrophysiology, neurological, Neurotransmitters, Non Profit Organizations, Parenting, Pulsed Radiation, Pulses, radiation, Radio Frequency Radiation, Research, Research Needed, Resonance, Resonant Frequency, Risk Factor, Risk of Disease, Sick People, signaling enzymes, Skull, Sleep, Sleep Centers, Sleep disturbances, Solutions, Stress, Symptoms, Toxic Interactions, University, Vibration, VLF, watts, Waves, Who is Affected?, Wired, Women's Health, yawning.
5 comments

Do you use a machine to help you sleep?

You may be exposing yourself to increased pulsed radiation.

“…any machine that is operational will be putting forth a magnetic field. Considering the fact that both the cpap and bipap are strictly to insure respiration makes them a higher priority for health than the EMFs. Thus the only consideration is to convert the MF to a less invasive form. There are several devices that can be applied to these and any other electrical devices to decrease the effects of the EMFs. If that suggestion does not fall completely within your level of acceptability you might try to convince the manufacturers to come with a longer hose in order to create a greater distance from the actual pump.”

Dr. Howard Fisher

Watch for Dr. Fisher’s upcoming book: “The Invisible Threat: The Risks sssociated ith EMFs,” which will be released soon.

Danger for Children and Staff in Schools April 2, 2007

Posted by healthyself in .1W/m2, 10 W/m2, 23000 uWatt/mw, Bioeffects, Biological Activity, Biological Effects, Blogroll, Bluetooth, Cable, Children's health, Chromosomal damage, Communication, Community, Computer Rooms, Cytotoxic Effects, Decision Making, DECT, Distribution, Electrical Components, Electrical Pulses, Electrical Surges, Electrical Wiring, Electromagnetic Communications, Electromagnetic Field, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic Radiation, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, Emergency Medicine, EMF Research, EMF's, Employees, EMR, Environment, Epidemiologists, Epidemiology, Exposure, Financial Considerations, Frequencies, genetic damage, Government's role, grams of tissue, Hand Portables, Handheld Units, Health and Safety Officer, Health related, High Frequencies, HRD, Human Resources, Hz, Interdisciplinary, Kids, Landline, Laptops, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Men's Health, Metabolic Changes, MHz, Music, Networks, Non Profit Organizations, Parenting, Public Policy, radiation, Radio Frequency Radiation, Research, Research Needed, Risk Factor, Risk of Disease, Safe Levels, Safety, SAR, School administrators, School Boards, Schools, Solutions, Symptoms, Teenagers, Toxic Interactions, transmission, Tweenies, watts, Who is Affected?, WiFi, Wired, Wireless, Women's Health, Workplace.
add a comment

Health Dangers From Wireless Laptops Danger from high frequency fields

“Under the motto of ‘increasing efficiency’, things are happening in many schools in an almost unnoticed and uncritical manner, which would have lead to animated discussions and actions in the past. Without informing or consulting staff, the federal state of Hessen has equipped around 100 schools with laptops in the name of ‘increased media competence’, ’new learning culture’ and ‘better education’. “…”By installing these new student workstations, the government and education authorities are introducing a new technology, against which there are strong concerns about potential health effects. According to the initiative ‘Schools and Future’, in which the government and local education authorities co-operate, ‘only WLAN is to be considered’, when it comes to laptops in schools. This WLAN technology (Wireless Local Area Networks) currently pushed by the authorities, consists of a transmitter installed in the classroom or school via which the students communicate with each other, with the periphery hardware and with the internet. In this case, each laptop is a sender and a receiver. …each workstation emits high frequency electromagnetic fields, which are generally acknowledged to have harmful effects on health. …the ‘large number of studies lead to the conclusion that living organisms react to this radiation’. Precautionary health protection is therefore urgently recommended, especially if we consider the experiences from the past, when the careless use of substances like wood preservatives, asbestos and CFCs lead to devastating health hazards and financial losses, also in schools.”

High frequency radiation

“With a network within one room it is still mostly an individual decision whether the students are linked with each other via cable or wireless. If the network extends through the entire school, the staff has no possibility to decide whether they agree to be exposed to the additional radiation or not. Similar to the situation in the waiting areas in airports and large train stations, they are exposed all working day long to the electromagnetic fields from the WLAN transmitters. Exposures within a building can vary to a large degree. Overlaps and reflections can create radiation hotspots which go completely unnoticed.”

