Police may have become sick from radiation

Police may have become sick from radiation

Mona Nilsson: "Investigation of the police mobile systems TETRA is misleading"
Susanne Larsson, The Epoch Times
29.05.2012 11:00

After the policeman Roger Carlstrom in Trelleborg was hit by brain tumor, the police demanded an answer to how dangerous the radiation from the new phone system Tetra really is.

The Swedish Authority for Civil Contingencies, MSB, answered that they "meet the current standard." But according to Mona Nilsson, journalist and author of health risks of mobile telephony, the information is "misleading" since the limit applies only to the immediate effects of a six-minute exposure.

"We are nothing more than guinea pigs in a massive human experiment", says Roger Carlstrom.

Among the policeman Roger Carlströms colleagues, concern has spread since the doctors determined that he suffered from a malignant brain tumor.

He had for some time been suffering from fatigue and also suffered from skin disease rosacea. He suspects himself to both skin disease and the tumor caused by TETRA

- I have been able to monitor the intensity of the skin disease for many years and it is directly related to radio traffic through portable Rachel stations, says Roger Carlstrom to the National Police Gazette.

Roger Carlstrom said that several police officers in England is suing the authorities because they feel that they have become ill from their communications system based on the same technology TETRA. According to investigations made by the expert Barrie Trower is Rachel technique very unhealthy and he states that among other things, rosacea, tumors, mood swings and sleep problems can be linked to technology.

In a press release from MSB May 23 the authority denied that the radiation would be harmful, "Radiation from TETRA system cell towers as well as from handheld and vehicle mount TETRA Mobiles are well below the specified limits."

Mona Nilsson for many years covered the issue and reviewed the authorities and the research, argues that the press release is misleading because the limit applies only to an immediate effect after six minutes of exposure.

She explains that the current standard for mobile telephony is recommended by ICNIRP * and explicitly protects only against the immediate, acute effects of short-term exposure, when the radiation is so intense that it heats up the tissue. It explicitly  excludes the risk of cancer and other long term health effects.

Mona Nilsson also refers to the researcher Lennart Hardell study, and the international Interphone study, which both showed an increased risk of brain tumors from mobile use.

Hardell study formed the basis for WHO's cancer research institute IARC last year ruled that cell phone radiation is "possibly carcinogenic".

Mona Nilsson told The Epoch Times that it is staggering incompetence of the MSB to not be able to give an objective information that the ICNIRP limit do not cover the disease that hit Carlstrom after being long term exposed to TETRA.

- MSB writes that the radiation does not cause direct damage, which is an idealization of immediate damage. When I ask the manager at the MSB what "direct damage" is, he refused to answer. This is a form of fraud and may be likened to an insurance company selling an insurance policy that claim to provide compensation for all forms of diseases, but when you read the fine print it just conpensate for a fraction of them.

Roger Carlstrom told The Epoch Times that he received his first symptoms of radiation in 2007 with rosacea.

-I have since then investigated the issue and sought information about the radiation from the radio system TETRA and what we are exposed to. I have also checked our supervisor, Radiation Safety Authority, which should protect people and the environment from various types of radiation, what they do and what they tell us about the various risks, says Roger Carlstrom and continues:

- It is clear that the only thing they protect is the producers of this radiation. As they writes on his website: "The ICNIRP limit  is set by a good margin to levels that demonstrated direct health effects".

Roger Carlstrom says he feels quite good now and has done so ever since radiotherapy and chemotherapy begun in January. After surgery, was discovered microscopic residual tumor not seen at surgery. In early March, radiation therapy was completed and after that he had only chemotherapy and will continue to do so until the end of August. Ongoing studies will be done every three months to monitor progress.

- I'm stubborn and keeps me positive that I will overcome this disease, he says, adding that he believes much of the psyche in healing power.

Roger Carlstrom believes that the investigation of radiation risks is a fraud because it ignores or explicitly mention that their reference values ​​do not include long term damage.

Roger Carlstrom fears that many people in Sweden are now exposed to radiation of which we will not know the full impact of until many years ahead.

