Saturday, December 20, 2014
Microwave EMFs Produce Health Effects by Voltage Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) Activation
Microwave EMFs Produce Health Effects by Voltage Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) Activation
http://issuu.com/thegreengazette/docs/dec-jan2014-15web144dpi/19?e=9773462/10407963
KPFA Project Censored: Kevin Kunze, Lloyd Morgan, and Max Anderson Interview
KPFA Project Censored: Kevin Kunze, Lloyd Morgan, and Max Anderson Interview
Kevin Kunze, Lloyd Morgan, and Max Anderson are interviewed. KPFA gives away the film "Mobilize" to promote donations to the station.
Project Censored, for December 12, 2014 - 1:00pm
Click to Play:
Download this clip (mp3, 10.27 megabytes)
Play this clip in your Computer's media player
Download this clip (mp3, 10.27 megabytes)
Play this clip in your Computer's media player
Phone companies would like to cut your landline cord for you
Phone companies would like to cut your landline cord for you
Mary Teister, 72, and her husband keep a landline because doctors use it to monitor her husband's pacemaker. (Michael Tercha,
Mary Teister, 72, and her husband keep a landline because doctors use it to monitor her husband's pacemaker. (Michael Tercha,
EHS & MCS
Whether you are a doctor or a health care professional; whether you are sick, and/or you think you are becoming intolerant to electromagnetic fields (EMF) or chemicals, this ehs-mcs website is intended for you.
It was created in the spirit of the Hippocratic oath and therefore is in strict compliance with Medical Ethics. It is mainly devoted to sick persons who need care and treatment according to the best medical and scientific knowledge, in addition to a most accessible social framework.
Note for people intolerant to electromagnetic fields.
To protect your health, for reading you are advised to print the website content.
This website is the exclusive property of the Association for Research and Treatment of Cancer (ARTAC). Its content in the form of printed documents cannot be shared without ARTAC permission.
|
General background
The content of this website is the result of several years of clinico-biologic research efforts to diagnose and treat patients with self-reported electromagnetic hyper-sensitivity (EHS) and/or hyper-sensitivity to multiple chemical products i.e. " Multiple chemical Sensitivity" (MCS). Research based on a series of more than 800 self-reported EHS and/or MCS patients was performed by the ARTAC research team coordinated by Dr Dominique Belpomme: MD, MCS, full professor in medical oncology at the Paris University. These patient investigations and follow-ups began in 2008 at the Georges Pompidou European Hospital, and from September 2009 to today at the Alleray Labrouste private hospital, Paris 75015.
The research has been carried out at a French national level under the control of the ARTAC research coordination team, and since 2011 at an international level, under the control of the Environment Research Institute (ECERI) which ARTAC founded in Brussels (Belgium).
The data reported on this web site are from the international scientific literature and/or from the ARTAC and/or ECERI’s experimental and clinical data, all resulting from a rigorous scientific research process and in accordance with the principles of "evidence -based medicine." Therefore these data cannot be criticized other than in the framework of the falsifiability principle, as proposed by the German scientific philosopher Karl Popper and defended in France by a friend of Pr Belpomme, Jacques Monod, winner of the 1965 Medicine Nobel Prize.
ARTAC and ECERI are non-profit private research organizations, independent of conflicting interests, primarily funded by donations and legacies from patients or their families, as well as sponsors who understood potential risks of excessive exposure to EMF and the inadequate market regulation of chemicals whose toxic effects are insufficiently assessed. So ARTAC and ECERI scientists emphasize the extreme gravity of the public health situation generated by environmental pollution, reflected in the increasing incidence of many chronic diseases and some entirely new pathological disorders. Public health policies in the different countries around the world, particularly in the European Community, continue to minimize or deny the deleterious health effects of non-ionizing radiation at various frequencies. The risks of chemicals still marketed without adequate toxicological control, despite the basic reversal of burden of proof (“no toxicity data, no market”) in the new European regulation REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization of Chemicals). The Paris Appeal, initiated in 2004 at UNESCO (Paris) by Professor Belpomme, contributed to REACH’s implementation, and ARTAC and ECERI continue to promote its goals at the scientific level.
Towards environmental medicine
Why has the EMF / chemical public health situation become so critical ?
An key answer is that people claiming to be suffering from EHS and/or MCS represent only the tip of an iceberg. We should indeed distinguish the three following clinic-biologic entities.