The magazine Eco-Test [Translator’s note: an ecological equivalent of the UK Which magazine] tested workstations in the juristic library in Göttingen and found a peak value of 23,000 µWatt/m2. The current official guideline in Germany [and in the UK] is 10 W/m2. Without cable connections, a WLAN-installation must also be switched on at night and linked via radio link to the network, since it is then that the remote maintenance of the school transmitter with the docked-on laptops is done. In November 2002, Eco-Test magazine found in a large study that particularly laptops which are sending information and their WLAN cards emit considerable amounts of radiation. This radiation is often considerable higher than the recommended precautionary values and in hotspots even exceeds the official guidelines. Likewise, the Nova-Institute had previously found in its study regarding the installation of a WLAN network at the University of Bremen that persons working on notebook workstations had to ‘count on the precautionary values being exceeded’.

“In addition to the already existing massive interference from unnatural electromagnetic fields from sources such as mobile phones, DECT (cordless) phones, microwave ovens and computer screens, children, adolescents and staff are now exposed to additional health hazards which would be easily avoidable. It is possible without any quantitative or qualitative sacrifice, to use any laptop with a cable and hence to avoid the additional radiation load created by a WLAN installation. Only a cable is needed to link the laptop with the network, and the peripheral hardware such as a central printer can be connected via plug-ins as well.”

Almost all arguments go against WLAN!

“In addition to the precautionary aspect, it would be cheaper for schools and local education authorities to equip schools with wired networks, since they do not incur cost for the radio (wireless). Further arguments against WLAN technology are its susceptibility to exterior influences on data transmission, its slower operational speed when compared to wired networks, its lower capacity, its limited suitability for the use in exams and its higher rate of disruption in everyday use. Exterior pressures and industry interest however, seem to outweigh all the health, technical, financial and pedagogical objections. Doubts and objections are probably not least ignored in order to further the quick implementation and testing of this new technology which promises much profit in a large-scale experiment. In some school districts, the technology is even ‘trialled’ in primary schools. Children are degraded to become test subjects.”

“There are hardly any ways to legally raise objections: ‘WLAN equipment works within the legal guidelines’ is the official justification. However, the legal basis for this, the Electromagnetic Fields Ordinance of 1996 (!) set the guidelines only based on the thermal effects of this radiation. Yet, pulsed high frequency fields are proven to have effects at power flux densities much lower than the thermal threshold. They cause headaches, high blood pressure and lack of concentration and can lead to permanent health damage. The ECOLOG Institute in Hanover has produced a science review of more than 220 peer reviewed and published studies of the various health effects of electromagnetic fields [Translator’s note: commissioned by T-Mobile, Germany] and confirmed them on a scientific basis.”

“To protect public health it is therefore no longer sufficient to apply the old, inadequate guidelines, but to introduce a new precautionary guideline, which will take all influences on health known so far into account, and which would need to be categorically adhered to with regards to the assessment of all radiation exposure. Switzerland has already implemented this. There, the precautionary upper limit for power flux density is 0.1 W/m².This is 1/100 of the current guideline value in Germany [Translator’s note: and 1/100 of the current guideline value of the UK]. ”

Based on their comprehensive science review, the ECOLOG-Institute recommends

0.01 W//m² as the precautionary upper limit. Even at this value, studies found negative influences on brain function – EEC, capacity to react, blood-brain-barrier permeability.”

Eco-Test found exposures higher than these precautionary values in the vicinity of several laptops during their on-site studies. ”

Almost criminal assault

“The uncritical IT equipment of schools with transmitters and radiation emitting laptops does not take into account that the main users are children and adolescents who will be exposed for many hours every day.”

“In the UK, the Independent Expert Group commissioned by the government in 2000 came to the conclusion that children – due to their not yet fully developed nervous system and a circa 60% higher susceptibility to energetic radiation – were far more vulnerable than adults. Hence, there should be even stricter precautionary guidelines for children. To expose children knowingly to this danger is bordering criminal assault.”

“Also often ignored is the fact that it is not just one device emitting the pulsed high frequency radiation, but that there are usually 20 or more workstations per classroom. And this in an environment which is already riddled with further sources of unnatural radiation such as fluorescent lighting halogen lamps, mobile phones and transformers. It can therefore not be excluded that an overlap of these fields will cause the electromagnetic exposure at individual workstations to greatly exceed the precautionary guidelines. ”

“Admittedly, the electromagnetic radiation of a single laptop is below that of a mobile phone. The effect of electromagnetic radiation being accumulative, it will however, increase the intensity of ‘electro-smog’. The duration of use also plays an important role: it can be many hours per day, especially for IT teachers and students. Particular protection must be provided for electrosensitive people, for whom electromagnetic radiation triggers allergic reactions. They account for 3 – 5 % of the population.” …..”The summary of the arguments presented in this article should be sufficient to object to the WLAN project of the federal state government and the education authorities with a loud and clear ‘NO, no transmitters in schools and other public institutions!’ In addition to WLAN, this also includes wireless Bluetooth equipment, DECT and mobile phones. Cabled equipment results in higher data speeds and better results. Protection and precaution against health damage should be more important than the slightly ore convenient use of wireless equipment.”