- We are nothing more than guinea pigs in a giant human experiment, instead of making use of the precautionary principle in the Environmental Code and any risks carefully investigated before we are exposed to this new influence. Many studies have already demonstrated the significant risks associated with this radiation, but these studies are ignored. On the contrary, all the studies that show the risks are constantly dismissed as unreliable.

 

Polis kan ha blivit sjuk av strålning Mona Nilsson: ”Utredning av polisens mobiltelefonsystem Rakel är vilseledande”

Susanne Larsson, Epoch Times

29.05.2012 11:00

Efter att polismannen Roger Carlström i Trelleborg drabbats av hjärntumör har poliserna krävt ett svar på hur farlig strålningen från det nya mobiltelefonsystemet Rakel egentligen är.

Myndigheten för Samhällsskydd och Beredskap, MSB, har svarat att de ”uppfyller gällande gränsvärden”. Men enligt Mona Nilsson, journalist och författare till boken Mobiltelefonins hälsorisker, är uppgifterna ”vilseledande” då gränsvärdet gäller enbart de omedelbara effekterna av sex minuters exponering.

”Vi är inget annat än försökskaniner i ett jättestort mänskligt experiment”, anser Roger Carlström.

Bland polismannen Roger Carlströms kollegor har oron spridit sig sedan läkarna konstaterat att han drabbats av en elakartad hjärntumör.

Han hade sedan en tid lidit av trötthet och även drabbats av hudsjukdomen rosacea. Han misstänker själv att både hudsjukdomen och tumören orsakats av Rakel.

– Jag har själv kunnat följa intensiteten i rodnaden arbetspass för arbetspass under många år och den har ett direkt samband med radiotrafiken via bärbara Rakelstationer, säger Roger Carlström till Polistidningen.

Roger Carlström berättar att flera poliser i England har stämt myndigheterna eftersom de anser att de blivit sjuka av sitt kommunikationssystem som bygger på samma teknik som Rakel. Enligt utredningar gjorda av experten Barrie Trower är Rakeltekniken mycket hälsofarlig och han slår fast att bland annat rosacea, tumörer, humörsvängningar och sömnproblem går att koppla till tekniken.

I ett pressmeddelande från MSB den 23 maj dementerar man att strålningen skulle vara hälsofarlig: ”Strålningen från Rakelsystemets mobilmaster liksom från handburna och fordonsmonterade Rakelmobiler ligger långt under angivna gränsvärden.”

Mona Nilsson som under många år bevakat frågan och granskat myndigheterna och forskningen, anser att pressmeddelandet är vilseledande eftersom gränsvärdet enbart gäller omedelbara effekter efter sex minuters exponering.

Hon förklarar att gällande gränsvärden för mobiltelefoni är rekommenderade av ICNIRP* och skyddar uttryckligen enbart mot omedelbara, akuta effekter av korttidsexponering, då strålningen är så intensiv att den värmer upp vävnad. Det utesluter uttryckligen cancerrisker och även andra besvär.

Mona Nilsson hänvisar även till forskaren Lennart Hardells studie samt den internationella undersökningen Interphone som båda visat en ökad risk för hjärntumör av mobilanvändning.

Hardells studie låg till grund för att WHO:s cancerforskningsinstitut IARC förra året gjorde bedömningen att mobiltelefonstrålningen är "möjligen cancerframkallande"

Mona Nilsson säger till Epoch Times att det är häpnadsväckande inkompetent av MSB att inte kunna redogöra objektivt och sakligt för att gränsvärdet inte har relevans för de skador som Carlström rapporterat och som gränsvärdet inte täcker:

- MSB skriver att strålningen inte ger direkta skador, vilket är en skönmålning av omedelbara skador. När jag frågar ansvarig vid MSB vad ”direkta skador” är vägrar han att svara. Det här är en form av bedrägeri och kan liknas vid att ett försäkringsbolag säljer en försäkring som påstås ge ersättning för alla former av sjukdomar, men som när du läser det finstilta bara ersätter en bråkdel av dessa.

