Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Dangers of cellphone technology

Dangers of cellphone technology

2015-08-19 06:00
TOTI Conservancy held a meeting last Wednesday to raise awareness about the dangers of cellphone technology. Conservancy chairperson, Laura Taylor said while it is a global problem, most countries are substantially more aware of the problem than South Africa and we are woefully ignorant. For example, most people do not know that cellphone radiation has been classed as a “possibly carcinogenic” Class 2B Carcinogen by the World Health Organisation, or that Wifi is banned in schools in Germany, France, Switzerland and Austria because of its possible health effects on children.
Recent scientific evidence proves that children, teenagers and young people of reproductive age are most vulnerable. According to Taylor, the first microwave radiation research knowledge was developed in the military and was tested on soldiers. The standard that the mobile industry uses to test cellphones is based on the skull of U.S. military personnel and only tests for heating effects of cellphones. The skull of a child is much smaller and much more easily penetrated by microwave radiation, putting them at greater risk to contract brain tumours, cancers and other serious effects such as autistic spectrum disorders.
Two scientific reports compiled by 29 independent scientists and health experts from around the world, one published­ in 2007 and one in 2012, called the Bio-initiative Reports, have presented a few thousand studies reporting bioeffects and adverse health effects of electromagnetic fields (power lines, electrical wiring, appliances and hand-held devices) – and wireless technologies (cell and cordless phones, cell towers, Wifi, wireless laptops, wireless routers, baby monitors, surveillance systems, wireless utility meters (smart meters), etc. Also significant, according to the reports, sperm counts in men are declining and there are possible genetic effects on the sperm as well, due to men carrying cellphones in their pocket, while women carrying cellphones in their bras are vulnerable to breast cancer. Cellphone manuals actually say that you should not place the phone more than two centimetres from the body, but this is not generally known.
Taylor said there has been an alarming increase in cancer throughout the world including South Africa. “In 10 years, the risk factor has literally doubled.” 
At the meeting, residents of a block of flats in Doonheights which has many cellphone antennae on the roof, reported having poor health. At the root of the problem is reportedly the fact that cellphone companies pay huge amounts to rent roof space which is used to subsidise levies. Residents who have not yet had adverse health effects therefore accept the towers.
Another concerned citizen said this is the single most important environmental issue in the world today, but that there is some legislation such as Section 24 of the National Environment Management Act and certain sections in the Occupational Health Act that could be used to protect people. However, this would require lengthy court proceedings and it is worth noting that the cellular telecommunications industry is the richest industry in the world currently.
In May a group of 206 international scientists launched an appeal to the UN, UN member states and the World Health Organisation saying “To protect our children, our selves and our ecosystem, we must reduce exposures by establishing more protective guidelines,” and presented a petition which could be downloaded and signed at EMFscientist.org
“The ICNIRP is the only body that regulates the cellphone industry internationally, but we have no environmental regulations in South Africa, only building regulations. While the legally allowed rate in other countries is six or three volts per metre, South Africa allow for the ICNIRP standard of 58 volts per metre (though this is not the actual rate though at which the technology currently operates). Surprisingly cellphones can work at 0,00003 volts per metre, so there is no reason to allow the current strength of signal operating in South Africa,” Taylor said.
So high is the health risks of the cellphone industry that re-insurance companies (companies that back up an industry for claims they may not be able to recover) have refused to insure the cellular telecommunications industry for possible health risks. 
There are however, ways in which people can protect themselves:
· Speak on speaker phone or use an earpiece, keep the cellphone away from your ear and your body.
· Never sleep with the phone next to you on or keep it on aeroplane mode.
· Get rid of any cordless phones.
· Insist on using a landline in your office and at home.
· Metal protects you, use metal sisalation in your roof.
· A corrugated iron roof offers good protection.
· Metal paint on walls, metallised glass and metallised fabrics can protect you. In some countries they have made an industry of it.
For further information contact Toti Conservancy on 031 903 1961