“The Union for Education and Science and all the Union representatives on the federal state, town, council and school level must exert their influence to have policies in favour of wireless equipment revised and ensure that children and staff in schools are not knowingly exposed to additional health hazards from electromagnetic fields.”…” the precautionary principle should prevail and human health should be in the centre of interest. Further research results can be expected from the REFLEX study, which was commissioned by the EU and is currently being conducted in participating countries across Europe. It examines amongst other things the effect of electromagnetic radiation on human tissue. …”
From the Union Magazine „GEW Hessen“, Nr I2/2003

http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1755556/

Metals in the Mouth March 22, 2007

Posted by healthyself in "Silver" Fillings, Aging, Alzheimer's, Amalgam filings, Amplified Signals, Animal Research, Biochemical, Bioeffects, Biofield, Biological Activity, Biological Dentistry, Biological Effects, Blogroll, Bluetooth, cell membrane, Cell Phones, Children's health, Cordless Phones, Cytotoxic Effects, Decision Making, Detoxification, Electrochemical, Electromagnetic Communications, Electromagnetic Field, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic Radiation, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, EMF Research, EMF's, Environment, Financial Considerations, Frequencies, grams of tissue, Health related, Heavy Metals, Integrative Medicine, Interdisciplinary, Kids, Legal Issues, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Men's Health, Mercury, mobile telephones, Parenting, People in Laboratories, radiation, Research Needed, Risk Factor, Risk of Disease, Stress, Symptoms, Teenagers, teeth grinding, Toxic Interactions, Tweenies, Vapor, Who is Affected?, Women's Health.
add a comment

 This is an important video concerning the affect of mercury which comes from fillings in the teeth as vapor as they are rubbed or scratched.

http://iaomt.org/videos/index.asp

Besides creating vapor in the mouth and tissues of the body, metals in the mouth can carry electrical charge…guess from where?

Grave cell phone danger—pay attention to this! December 2, 2006

Posted by healthyself in 217 Hz, ADD, Addiction, ADHD, Adolescents, Aging, Allergies, ALS, Alzheimer's, angst, Antennas, Anxiety, arteriosclerosis, Attention, Attention Deficit, Autism / Asperger's, Bioeffects, Biological Activity, Biological Effects, Bioscalar Energy, Birth Defects, Blogroll, Blood Brain Barrier, Blood Pressure, Brain, Brain Cancer, Brainwave Interference, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Cardiac Problems, Cell changes, Cell death, cell membrane, Cell phone safety, Cell phone towers, Cell Phones, Cells, Cellular Morphology, Central Nervous System, Childhood Leukemia, Children, Children's health, Chromosomal damage, Chronic Exhaustion, Chronic Fatigue, Chronic Illness, Circadian rhythms, Circulation, Coherence, Communication, Community, Concentration, Connective Tissue Pains, Conversations, Cordless Phones, Cytotoxic Effects, Death, Dementia, Depression, Diagnostic marker, Digital, Dizziness, DNA, Dopamine, Ear, ear ache, earphones, EEG, Elderly, Electrical Components, Electrical Pulses, Electrical Surges, Electrical Wiring, Electrochemical, electromagnetic, Electromagnetic Communications, Electromagnetic Field, Electromagnetic Interference, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic Radiation, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, Emergency Medicine, EMF Research, EMF's, Employees, EMR, Endogenous Fields, Energy, Environment, Epidemiologists, Epidemiology, Epilepsy, Exposure, Eye Cancer, Eyes, Family, Fatigue, Fiber Optic, Flickering, Free Radicals, Frequencies, Games and Gaming, genes, genetic damage, grams of tissue, Hand Portables, Handheld Units, Harmonics, headaches, Healing, Health, Health related, Hearing, Heart, Heart Disease, heat, Heavy Metals, HF, High Frequencies, high voltage transmission lines, Hormones, HOuseholds, HRD, Human Resources, Humor, Imbalances, Immune system, Inflammation, Infrared, Inner Agitation, Insomnia, Integrative Medicine, Interdisciplinary, Internet, Intuition, Kids, Lack of Concentration, Learning, Legal Issues, LF, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Lymphoma, MCS, Medical Research, Medicine, Memory, Memory Loss, Men', Men's Health, Metabolic Changes, Metal Roofs, Microwave exposure, Migraines, Military, miscarriages, Mitigation, mobile telephones, Monitoring, Movement, nausea, nerves, Neural Electrophysiology, Neurasthenia, neurological, neuroma, neurons, neurosurgeons, Neurotransmitters, Noise, Non Profit Organizations, Non-Thermal Levels, Nutrition, oncogenes, Optical, Overtones, Pain, Pain Perception, Panic Attacks, Paralysis, Parenting, Penetration, People in Laboratories, Pets, Pineal Gland, Pregnant Women, pressure, Proteins, Public Policy, Pulsed Radiation, Pulses, radiation, Radio Frequency Radiation, Reaction Time, Research, Research Needed, ringing, ringtones, Risk Factor, Risk of Disease, Safe Levels, Safety, SAR, School administrators, School Boards, Schools, Seizure, sensations, Sick People, signaling enzymes, Sleep, Sleep disturbances, Stress, Symptoms, Teenagers, Telecommunications, Telephony, Tinnitus, Toxic Interactions, Traffic Pollution, Tumors, Tweenies, Unified Field, VDT, Vibrational Medicine, Who is Affected?, WiFi, Wireless Phones, Withdrawal, Women, Women's Health, Workplace, X-Rays, zinging/crackling.
20 comments