Read whole article at http://www.epochtimes.se/articles/2012/05/28/23366.html

REgards
Mona

Fukushima radiation now detected in the U.S. food supply

Fukushima radiation now detected in the U.S. food supply

Wednesday, May 30, 2012 by: J. D. Heyes


Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/036022_Fukushima_radiation_food_supply.html#ixzz1wverNs00
(NaturalNews) Scores of experts and analysts have feared for months that it would happen, and now it has: Radiation from the heavily damaged nuclear power plants at Japan's Fukushima complex has made it into the seafood chain off the coast of America.

Small amounts of cesium-137 and cesium-134, both radioactive elements released after a major earthquake-caused tsunami damaged at least three reactors at the site along Japan's northeastern coast in March 2011, have been found in at least 15 tuna that were recently caught off the coast of California, scientists have said.

The finding suggests that the fish may have carried the contamination across the Pacific Ocean faster than wind or water has been able to do, and months earlier than wind and water brought debris from the damaged nuclear plant across the ocean to the shores of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest, saidReuters.

Researchers said that, so far, the levels of cesium found in the fish are not high enough to harm humans if consumed, according to data published in the journalProceedingsof theNational Academy of Sciences.

'Not a large amount at all'

Daniel Madigan ofStanford University's Hopkins Marine Station did not make a determination about the safety of the fish, though he did say the amounts of radiation detected in the tuna are far less than Japan's safety limit.

"I wouldn't tell anyone what's safe to eat or what's not safe to eat," Madigan toldReuters. "It's become clear that some people feel that any amount of radioactivity, in their minds, is bad and they'd like to avoid it. But compared to what's there naturally [...] and what's established as safety limits, it's not a large amount at all."

Madigan said researchers found higher levels of two radioactive isotopes of the cesium element, 137 - which was present in the eastern Pacific before the disaster at Fukushima Daiichi - and 134, which is caused only by manmade activities and wasn't present before the tsunami smashed into the plant.

Since cesium 134 only exists through human activity, such as nuclear power plants and the manufacture of nuclear weapons, Madigan's team figured the 134 they were measuring had to have come from Fukushima.

"There was about five times the background amount of cesium 137 in the bluefin tuna they tested, but that is still a tiny quantity, Madigan said: 5 becquerels instead of 1 becquerel (It takes 37 billion becquerels to equal 1 curie; for context, a pound of uranium-238 has 0.00015 curies of radioactivity, so one becquerel would be a truly miniscule proportion),"Reutersreported.

Not much contamination, but how much is too much?

Bluefin tuna only spawn in the western Pacific, off the coasts of the Philippines and Japan. The researchers believe that the elevated radioactive isotopes came from Fukushima because of the way the tuna migrate across the Pacific Ocean. As young fish, some of them tend to migrate off the coast of California, and then remain there as they grow.

Judging by the size of the tuna examined (about 15 pounds), researchers believe the fish left the waters off Japan about a month after the accident.

Most of the radiation from the damaged plant was released only for a few days in April 2011. Unlike some other compounds, radioactive cesium doesn't sink quickly but instead remains spread out from the ocean's surface to the seafloor. That means fish can swim through it and ingest it through their gills, researchers said, or by either taking in contaminated sea water or contaminated organisms.

Madigan said bluefin tuna off Japan's coast soon after the accident probably had much higher levels of cesium 134 present in their bodies, perhaps as much as 40-50 percent more than normal.

Still, the fact that any radioactive contamination has showed up off the nation's coastline at all should be cause of concern because, as Madigan himself noted, it's hard to say what levels of contamination in our food are ultimately dangerous enough to cause harm.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.reuters.com

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/fukushima_accident_inf129.html

http://www.sfgate.com

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/036022_Fukushima_radiation_food_supply.html#ixzz1wvelG3q2

Should We Hide Low-dose Radiation Exposure from the Public?