Pathologic intolerance is defined as the occurrence of clinical symptoms and biological dysfunctions in any subject exposed to EMFs and/or chemicals without considering specifically susceptibility or hypersensitivity to these agents. Any patient, potentially many, might display pathologic intolerance;
Susceptibility is a clinico-biologic condition related constitutionally to a particular genetic profile (or to epigenetic acquired intracellular modifications as a consequence of environmental exposures). Due to the continuing expansion of EMF and/or chemical exposures, such genetic/epigenetic susceptibility may affect an increasing number of people.
Hypersensitivity is a specific condition characterized by susceptible patients becoming clinically and biologically intolerant to weaker intensities of EMFs and/ or low concentrations of chemicals than they may have originally been exposed to. Less numerous than intolerant people, these EHS and MCS patients may even so represent the tip of the iceberg. We must consider the hypersensitivity syndrome as an indicator of a much larger public health problem: thelarge numbers of people who have not necessarily become hypersensitive who may in fact be intolerant to these agents; and that their ubiquitous prolonged exposures may generate a number of chronic organic disorders or diseases; which unfortunately medicine still considers idiopathic, i.e. without any recognized cause. It is possible that such widespread intolerance phenomena, especially when associated with progressive organic damage, may account for much of the apparent increased incidence (few baseline measures exist) of widesprad pathological conditions, such as migraine, heart rhythm disorders, chemical-induced asthma and other obstructive bronchial diseases, skin diseases, chronic rheumatisms and many other autoimmune diseases, degenerative neuropathies (including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis and even amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), autism in children, and even several types of cancers and leukemias. The incidence of non-infectious chronic diseases has been growing strongly for decades (when a baseline can be established), while modern medicine still considers them to be largely idiopathic.
Taking into account worldwide scientific research and the results of our own research highlighting the causal role of the environment in the emergence of some of these pathological disorders or diseases, we believe that the diagnostic and therapeutic management of such patients must occur within the framework of a new extremely multi-disciplinary form of medical practice designated “environmental medicine”. ARTAC has implemented environmental medicine in France and now, thanks to ECERI in Europe, with the objective to diagnose and treat patients using the best evidence-based techniques, supplying in France highly specialized medical consultations.
Several scientific papers arising from ARTAC’s research have already been published. Others are in press and more will be submitted to top journals, pending financial support which neither ARTAC nor ECERI currently have sufficiently. Nevertheless, our research and dissemination efforts continue relentlessly, as ARTAC has extensive clinical and biological experience in its field. ARTAC’s series of clinically examined and biologically investigated and treated patients with EHS and/or MCS is probably one of the largest worldwide. It is noteworthy that ARTAC discovered new biological tests and innovative treatments of great use to highly integrated practice of environmental medicine.
Another key asset for ARTAC and ECERI’s research success in the field of EHS and MCS diagnosis and treatment is their allegiance to objectivity in science, independent of any political pressures or administrative ideologies and private interests (profit over knowledge) of electromagnetic and chemical industries. The recognized scientific expertise and quality of research work of ARTAC and ECERI in the field of EHS and MCS derive from their independence when performing scientific research and reaching new scientific knowledge; from their internationally recognized competence in a field as complex as cancer; and from their public expressions concerning the social implications of scientific results. ARTAC and ECERI’s researchers are indeed not systematically opposed to industrial technological innovations, when these are useful and honestly beneficial to populations. But ARTAC’s priority is the care of patients in the best medico-social conditions. Therefore health policy is paramount, and ARTAC and ECERI promote exposure restrictions, rather than the current economic excess and environmental spill-over known to be driven mainly by private profit-seeking.
Un autre atout primordial concernant les recherches de l'ARTAC et de l’ECERI est leur totale indépendance scientifique vis-à -vis des pouvoirs administratifs et politiques quels qu’ils soient et des lobbies en provenance des opérateurs et industriels impliqués dans les technologies sans fils ou la chimie. Ce qui assure la véracité scientifique des travaux de l’ARTAC et/ou de l’ECERI est justement leur indépendance dans le choix des thématiques de recherche envisagées, leur compétence internationalement reconnue dans un domaine aussi complexe qu’est le cancer et leur liberté d'expression au plan national et international vis-à -vis du grand public, une fois les travaux scientifiques réalisés et éventuellement publiés.
Il ne s'agit pas ici de s'opposer systématiquement aux innovations technologiques de l'industrie lorsque celles-ci sont utiles et bénéfiques pour les populations, mais d’abord et avant tout au plan médical, de prendre en charges les malades victimes de ces affections ou maladies, dans des conditions médico-sociales les plus satisfaisantes possibles, et au plan de la santé publique d'instituer et de promouvoir auprès des décideurs politiques des limites sanitaires raisonnables, face aux excès économiques actuels dont on sait qu’ils sont guidés par une logique principalement, si ce n’est exclusivement, financière.