By: Will Thomas

Though intended for renovations, Chris Anderson would like all visitors to deposit their cellular phones in the cement mixer by his front door. This sounds excessive – until you step into Anderson’s orchard, where the pegged needle of a shrieking electromagnetic radiation (EMR) meter placed beside a connected cellphone still shows significant exposure 100 feet away.

Much to the chagrin of this certified EMR-mitigation specialist, every day some 300 million cell phone users are “reaching out and touching someone you love. Yourself, and anyone else within range of the microwaves emitted by your cell phone.”……Silicon sensors are already calling to each other. Soon, countless communicating microchips embedded in everything from bumpers to brooms will be sending streams of encoded electrical energy through glass, steel, concrete, bone and flesh. Exquisitely sensitive to subtle electromagnetic harmonies, human brains and bodies as intricate as galaxies depend on tiny electrical impulses to conduct complex life-processes – including the ability to read, recall and respond to these words. Acting as antennas, our anatomies just as easily tune into spurious signals from radio and microwave transmissions. .

….”a worse frequency could not have been chosen for the human anatomy.”

As cell phones conquer consumer minds and markets, researcher Carolanne Patton notes that “the brain reaches peak absorption in the UHF bands, right where cellular telecommunications operate.” British military scientists have discovered that cellphone transmissions disrupt the brain sites for memory and learning, causing forgetfulness and sudden confusion.

Other studies show that electromagnetic signals from cellular phones reduce the ability to concentrate, calculate and coordinate complicated activities such as driving a car. Startled by $4 billion a year in extra claims among cellphone-wielding drivers, North American insurers did a double-take that found simply juggling `cell phones is not causing a 600% increase in accidents over other drivers busy shaving, applying makeup, tuning radios, taming pets, making out, pouring coffee, retrieving dropped cigarettes, talking and gesturing to passengers, or actually steering the vehicle….Instead of just another dangerous distraction, tests conducted by the U.S.Department of Energy found that using a cell phone severely impairs memory and reaction times. “Hands-free” mobile speaker-phones cause even more crashes because they typically emit 10-times more brainwave interference than handheld units.

For all drivers dialing out on their cell phones, University of Toronto investigators report that the heightened probability of cracking up your car persists for up to 15-minutes after completing a call. That’s comparable to the risk of crashing while driving dead drunk exclaims Dr. Chris Runball, chairman of the B.C. Medical Association’s emergency medical services committee. Reeling from “dial-a-collision” costs, the government of British Columbia may join England, Spain, Israel, Switzerland and Brazil in restricting or banning the use of cell phones by drivers.

In New Zealand, cellphone towers are prohibited on school property because of possible health effects.
But Health Canada regulations ignore the hidden hazards of cell-wrenching cellphones, which send pulsed signals through the skull in a process one expert likens to “jackhammers on the brain.”

…. cellphone addiction mirrors the prestigious early allure of smoking – as well as an immensely profitable industry’s steadfast denial of risk and responsibility. …Sir William Stewart told London’s Financial Times that “children may be more vulnerable because of their developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues of the head and a longer lifetime of exposure.”