MA Activists Renew Call Against Smart Meters After Harvard’s Fraud Report

MA Activists Renew Call Against Smart Meters After Harvard’s Fraud Report

In response to the report “Captured Agency, How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries it Presumably Regulates,” MA activists are renewing their call for investigation of the Dept. of Public Utilities smart meter mandate.
The report, by Norm Alster, was just released by the Harvard Center for Ethics.
The report reads:
“The Federal Communications Commission sits at the heart of a bipartisan Washington web of institutional corruption that has for many years championed corporate interests, typically at public expense. Echoing industry, the FCC has ignored the growing evidence that wireless technologies pose serious health risks.” 
“The FCC‘s network of corruption doesn‘t just shield industry from needed scrutiny and regulation on matters of public health and safety. Sometimes it just puts its hand directly into the public pocket and redistributes that cash to industry supplicants.”
In a released statement from Patricia Burke of HaltMAsmartmeters.org, she writes: “MA DPU mandate forces ratepayers to finance deployment of wireless meters and infrastructure for investor-owned utilities. A fraud complaint was submitted to the Attorney General and the Legislature by HaltMAsmartmeters.org concerning health claims in the meter mandate DPU 12-76-B. The DPU mischaracterized the scope of the FCC limits by implying that they protect against non-thermal impacts, quoting references that do not correspond to the document’s claims.
“Citizens are being misled about renewable energy and energy efficiency. The DPU’s expert witness testified for Phillip Morris cigarettes the same week he testified for the DPU. When the agency responsible for the safe and reliable delivery of electricity essentially lies about safety, its necessary for a system of checks and balances to prevail. Its not a question of whether the DPU order is fraudulent, because it is. The question is whether elected officials will collude with the DPU, or begin the necessary process of restoring integrity to energy policy. Property values, the ecosystem, and human health are being threatened on many fronts by massive energy projects that are not helping move to U.S towards greater ecological stewardship, and the DPU has not protected MA residents from harm.”
In his encyclical, Pope Francis stated: “Our immense technological development has not been accompanied by a development in human responsibility, values, and conscience.” In describing relentless exploitation and destruction of the environment; he said that “apathy, the reckless pursuit of profits, excessive faith in technology and political shortsightedness were to blame.” MA residents striving to ensure that smart meter health, fire, safety, hacking, security, green-washing, privacy, and cost issues are addressed have their sights set squarely on unsafe, unethical radio frequency exposures, including stealth antennas hidden in church steeples in residential neighborhoods.

Permitting Requirements for Placing Cell Phone Antennas on New or Existing Light Poles/Utility Poles in Public

From: Donna Dixon [mailto:donna.dixon@mobilitie.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 11:07 AM 
Subject: Permitting Requirements for New or Existing Light Poles/Utility Poles in Public ROW
 
Hello To All,
 
My name is Donna Dixon, and I am reaching out to you on behalf of a company called Mobilitie, which is a certified public utility and registered CLEC (Competitive Local Exchange Carrier) telecommunications provide r. As a CLEC, Mobilitie is interested in utilizing its usury rights to place a handful of utility poles in the right of way at various locations in XYZ TOWN each mounted with an individual small cell antenna. As a developing technology, small cell solutions expand network coverage and capacity at discreet locations for wireless carriers, require only limited infrastructure to be installed at a property, and don't require dedicated space for head-end equipment, high power demands, or any HVAC equipment. Mobilitie would plan to install a pole, an antenna, the equipment, and a meter at each site, though there will be no ground equipment 
 
We are still in the information gathering/planning stages for the project, so the purpose of this email is to introduce myself and attempt to outline your permitting process in detail, as well as identify the proper point of contact to begin discussions regarding the deployment of these critical network upgrades in ways that are acceptable for these townships.  While I know that there are multiple poles proposed, I don't yet have exact proposed locations or equipment specs, since those details are usually put off until initial contact with each jurisdiction is made so that we can ensure compliance with local codes and ordinances.
 
Can you please confirm or complete the following general questions?
 
1.       Can a new pole be permitted?  
2.       Can a replacement pole be permitted?  
3.       Can there be an attachment to an existing pole. If yes, who are the pole owners? 
4.       Is there a maximum pole height requirement?
5.     Is a Franchise Agreement required?
5.       What other types of documents are needed for permitting?  (Utility, BP, Electrical, Special Use, etc.)
 
Note:  I have also attached sample photos of what the small cell sites look like.
 
If you could please confirm the proper POC(s) to begin discussions, I’d appreciate it. I can be reached via email or by phone at 630-805-2400. I look forward to hearing from you.    
 
Thank you for your time.
Regards,
 
 
Donna Dixon   |   NRE Specialist
 
mobilitie_bluelogo_NEW_Email_R 
120 South Riverside - 18th Floor | Chicago, IL  60606      
630-805-2400  mobile  |   

www.mobilitie.com 

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Effects of chronic exposure to 950 MHz ultra-high-frequency electromagnetic radiation on reactive oxygen species metabolism in the right and left cerebral cortex of young rats of different ages

Joel's comments: The study had limited statistical power to detect differences due to the small sample size (6 per group). Also note that the animals were exposed to continuous wave 950 MHz electromagnetic radiation; cell phone radiation is modulated and usually pulsed.

