Saturday, April 12, 2014
Friday, April 11, 2014
The number of U.S. children with autism has surged to one in 68, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Thursday, a 30 percent increase since the agency estimated just two years ago that one child in 88 suffered from the disorder.
The new estimate, based on a review of records in 2010 for eight year olds in 11 states, also showed a marked increase in the number of children with higher IQs who fall somewhere on the autism spectrum, and a wide range of results depending on where a child lives. Only one child in 175 was diagnosed with autism in Alabama, while one in 45 was found to have the disorder in New Jersey.
The information was reported in the CDC’sMorbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
In a telephone news conference, Coleen Boyle director of the CDC’s National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, said the growing numbers could reflect both better identification of children with autism spectrum disorders and a growing number of intelligent children with autism.
“It could be that doctors are getting better at identifying these children, there could be a growing number of children with high intelligence [who are autistic], or it could be both,” she said.
As in previous reports, the diagnosis is much more common in boys (one in 42) than girls (one in 189), and much more frequently found in whites than blacks or Hispanics. Boyle said the racial disparity is most likely due to better reporting of the disorder in whites.
Children with the most extreme form of autism are withdrawn, speak little, avoid eye contact and engage in repetitive actions. Milder forms, such as Asperger’s syndrome, are now considered to fall along the autism spectrum. In the past, children with Asperger’s, for example, might have been considered peculiar and abnormal but not suffering from a disorder.
The CDC said it would be announcing a new initiative later Thursday to encourage parents to have young children screened for autism in their early years, and given the support they need. Officials said most children are not diagnosed until they are at least four years old, though identification is possible as early as two years old. Any parent who has concerns about how a child plays, learns, speaks, acts or moves should seek an assessment, officials said.
Autism treatment requires time and patience. Medical expenses for children with autism are six times as high as those for children without the disorder. Behavioral therapy, often delivered one-on-one, can cost as much as $60,000 per year.
Liz Feld, president of the advocacy group Autism Speaks, said in a statement that the disorder is “a pressing public health crisis that must be prioritized at the national level. We need a comprehensive strategy that includes the research community, policymakers, educators, and caregivers coming together to address our community’s needs across the lifespan.”
Findings Show Radiation Emissions from Wireless Phones are Class 1 Carcinogens
April 3, 2014
Two important new papers show mobile phone use as a cause of increased brain tumors. Any wireless phone, i.e. cell phone or cordless phone, emits radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) when it is in use. One paper shows that RF-EMF exposure from mobile (and cordless) phones should be regarded as an IARC class 1 human carcinogen (cancel causing agent). Current guidelines for exposure urgently need to be revised.
After a case-control study of the association between malignant brain tumors and mobile or cordless phone use, confirmation was made with 95% confidence that RF-EMFs play a significant role in both the initiation and promotion stages of carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis is the process by which normal cells are transformed into cancer cells.
In May of 2011, after the consideration of laboratory studies, studies of long-term use of wireless phones, and data on the incidence of brain tumors, the World Health Organization concluded RF-EMFs to be a possible human carcinogen. Other studies have shown an association between long-term mobile and cordless phone use with Glioma and Acoustic Neuroma. Because of this, the guidelines for cell phone use need to be revised and the public alerted.
Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg, “Using the Hill viewpoints from 1965 for evaluating strengths of evidence of the risk for brain tumors associated with use of mobile and cordless phones,” Rev. Environmental Health, 2013-0006.
L. Hardell, M. Carlberg, F. Soderqvist, KH. Mild, “Case-control study of the association between malignant brain tumors diagnosed between 2007 and 2009 and mobile and cordless phone use, International Journal of Oncology, September 24, 2013, http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20131016-hardell-carlberg-papers.asp
Student Researcher: Julian Klein (San Francisco State University)
Faculty Evaluator: Kenn Burrows (San Francisco State University)
Scientists Link Selfies To Narcissism, Addiction & Mental Illness
by Joe Martino.
You’ve seen it thousands of times on Facebook and other social media outlets, there is even a song on the radio about it! Selfies have become a huge trend in social media and psychiatrists and mental health workers are linking them to mental health conditions related to narcissism and a person’s obsession with their looks.
According to psychiatrist Dr David Veal: “Two out of three of all the patients who come to see me with Body Dysmorphic Disorder since the rise of camera phones have a compulsion to repeatedly take and post selfies on social media sites.”
“Cognitive behavioural therapy is used to help a patient to recognize the reasons for his or her compulsive behaviour and then to learn how to moderate it,” he told the Sunday Mirror.
I’ve personally seen this with some of my own friends. They might take several selfies over and over again until they find the right one. Picking out details about their eyebrows, skin, noses, smiles, teeth, hair and so forth, all in an attempt to find the perfect angle to make the perfect picture. Even looking at how most of us choose our profile pictures on Facebook and other social media sites is a huge process. Believe it or not, as harmless as these acts all seem, they build up over time to create and create great forms of self consciousness and false sense of confidence. Instead of being okay with who we are no matter what, we strive to find the right picture with all the perfect details. The more likes we get on social media sites the happier we feel. Is this sustainable? Basing our happiness on our profile picture or selfie picture performance?