…a Ph.D. biophysicist warns that headaches, fatigue, lethargy, nausea, dizziness, depression, arteriosclerosis and even Alzheimer’s can result from frequent or prolonged calls on cell phones.

“There is also a higher incidence of cardiac problems,” Cherry comments, “in terms of the timing function in hearts. You get more heart attacks and more heart disease – it has now been shown in many studies.”

…..cell phones can murderously modify moods. In brains and bodies seriously derailed by tiny imbalances in trace minerals and hormones, depression, suicide, anger, rage and violence can result when calcium and serotonin levels are disrupted by cellphone transmissions….
.
….DNA damage is passed on to succeeding generations.

….we forget how inconvenient it is to contract cancer. …B-cell lymphomas doubled in mice within 18 months of one-hour daily exposure to power densities experienced by a cellphone user. B-cell lymphomas are implicated in 85% of all cancers.

…Sleep disorders, she learned, are common among people exposed to high levels of electromagnetic pollution.

…there is nothing “safe” about the new 1.9 gigahertz broadcasting frequency. Much like a boxer taking repeated blows to the head, rapidly pulsing cellphones signal permanent brain damage. A study by Dr. Peter Franch found unequivocally that “cells are permanently damaged by cellular phone frequencies.” This cellular damage, Franch noted, is maximized at low dosage – and “inherited unchanged, from generation to generation.”

….the production of histamine, which triggers bronchial spasms, is nearly doubled after exposure to mobile phone transmissions. Cellphones also reduce the effectiveness of anti-asthmatic drugs, and retard recovery from illness.

…. 217 Hz spikes are very close to the frequencies of human cell membranes.

…..because cancer takes decades to develop, it will be another 10 or 20 years before “mobiles” manifest a big bonanza in brain tumors. But he adds, we’re already seeing “acute effects that are noticed within minutes of using a cell phone.”

After two minutes’ conversation, a cell phone’s digitized impulses disable the safety barrier that isolates the brain from destructive proteins and poisons in the blood.

…If you must pack a cell phone, treat it like a loaded pistol. Keep it turned off. Don’t carry it near ovaries, testicles, or the heart. For partial protection, buy an antenna shield. Limit calls to one-minute, six to 10 minutes a month. Never fire off a cellphone with children anywhere in sight.

A better bet is to facilitate the growth of organic telephone networks with lots of fibre. Instead of more microwave towers, “We should be wiring up our cities with fibre-optic cables to provide Internet, fax, telephone, radio and television at very high quality,” Cherry urges, “rather than saturating our cities with the microwave, radiowave and low frequency signals all the time.”

When it comes to cells, consciousness and cell phones, every call is collect. How can convenience count more than cancer? What is gained by being in constant contact with disembodied voices, while being “out of touch” with the friends and neighbours around us? Are we comfortable having our location traced by monitoring authorities?

Unless we start voting with our wallets, consumer complacency could prove as species-limiting as corporate cynicism.

“Microwave frequencies are the same as those used in radar and your microwave oven,” … “You wouldn’t think of sticking your head in the oven, but there is no hesitation to putting the cell phone to your ear.”

It’s worth reading this whole article…. put this in your url NOW:

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2005/02/15/grave_cell_phone_dangers_revealed.htm

Science Says… October 10, 2006

Posted by healthyself in Animal Research, Antennas, Bioeffects, Biomimetic, Blogroll, Brainwave Interference, Cell changes, Cell Cultures, Cell death, cell membrane, Cell phone safety, Cell Phones, Cells, Cellular Morphology, Central Nervous System, Children's health, Chromosomal damage, Computer Rooms, Conversations, Cordless Phones, Cytotoxic Effects, Diagnostic marker, DNA, Electrical Components, Electrical Pulses, Electrical Surges, Electrical Wiring, Electrochemical, Electromagetic pollution, Electromagnetic Communications, Electromagnetic Field, Electromagnetic Interference, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, EMF Research, EMF's, EMR, Encoding, Entrainment, Entropy, Environment, Epidemiology, Exposure, Frequencies, genes, GHz, grams of tissue, Hand Portables, Handheld Units, Health related, HF, High Frequencies, high voltage transmission lines, HOuseholds, Hz, Inner Agitation, Integrative Medicine, Interdisciplinary, Intuition, LF, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Medical Research, Men's Health, Metabolic Changes, MF, MHz, Microwave exposure, Mitochondria, nerves, Networks, Neural Electrophysiology, neurological, Neurotransmitters, Non-Thermal Levels, Parenting, Pulsed Radiation, Pulses, radiation, Radio Waves, Radios, Research Needed, Risk of Disease, Symptoms, Waves, WiFi, Wireless Phones, Women's Health, Workplace.
add a comment

FDTD analysis of a gigahertz TEM cell for ultra-wideband pulse exposure studies of biological specimens

IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2006 May;53(5):780-9.