This website will be uploaded and updated with scientific and medical (diagnostic and therapeutic) research. It includes the following topics:
Diagnosis
6) Clinical and biological description of the multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome (MCS),
7) Diagnostic criteria of MCS,
8) Differential diagnosis,
9) Clinical forms of EMF and/or chemical intolerance,
11) Familial forms of EHS and MCS,
12) A particular clinical form of MCS: cutaneous intolerance to synthetic fibers.
Protection
1) Understanding of what are EMFs and their health effects
2) How can we avoid EMF intolerance,
3) How can we protect ourselves when suffering from EHS ?,
4) Understanding chemical pollution and practical advice to protect ourselves when suffering MCS,
5) Physical barriers and/or societal prejudices: What can we do ?
Treatments
1) What treatments are possible for patients with EHS and/or MCS ? ARTAC and ECERI therapeutic clinical trials,
3) Removal of mercury amalgams: how and whom can you consult ?
4) Poisoning by heavy metals : what can be done ?
5) What are food allergies and food intolerances ? What can be done in case of allergy or food intolerance ?
Information
1) Patient assistance. How can you organize to act effectively?
2) In case of serious health and social problems, who can be contacted?
3) Some useful contacts for protecting oneself
4) Where do we stand regarding the recognition of EHS and MCS by governmental bodies as WHO and the different Member States of the European Union?
Scientific research
1) Learn more about ARTAC and ECERI,
2) ARTAC and ECERI’s current scientific studies,
3) Help fund research: why and how can you help ARTAC or ECERI to improve EHS and MCS diagnosis and treatment,
References
The power of our voice: big updates from Canada
The power of our voice: big updates from Canada
| |||||
| |||||
|
Friday, December 19, 2014
Arizona settles 'smart' meter debate
State settles 'smart' meter debate
Ryan Randazzo, The Republic | azcentral.com 11:20 a.m. MST December 19, 2014
About 20,000 APS customers have refused to allow the company to install smart meters on their homes.(Photo: Arizona Public Service Co.)
(Photo: Arizona Public Service Co.)
STORY
HIGHLIGHTS
• Utility regulators settled on a fee to
charge customers who don't want smart meters.
• APS customers will pay $50 plus $5 a
month to refuse smart meters.
Arizona Public Service wants your meter reader to go the way of
the milk man and the rotary dial phone. But the wireless technology it is using
has at least 20,000 customers up in arms.
The utility's solution? If customers still want someone to come
to their house and read their meter in person, they'll have to pay for it.
On Friday, regulators came up with a compromise that left no one
happy.
Customers who don't want wireless "smart" meters will
have to pay for the privilege: a $50 fee and $5 a month. But the amount is far
less than the utility had sought.
About 20,000 APS customers have refused to allow the company to
install smart meters on their homes. More than 1.1 million have been installed
since the company began phasing out analog meters in 2006.
Smart meters transmit customers' electricity usage to the
utility with radio signals, and dozens of opponents spent hours testifying
before the Arizona Corporation Commission Friday, hoping to convince the five
regulators the meters are unsafe.
"They are microwave weaponry," said Scottsdale
resident Floris Freshman, who wore a bicycle helmet covered in tin foil and
patterned cloth at the hearing.
Freshman said she suffered a head injury long ago and is extra
sensitive to the meters' signals, and the helmet seems to help protect her from
the unwanted exposure to radio frequencies.
Smart meter opponents complain of headaches, sleeplessness and
other health concerns from the meters, which use wireless signals to transmit
data. .
Many said they were concerned that even if they opted to refuse
a smart meter, they could not avoid the radio frequencies emitted by their
neighbors' meters, not to mention the higher exposure for people in apartments
or other dwellings where several meters can be clustered in one location.
The meter opponents brought in an expert, Martin Blank, a
retired associate professor from the Columbia University Department of
Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, who has written a book on the subject.
Blank suggested the possible health effects from the meters were
not worth the benefits.
"We know a lot about the way these radio frequencies and
power signals can activate the DNA," he said. "The very earliest
biological materials activated (during tests) were the linings of the cavity
that protect our brain."
He said national safety standards that regulate the frequencies
such devices can use are focused on avoiding high levels of radio frequencies
that can heat and damage cells. But he said much lower levels of exposure can
trigger physical changes.
"(It is possible to) get an effect long before you get a
temperature change," he said.
APS, SRP and the other utilities across the country use the
meters to avoid sending employees to collect meter data. They say they are a
safe, efficient way to measure customers' usage and the radio frequencies they
use are harmless.