Ruriko Sakuma, daughter of dairy farmer Shinji Sakuma, rubs a cow at their farm in the village of Katsurao in Fukushima prefecture, 25 kms west of the stricken Fukushima nuclear power plant on May 3, 2011 after returning to feed their livestock from a shelter in Fukushima City. (Image credit: AFP/Getty Images via @daylife)

Should We Hide Low-dose Radiation Exposure from the Public?

When fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster began appearing last Spring in U.S. air, rainwater, drinking water, and milk, many U.S. media outlets ignored the story.

It was a difficult story to cover. TheU.S. Environmental Protection Agency was releasing raw data erratically, sometimes late on Friday afternoons, and reporters either had to possess radiation expertise or take a crash course in picocuries, millisieverts, MCLs and DILs.

It was much easier for reporters to accept reassurances from government officials that the fallout drifting across the U.S. was “well below levels of public concern.” And it was much easier to heed pleas from government and industry that we not alarm the public.

But experts in low-dose radiation will tell you scientists know too little about the effects of low-dose radiation for public officials to make such sweeping statements, and most scientists believe that across large populations, more exposure means more cancer:

“There is scientific consensus on a prevailing hypothesis that, down to near-zero levels, the occurrence of future cancer is proportional to the dose of radiation received,” writes Gordon Thompson, executive director of theInstitute for Resource and Security Studies, in the May/June issue of TheBulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

This hypothesis is called the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) Hypothesis. It implies that no additional dose of radiation, however small, can be described as absolutely safe.

Government and Industry officials downplay that implication, and reporters have been complicit in hiding it from the public. Thompson suggests this policy approach may be patronizing, obsolete, and a threat to public faith in science:

Public fear does not provide a reason to hide the logical implications of the LNT hypothesis. An attempt by experts to hide these implications is likely to be counterproductive. The truth would probably be revealed eventually, leading to diminished public faith in the relevant experts and in science in general. Ultimately, public fear could be exacerbated. Also, when experts consider public fear, they should account for contemporary views on individual agency. In past years, well-meaning doctors would often withhold a diagnosis of cancer to avoid alarming a patient. Now, such behavior is generally regarded as patronizing and obsolete.

via “Unmasking the Truth,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

If this is true for public officials, it’s at least as true for reporters, who should act as watchdogs, scrutinizing the actions and statements of public officials.

When fallout from Fukushima reached the U.S. last year, few reporters did so.

When radioactive strontium appeared in Hilo, Hawaii milk, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser stated matter-of-factly in a headline that the radiation was “no cause for concern.” That statement is at odds with scientific consensus.

Reporter William Cole relied on assurances from his expert, Lynne Nakasone, administrator of Hawaii’s Environmental Health Services Division, who told him, “There’s no question the milk is safe.”

Of course, there is a question whether the milk was safe.

Why would public officials downplay risk to the public? Because radioactive strontium can put a damper on milk sales.

In The Bulletin, Gordon writes that political pressure from economic interests too often influences policy approaches to low-dose radiation:

A question for professional bodies is whether, in a politically pressurized environment, they will not only speak about the uncertainties of the LNT hypothesis, but will also acknowledge its logical implication: Even very low-dose radiation can be expected to sicken and kill a number of people over time.

That’s a good question for professional bodies of reporters, too. If even very low-dose radiation can sicken and kill people, should we hide exposures from the public?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2012/05/29/should-we-hide-low-dose-radiation-exposures-from-the-public/

Cell phones: 50 percent increase in frontal and temporal lobe tumors in children

Cell phones: 50 percent increase in frontal and temporal lobe tumors in children

Wednesday, May 30, 2012 by: Lloyd Burrell


Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/036016_cell_phone_radiation_tumors.html#ixzz1wvdvMuD1
(NaturalNews)The Office of National Statisticsin the United Kingdom discovered a 50 percent increase in frontal and temporal lobe tumors in children during the ten year span covering 1999 to 2009. Was this a result of cell phone radiation?

The Department of Healthin the UK would appear to think so. One in three children under the age of ten currently has a cellphone in their possession. The governmental agency put out the following statement: "Children should only use mobile phones for essential purposes and keep all calls short."