Ji Z, Hagness SC, Booske JH, Mathur S, Meltz ML.

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA. zji@wisc.edu

Gigahertz transverse electromagnetic (GTEM) transmission cells have been previously used to experimentally study exposure of biological cells to ultra-wideband (UWB), monopolar, electromagnetic pulses. Using finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) simulations we examine the time-dependent electric field waveforms and energy dose spatial distributions within a finite volume of biological cell culture medium during these experiments. The simulations show that when one or more flasks containing cell culture media are placed inside the GTEM cell, the uniform fields of the empty GTEM cell are significantly perturbed. The fields inside the cell culture medium, representing the fields to which the biological cells are exposed, are no longer monopolar and are spatially highly nonuniform. These effects result from a combination of refraction and distortion of the incident wave, combined with excitation of resonant eigenmodes within the cell culture medium volume. The simulations show that these distortions of the incident waveform may be mitigated by supporting the sample on a high permittivity pedestal and modifying the incident waveform to more closely approximate a Gaussian pulse. Under all simulated conditions, the estimated maximum temperature rises are completely negligible, ensuring that any experimentally observed unusual cell function or histopathology can be associated with nonthermal effects.

PMID: 16686400 [PubMed – in process]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16686400&dopt=Abstract

What is Bluetooth, and Is It Safe? September 27, 2006

Posted by healthyself in 2.402 GHz-2.480 GHz, 2450 MHz, 900 mHz, Bioeffects, Biological Effects, Blogroll, Body Temperature, Brainwave Interference, Cell phone safety, Cell Phones, Children's health, Cordless Phones, Decision Making, Definitions, ear ache, earphones, Electrical Pulses, Electrical Surges, Electromagnetic Communications, Electromagnetic Field, Electromagnetic Interference, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic Spectrum, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, EMF Research, EMF's, EMR, Environment, Exposure, Frequencies, GHz, grams of tissue, Health related, High Frequencies, HOuseholds, HRD, Hz, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Men's Health, Microwave exposure, Mobile Music, mobile telephones, Noise, Non-Thermal Levels, Pain Perception, Parenting, Penetration, Pulsed Radiation, Pulses, radiation, Radio Waves, Radios, Research Needed, Risk of Disease, Teenagers, Traffic Pollution, transmission, Who is Affected?, Women's Health.
71 comments

Bluetooth is a method for datacommunication that uses short-range radiolinks to replace cables between computers and their connected units.

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

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

Heating by means of radio frequencies is possible over a broad frequency range. This is taken advantage of in microwave ovens at 2450 MHz using very high power levels (up to 1,000,000 times the power used by Bluetooth devices). However, 2450 MHz is not a resonance frequency of water. “There is, however, another side to this; some people are demonstrably over-sensitive to electromagnetic radiations. Long exposure to strong fields make some individuals so sensitive, after a few years, that they can no longer be near such fields without considerable discomfort. Bluetooth fits into a general development pattern where antennas for GSM-transmission and other sources of electromagnetic radiations become more and more prevalent in our cities. The future will show whether this is a healthy development.”

How Do Physicists and Biologists Think Differently? September 26, 2006

Posted by healthyself in Bioeffects, Biological Activity, Biological Effects, Bioscalar Energy, Blogroll, Cell phone industry, Cell phone safety, Cell Phones, Communication, Decision Making, Definitions, Electromagetic pollution, electromagnetic, Electromagnetic Field, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, Emergency Medicine, EMF Research, EMF's, EMR, Environment, Epidemiologists, Financial Considerations, Frequencies, grams of tissue, Health related, High Frequencies, high voltage transmission lines, HOuseholds, Integrative Medicine, Interdisciplinary, Legal Issues, LF, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Magnetic, Medical Research, Microwave exposure, mobile telephones, People in Laboratories, Public Policy, Pulsed Radiation, Quantum Physics, Quantum Vacuum, QV, Radio Waves, Research, Research Needed, Risk of Disease, Safe Levels, University.
1 comment so far

Thought-Styles….there are two fundamentally different approaches to doing science in the 1990s – two distinct scientific thought-styles. In the physical thought-style, the goal is to explain an observation by showing that it is compelled by basic physical laws or at least by phenomenological equations. In this thought-style, a scientific fact is a deduction from a relevant covering law made in the context of particular assumptions. The concept of causality does not occupy a central position in the physical thought-style because the necessary and sufficient cause of the observation to be explained – a force – is known in advance of the explanation.