But opponents are distrustful of utilities.
"There are hundreds and hundreds of people who say yes, I'm
sick," said Cindy Debac, a smart meter opponent from Scottsdale who said
her dog died of cancer six months after one of the devices was installed on her
home. "The smart meters need to be banned from our state and not only that
but from our country."
She said she can feel when a neighbor's meter is replaced with a
smart meter.
She now runs a website, EMFdoctors.com, that sells equipment to
monitor radio frequencies and items to shield people from them, including
$1,100 bed canopies.
"Don't tell the commission that," she said of her
website when she answered her cellphone number listed online. "Do I have a
vast interest in this, yeah. Do I have a vast interest in keeping people alive?
Yes I do."
APS last year proposed an opt-out fee of $75 up front, plus $30
a month, for customers who prefer to keep their old meters.
But as the number of people who refused the meters increased
from about 5,000 to about 20,000, the company recalculated that it would cost
about $20 a month to serve those customers with traditional meter readers,
thanks to the economy of scale and the fact most of those opposing the meters
are clustered in Prescott, Sedona and a few other rural locations.
SRP officials in November 2011 voted to charge customers $20 a
month to opt out of using a smart meter, with no initial setup charge. SRP, a
government-owned utility, has its own board of directors and is not regulated
by the Corporation Commission.
Utilities in California and Nevada charge higher fees than those
approved by the Arizona regulators for opting out of smart-meter programs.
Commission Chairman Bob Stump and Commissioner Brenda Burns both
suggested a fee of $5 a month would be more appropriate. Commissioner Susan
Bitter Smith suggested $20 a month.
Sedona City Councilman Jon Thompson said there should be no opt
out fee. About 1,600 Sedona residents refuse the meters.
"Sixteen-hundred is a big number for us," he said.
"It should be for APS and this commission as well."
Burns said she is sensitive to opponents' concerns.
"I, too, have questioned why we have so many brain tumors,"
she told the crowd.
She said she has 10 grandchildren who she thinks of when
considering potential health effects of the meters.
"The people at APS have children and grandchildren,
too," she said.
When given a notice by the company she would be getting a smart
meter on her home, Burns said she called the company and asked to keep her old
meter to see how the company handled such requests. Despite the request, APS
installed a smart meter on her home anyhow.
"I want you to know I have given them a pretty hard
time," she said, adding that she met with the company CEO after that
event.
"We have to make sure we are handling customers better than
that," she said.
Commissioner Gary Pierce said he, too, is concerned. He said he
checked whether his grandchildren slept near smart meters mounted on their
homes.
"I suspect everyone up here who is not here to protest
smart meters is sitting here thinking about their own health," he said.
"This has been a long, hard drive of a debate for me."
He said he was concerned that the cost of reading meters
manually for customers who refuse smart meters will be "socialized"
and paid by the rest of APS' customers, but voted for the lower fees along with
the rest of the commissioners.
"Today's decision is important to have resolved for all of
our customers," APS spokeswoman Anna Haberlein said. "As always, we
will comply with what the commission has ordered."
Before deciding on the APS fee, the Corporation Commission in
August 2013 requested a study by the Arizona Department of Health Services.
ADHS released its report in November, determining the meters "are not
likely to harm the health of the public."
ADHS reviewed scientific literature from around the world
relating to the radio frequencies used by smart meters and worked with the
Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency to test meters to ensure they were
operating at the frequencies described by the manufacturers.
Some customers also worry the meters pose a privacy concern
because they track electricity use, and others are concerned the meters pose a
fire danger. Those two concerns were not addressed by the ADHS report.
Smart-meter critics rejected the study because "not likely
to cause harm" did not imply the meters are safe.
"What that means is, they just might cause harm,"
opponent and Sedona resident Warren Woodward said.
By the numbers
Smart meter fees
20,000: Approximate
number of APS customers who have refused smart meters.
$50:One-time fee to be charged to those who
want smart meter replaced with analog meter. Those who never upgraded to a
smart meter avoid this fee.
$5: Monthly fee they will pay to keep
old meters.
$20:Monthly fee Salt River Project charges
customers who refuse smart meters. They do not pay a setup charge.
$75:Setup charge for Pacific Gas and
Electric Co. and Southern California Edison in California for customers
refusing smart meters, plus $10 a month.
$10:Setup charge for low-income customers
of PG&E and SCE who refuse smart meters, plus $5 a month.
$52.86:Setup charge for NV
Energy customers in Las Vegas to refuse smart meters, plus $8.82 a month.
Sources: APS, SRP, PG&E, SCE, Nev. Public Utilities
Commission