--

Effects of chronic exposure to 950 MHz ultra-high-frequency electromagnetic radiation on reactive oxygen species metabolism in the right and left cerebral cortex of young rats of different ages


Furtado-Filho OV, Borba JB, Maraschin T, Souza LM, Jose JA, Moreira CF, Saffi J. Effects of chronic exposure to 950 MHz ultra-high-frequency electromagnetic radiation on reactive oxygen species metabolism in the right and left cerebral cortex of young rats of different ages. Int J Radiat Biol. 2015 Aug 14:1-17. [Epub ahead of print]

Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the effect of 950 MHz ultra-high-frequency electromagnetic radiation (UHF-EMR) on biomarkers of oxidative damage to DNA, proteins and lipids in the left cerebral cortex (LCC) and right cerebral cortex (RCC) of neonate and 6-day-old rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve rats were equally divided into two groups as controls (CR) and exposed (ER), for each age (0 and 6 days). The LCC and RCC were examined in ER and CR after exposure. Radiation exposure lasted half an hour per day for up to 27 days (throughout pregnancy and 6 days postnatal). The specific absorption rate ranged from 1.32 - 1.14 W/kg. The damage to lipids, proteins and DNA was verified by thiobarbituric acid reactive substances, carbonylated proteins (CP) and comets, respectively. The concentration of glucose in the peripheral blood of the rats was measured by the Accu-Chek Active Kit due to increased CP in RCC.

RESULTS: In neonates, no modification of the biomarkers tested was detected. On the other hand, there was an increase in the levels of CP in the RCC of the 6-day-old ER. Interestingly, the concentration of blood glucose was decreased in this group.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that there is no genotoxicity and oxidative stress in neonates and 6 days rats. However, the RCC had the highest concentration of CP that do not seem to be a consequence of oxidative stress. This study is the first to demonstrate the use of UHF-EMR causes different damage responses to proteins in the LCC and RCC.
Excerpts

... the RCC of 6-day-old rats showed an increase in protein carbonylation in the ER group compared to the SR group. This difference was not observed in the measurements of lipid peroxidation or DNA damage ; therefore, it is likely that it is not the result of oxidative damage induced by ROS. Oxidative stress is not the only process that results in the formation of carbonylated proteins. For example, hyperglycemia can lead to the formation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) that can induce protein carbonylation (Barbosa et al. 2008).

Potential statistical differences may not have been seen due to the sample size (N = 6). The results of DNA damage can be an example (increasing trend, p <0 .1="" a="" be="" better="" br="" changes.="" for="" further="" in="" investigations="" of="" performed="" should="" t-test="" tails="" the="" therefore="" two="" understanding="">
The results of this investigation show that continuous wave UHF-EMR (SAR 1.32 W/kg for neonate and 1.14 W/kg for 6-day-old), administered for 30 minutes a day for 27 days (21 days of gestation and 6 days postnatally), is not genotoxic and does not cause oxidative stress in the LCC and RCC of neonate and 6-day-old rats. However, the RCC displays a significant increase in carbonylated protein concentration that does not seem to be related to oxidative stress generation. More studies are needed in order to understand the mechanism that is implicated in this process.

http://1.usa.gov/1NrAKMy

-- 

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley

Electromagnetic Radiation Safety

Website:              http://www.saferemr.com
Facebook:            http://www.facebook.com/SaferEMR
News Releases:    http://pressroom.prlog.org/jmm716/
Twitter:                 @berkeleyprc

Monday, August 17, 2015

About the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity, democracy and human rights

About the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity, democracy and human rights


Dear All on my mailing list,

Please, note that the Stockholm City Council civil servant for disability issues, the "funktionshindersombudsman" Ms Riitta-Leena Karlsson, has been invited to be part of the new Stockholm City Council group about democracy and human rights. As such, she is in a golden situation to also propel forward issues about the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity. This is a very important additional leap forward that - again - puts the Swedish model at the forefront, I would proudly say.

With my very best regards
Yours sincerely
Olle

(Olle Johansson
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)

About Jenny Fry, the 15 year old girl with EHS who recently committed suicide

About Jenny Fry, the 15 year old girl with EHS who recently committed suicide


Dear All on my mailing list,
Please, watch the opening presentation on wifi in schools which is dedicated to Jenny Fry, the 15 year old girl with EHS who recently committed suicide. The rest are also all only 15 mins each and all excellent, please disseminate widely, especially to schools groups.

https://vimeo.com/131798243


With my very best regards
Yours sincerely
Olle

(Olle Johansson
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)

"Funcophobia" and the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity

"Funcophobia" and the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity


Dear All on my mailing list,

Please, note that the Swedish Academy (i.a. responsible for the Nobel Prize in Literature) - in collaboration with various disability organizations and functional impairment experts - has decided to enter a new Swedish word, namely "funcophobia" (Sw. "funkofobi") into their official word list over the Swedish language. Funcophobia is defined as "prejudice against people with functional variations". Needless to say, this is a huge step forward for all disability groups, including persons with the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity.

With my very best regards
Yours sincerely
Olle

(Olle Johansson
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)