In contrast, in the biological thought-style, the goal is to establish a scientific fact. In this thought-style, a scientific fact is a but-for cause of an observation established using orthodox measurement methods and appropriate statistical techniques. In the biological thought-style, covering laws are not employed and linkage with covering laws, even in principle, is not required as a precondition for accepting observations as valid. Scientific facts are generalizations that admit of exceptions.

… two distinct thought-styles were utilized to produce scientific facts applies equally well to all subsequently published issues of Science that I have considered…each report in any issue of Science that involves formal reasoning can be classified into one (or a combination) of the thought-styles described here. It can permissibly be concluded, therefore that there presently exist two distinct valid methods for producing scientific knowledge. Consequently, the scientific facts of the physicist and the biologist are fundamentally different objects. This analysis makes clear – I think for the first time – that there presently are two distinct pathways by which observations can rise to the level of scientific fact…. failure to distinguish between the thought-styles and to identify the applicable thought-style accounts, in part, for the present controversy regarding whether powerline EMFs affect human health.

http://www.ortho.lsuhsc.edu/Faculty/Marino/Point1/Point1.html

It’s not either/or, folks. We need to put our heads together.

s

Pulsed Signals Interfere with the Body’s Regulation from Cells to Sense Organs to the Brain September 9, 2006

Posted by healthyself in 150 MHz, 217 Hz, 8.3 Hz, Bioeffects, Biological Effects, Blogroll, Cell changes, Cell phone industry, Cell phone safety, Cell Phones, Cells, Central Nervous System, Children's health, Decision Making, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, EMF Research, EMF's, Employees, EMR, Endogenous Fields, Environment, grams of tissue, Health related, heat, High Frequencies, high voltage transmission lines, Immune system, Inner Agitation, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Men's Health, MHz, Microwave exposure, mobile telephones, nerves, Ocular, Penetration, Pulsed Radiation, radiation, Risk of Disease, Safe Levels, SAR, signaling enzymes, transmission, watts, Who is Affected?, WiFi, Women's Health.
add a comment

“It is now fairly well established that the IEEE/WHO/ICNIR standards for SAR and other exposure “standards” so called based on “heating effect” do not tell the whole story on the effects of exposure of humans of all ages, both genders and the range of physical sizes to RF at HF and above and thus cannot be considered “safe” for electro-sensitive people.”

“This standard dates back to 1944 and was originally set so that the risk from RF (Microwave) exposure would not be greater than that on a live battlefield in the Pacific War. Hardly appropriate to a civil society at the start of the 21st Century.””

It has been known and shown repeatedly that there are bio-electrical effects that start at very low levels. Between 1/1000 and 1/10000 of the current (Western) “standard’. Further it is the type of modulation or intelligence placed on to the RF that is significant; with pulsed signals being far worse then radio (AM or FM) and TV signals (that contain vestige sideband “sync pulses”) some where in the middle as far as effects are concerned.”

“Basicly the mechanism is believed to be, that cells and specifically the cells of certain organs such as the middle ear, acting as a demodulator or detector, resolving the envelope pattern of the RF signal. Where the demodulated signal has components at the various bio-active frequencies that are used for internal signals by the human body, they may be swamped by this “false” RF demodulated signal. These “false” signals interfere with the body’s regulation at all levels from inside cells up to major sense organ inputs to the brain.”  

“As pulse signals contain all the harmonics of the pulse frequency, this raises the chance that one or more bio-active frequencies will be present within the signals. The current GSM signals have basic pulse repetition frequencies that are at or near known bio-active frequencies. Up to this point research has looked for a link between the RF field strength (SAR) and the effects. There are now well documented effects of weak magnetic fields at 8.3 and 217Hz on nerves.,,,,,,”

…..”All the effects appear to be worse as the frequency is raised. A serious side effect of exposure at frequencies above 150 Mhz, (that is VHF and above), is that body parts can become resonant absorbers, which raises the amount of energy taken in, and reduces the threshold exposure level at which effects are seen.”

“The range of variation of human “size” of hand, arm, leg etc within gender and age groups explains in part why some people are more affected than others.”