The facts: while adults definitely absorb some radiation from using cellphones, children are at considerably greater risk. When compared to adults, children's brains can take in up to three times the amount of radiation.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer(IARC) released their findings last year after going over huge amounts of data taken from dozens of studies: cellphones may cause cancer in humans. These findings were compiled from research that discovered using a cellphone for a decade increases the risk of developing acoustic neuromas in adults. It can be inferred from these findings the distinct possibility that similar, if not more devastating results, can occur in children due to:

• Brain tissue which is more conductive.
• A thinner skull.
• The ability for radiation to penetrate more effectively due to their smaller brains and softer brain tissue.
• A longer period of exposure due to use beginning at an earlier age.

Could this be why almost 400 children a year in Britain are diagnosed with brain and spinal tumors? This equates to 1 in four of all registered childhood cancers.

Cellphones and Big Business

MobileWise, a non-profit organization from the UK whose mission is to inform the public about the potential risks to children from engaging in cell phone use, released a report in 2011 in which researchers expressed concerns. Why have cell phones been deemed safe when more than 200 peer-reviewed studies convey an association between cellphone usage and serious health complications, including brain damage?

Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurosurgeon and editor ofThe Blaylock Wellness Report, may have the answer. Blaylock shares, "There is considerable evidence that cellphones damage the brain as well as other tissues and organs. In fact, two of the scientists cellphone companies backed to do these studies were fired when their studies demonstrated DNA damage in all cells exposed to the wavelengths and energy from cellphones."

Half the studies on cellphone use and cancer report a link and half do not, leaving researchers conflicted. It's important to note; approximately three quarters of the studies conducted on whether cell phones are linked to the development of cancer are backed and funded by the cellphone industry.

MobileWisesuggests helping children and parents minimize cell phone use by forcing the industry to step up. The organization's recommendations call for the industry to put out more user-friendly warning labels, implement the use of functions that place time restrictions on calls, and halt the aggressive marketing tactics aimed at children.

How many more young lives will be destroyed before governments have the courage to do their job and protect public health? The telecommunications industry should not be able to manipulate the facts and practical everyday guidelines to help prevent and/or minimize possibly deadly exposures for children need to be made conspicuously available to the public.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.childrenwithcancer.org.uk

http://www.newsmaxhealth.com

http://www.scribd.com

http://www.express.co.uk

About the author:
Lloyd Burrell has spent the last 10 years researching the effects of electromagnetic fields on health, after becoming electrically sensitive in 2002. He now offers practical advice on "healthy living in our electromagnetic world". You can download his free EMF Health Report and subscribe to his newsletter by visiting hisCell Phone and EMF protection website. You can also follow him onFacebookandTwitter.

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/036016_cell_phone_radiation_tumors.html#ixzz1wvdmkhg6

9 Health Risks that Aren't Worth Taking

9 Health Risks that Aren't Worth Taking

By Redbook | Healthy Living – Tue, May 29, 2012 3:08 PM EDT

By Melinda Wenner Moyer, REDBOOK
Cell Phone.

1. Holding your cell phone up to your ear.

Although the overall risk is still very low, research suggests that people who have spent the past decade or more frequently talking on their cell phones in the traditional way are more likely to develop brain tumors. John Walls, a spokesperson for industry trade group CTIA: The Wireless Association, points out that no major American health organization has said that wireless devices are a public health risk. (The World Health Organization, though, has expressed concern.) And texting or talking while driving--which boosts your chances of having a car wreck by a factor of four--poses a far bigger risk than the radiation may. But considering that you can get an earbud-type hands-free set for as little as five bucks, whynot take the safest tack? "I think the data are strong enough that using a hands-free set with your cell makes a lot of sense," says public health expert Ted Schettler, M.D., science director of the Science and Environmental Health Network.