How far can the selfie obsession go? A British male teenager went to the extent of trying to commit suicide after he was unable to take what he felt was the perfect selfie. Danny Bowman became so obsessed with capturing the perfect shot that he would spend roughly 10 hours per day taking up to 200 selfies trying to get the perfect shot. As things got more and more intense for Danny, he lost nearly 30 pounds, dropped out of school and did not leave the house for six months as he kept trying for the perfect picture. During his suicide attempt, Bowman was saved by his mother.
“I was constantly in search of taking the perfect selfie and when I realized I couldn’t, I wanted to die. I lost my friends, my education, my health and almost my life,” he told The Mirror.
While this is an extreme case, it isn’t too far off from what goes through many of the minds of young, and even older, people as they take pictures of themselves for social media. Seeing other peoples pictures, seeing the attention they may or may not get, we end up comparing ourselves and the fine details of our looks. Overtime, an obsession builds and our looks become increasingly more important to us. Something I feel we should be focusing less and less on versus more and more.
“Selfies frequently trigger perceptions of self-indulgence or attention-seeking social dependence that raises the damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t spectre of either narcissism or very low self-esteem,” said Pamela Rutledge in Psychology Today.
Narcissism, being obsessed with receiving recognition and gratification from ones looks, vanity and in an egotistical manner, is becoming a big problem in our digital age. I personally feel a big part of this stems from judgement of self, judgement of others and pop culture. There is a huge lack of addressing these personal issues within the education system or other programs youth and other young people have access to. We focus so much on educating a person to become a trained member of society, but we do nothing for their own personal development as a person. This is a very important aspect of personal development that I feel should be at the forefront of our education system.
The addiction to selfies has also alarmed health professionals in Thailand. “To pay close attention to published photos, controlling who sees or who likes or comments them, hoping to reach the greatest number of likes is a symptom that ‘selfies’ are causing problems,” said Panpimol Wipulakorn, of the Thai Mental Health Department.
The doctor believed that behaviours could generate more mental issues in the future, especially those related to lack of confidence.
The next time you go to post an image of yourself online, or even when you go out for the day, observe yourself and find out how much of your thoughts are based on how you look, what you think others will think of you and how you might be using your looks to try and make you feel good for a short period of time. From there you can work on accepting every aspect of who you are as being perfect and as it needs to be without needing to look outside yourself for self-love. You are much more than your looks.
Have you considered...Are birds more important than humans or other animals?
Posted: Friday, April 11, 2014 5:00 am
It’s interesting that the director of the Office of Environmental Policy is chastising the Department of the Interior for not doing enough to protect migratory and other birds from harm from cell towers and “non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation emitted by them (cell towers and phones.)”
In a letter sent to Secretary of the Interior Eli Veenendaal, it states: “The second significant issue associated with communication towers involves impacts from non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation emitted by these structures. Radiation studies at cellular communication towers were began circa 2000 in Europe and continue today on wild nesting birds. Study results have documented nest and site abandonment, plumage deterioration, locomotion problems, reduces survivorship, and death.”
Well go figure. It seems that the fight against smart meters and the smart grids have to involve government regulations on birds and animals to capture anyone’s attention. But what is harmful to birds is harmful to every living thing.
Smart meters emit non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation and still the electric industry says they cause no harm. Not even when placed on your house and not a cell tower. If some departments of the government can say that these devices are harmful, why can’t the rest of the government and the communications and electric industries do the same?
“Nesting migratory birds and their offspring have apparently been affected by the radiation from cellular phone towers in the 900 and 1800 MHz frequency ranges — 915 MHz is the standard cellular phone frequency used in the U.S. However, the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.”
Pay close attention to that last sentence. It is the same argument smart meter opponents have used that was denied by everyone.
Even if someone were to say that birds nest near or on the towers, is that any different than smart meters on bedroom walls where small children sleep? The birds cited in this letter include eagles. Babies are smaller than eagles and can be affected as much if not more from the radiation.
“This is primarily due to the lower levels of radiation output from microwave-powered communication devices such as cellular telephones and other sources of point-to-point communications.”
I believe the point-to-point communications would include smart meters, as that is what they do.
“Radiation at extremely low levels (0.0001 the level emitted by the average digital cellular telephone) caused heart attacks and the deaths of some chicken embryos subjected to hypoxic conditions in the laboratory while controls subjected to hypoxia were unaffected.”
The letter also states that there have been no independent, third-party field studies conducted in North American on impacts of tower electromagnetic radiation on migratory birds. What about humans?
Doesn’t it seem like simple common sense that if ill effects and death have been found in some studies and now every home in America is destined to emit this non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation that studies should be done on all living things?
“There is a growing level of anecdotal evidence linking effects of non-thermal, non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from communication towers on nesting and roosting wild birds and other wildlife in the U.S.”
There is all kinds of evidence out there that radiation is harmful. Why is it taking so long to admit that? Why are we being subjected to more radiation from countless sources and not studying the effects?
Could it be that those companies heavily invested in all this technology already know the answers, but don’t want to lose their money?
The next time someone says that cell phones and smart meters are perfectly safe; tell them that if they’re not safe for birds, then they aren’t safe for the rest of us living beings.
Reach the writer at firstname.lastname@example.org