“All the above has been widely known for some 40 years, as these effects were first documented by Russian scientists from the late 1950s onward.”

http://www.buergerwelle.de/body_emf-omega-news_17-12-03.html

Famous British Biochemist Warned Against Cell Phone Use by Children September 6, 2006

Posted by healthyself in 1.6 W/kg, 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, ADD, ADHD, Bioeffects, Biological Effects, Blogroll, Brain Cancer, Cancer Protection, Cell changes, Cell phone industry, Cell phone safety, Cell Phones, Central Nervous System, Children, Children's health, Chromosomal damage, Digital, DNA, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, Emergency Medicine, EMF Research, EMF's, EMR, Games and Gaming, genes, GHz, grams of tissue, Hand Portables, Health related, heat, High Frequencies, HOuseholds, Hz, Kids, Lack of Concentration, Lifestyle, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Microwave exposure, mobile telephones, Noise, Parenting, Penetration, Public Policy, Pulsed Radiation, radiation, Risk of Disease, School administrators, School Boards, Schools, Teenagers, transmission, Tweenies, Who is Affected?, WiFi.
4 comments

” In 1999, as a result of public concerns about possible health hazards from mobile phone technology, the UK Government formed the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) to examine possible effects of mobile phones and transmitter base stations. This group was headed by Sir William Stewart, the famous British biochemist and president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. What made the Stewart Inquiry unique, was that it was made up almost entirely of biomedical specialists — and so were able to focus many man-years of acquired specialist knowledge on the problem.”

Their report, Mobile Phones and Health, was released in April 2005. In regards to the use of mobile phones by children the IEGMP stated:

“If there are currently unrecognised adverse health effects from the use of mobile phones, children may be more vulnerable because of their developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues of the head and a longer lifetime of exposure. In line with our precautionary approach, we believe that the widespread use of mobile phones by children for non-essential calls should be discouraged. We also recommend that the mobile phone industry should refrain from promoting the use of mobile phones by children.”

 

http://www.latitudes.org/articles/electrical_sensitivity_articles.html


Why Would WHO Do This If There Weren’t a Recognized Problem? (Even if they won’t admit it yet) September 5, 2006

Posted by healthyself in .000021 W/Kg, .0004 W/Kg, .001 W/Kg, .0021 W/KG, .005 W/Kg, .0317 W/Kg, .05 W/Kg, .13 W/Kg, .14 W/Kg, .2 mHz, .26 W/Kg, .4 W/Kg, .58 W.Kg, .6 W/Kg, .75 W/Kg, 1.2 W/Kg, 1.6 W/kg, 100 kHz-94GHz, 10000 Hz, 10mW, 12000 volts, 138 kv, 14 mG, 16 Hz, 17.6 Hz, 2 W/kg, 2.4 GHz, 2.4 mW/Kg, 20 Hz, 200 gauss, 20000 Hz, 200000 Hz, 35 mG, 3W/Kg, 4 mG, 45, 45 Hz, 5 GHz, 5 Hz, 50 Hz, 500 Volts, 60 Hz Magnetic Fields, 85, 8W/kg, 900 mHz, Animal Research, Cell phone safety, Children's health, Chromosomal damage, Communication, Community, Death, Decision Making, Digital, Electromagnetic pollution, Electromagnetic waves, Electrosensitivity, Electrosmog, ELF, Emergency Medicine, EMF Research, EMF's, Employees, EMR, Environment, Epidemiologists, Funding, Games and Gaming, genes, GHz, Government's role, grams of tissue, Grants, Hand Portables, Health related, High Frequencies, HOuseholds, Hz, Immune system, Legal Issues, Long Term Health Risks, Low Frequencies, Medical Research, Men's Health, MHz, Microwave exposure, Military, miscarriages, mobile telephones, Noise, Parenting, Public Policy, Pulsed Radiation, radiation, Reaction Time, Research, Risk Factor, Risk of Disease, Safe Levels, Safety, SAR, School administrators, Teenagers, Tweenies, University, W/Kg, watts, Who is Affected?, Women's Health, Workplace.
4 comments

Electromagnetic fields Photos permitted by the National Radiological Protection Board, UK

“Electromagnetic fields of all frequencies represent one of the most common and fastest growing environmental influences, about which anxiety and speculation are spreading. All populations are now exposed to varying degrees of EMF, and the levels will continue to increase as technology advances.”

“As part of its Charter to protect public health and in response to public concern, 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 is open to broad participation.”

“The EMF Project is open to any WHO Member State government, i.e. department of health, or representatives of other national institutions concerned with radiation protection. The project is fully funded by participating countries and agencies.”