2. PVC shower curtains.

That funky, chemical-y smell of new polyvinyl chloride (PVC) shower curtains comes from volatile organic compounds, which may be carcinogenic over time and can cause nausea and headaches in the short term, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. "I always recommend the good old-fashioned fabric curtains," says preventive-medicine expert Suzanne Pham, M.D. Want something waterproof? Look for vinyl acetate, which is safer, she says.

Related: 9 Shortcuts to Total Beauty Happiness

3. Microwaving in plastic.

Heat releases some of the chemical building blocks in plastic, sending them into whatever food or drink you're warming up. One such chemical, bisphenol A (BPA), "can mimic the effects of estrogen in the body, potentially leading to issues like premature puberty and breast or testicular cancer," says Pham. Even BPA-free plastics could release substances that can have negative effects, so it's best to avoid microwaving any plastic container, says Jennifer Lowry, M.D., a medical toxicologist at Children's Mercy Hospitals and Clinics in Kansas City, MO. All of our experts agree: Heat food or drink in glass or ceramic.

bulldog4. Flea and tick collars.

Adults who play with a cat or dog while it's wearing a flea and tick collar are exposed to up to 500 times the Environmental Protection Agency's safe level of pesticides, according to a first-of-its-kind study by scientists at the Natural Resources Defense Council. For children, the levels can be 1,000 times higher than what's safe. The worst are collars containing chemicals called (get ready for a mouthful) propoxur or tetrachlorvinphos, which kill pests by disrupting their nerve pathways. Four out of five top-selling brands we shopped for contained one of these, so check labels. Luckily there are other effective pest-killing options. "Pills that pets take internally seem to be safer," says Jerome Paulson, M.D., chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics council on environmental health. Two common brands are Capstar and Program, which you can get for between $20 and $60 online or from your vet. (For other--cheaper!--suggestions, go to greenpaws.org.)

Related: Important Things Men Don't Know About Women

5. Constantly running a humidifier.

Those little steam machines can be a life saver for parents with a stuffed-up kid who can't sleep, but using them too often might make things worse. A study by the New York State Department of Health found that one of the biggest predictors of whether children developed asthma was the frequent use of a humidifier at home. "Too much moisture promotes mold and dust mite growth," which could be a problem for the whole family, explains Morris Nejat, M.D., a pediatrician and allergist in New York City.

6. Certain antibacterial soaps and toothpastes.

Triclosan is a germ killer found in a lot of antibacterial hand soaps, body washes, and even some brand-name cavity-control toothpastes. But the American Medical Association recommends againstthe use of triclosan in our homes, because it may encourage the development of scary bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics. "Studies have shown that these triclosan products don't work any better than regular cleansers or toothpastes, but they damage the environment and potentially place our long-term health at risk," says Susan Shaw, Ph.D., an environmental scientist at the State University of New York, Albany. Not sure whether triclosan lurks in your favorite products? Just check the labels.

7. X-ray airport scanners.

You know those "backscatter" full-body X-ray machines at airport security gates? Europe banned them several months ago because of health concerns, but the machines are still in use in some airports in the States. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) says the amount of radiation emitted by each scan is minuscule, but independent research suggests the dose to some parts of the body is at least 45 times higher than the TSA claims and may even increase cancer risk, particularly for the elderly and women predisposed to breast cancer. Since you're already going to be exposed to radiation by flying, avoid the extra rays and ask for a pat-down, says John Sedat, Ph.D., a professor emeritus at the University of California, San Francisco.

colon cleanse

8. Colon "cleansing."

Celebs may swear by this kind of thing, but colonics and colon-cleansing pills could be dangerous, our experts said. The intestines are self-cleaning, so unless you're getting a colonoscopy, there's no reason to sweep the whole thing out, says gastroenterologist Lisa Ganjhu. The pills are poorly regulated and could make you laxative-dependent, she says; colonic enemas carry a risk of intestinal perforation, which requires surgery to fix. To keep your digestive system working smoothly, says Ganjhu, stay hydrated; eat lots of fruits, veggies, and whole grains; and exercise. If you regularly have gas or constipation, a probiotic supplement may help by adding more healthy bacteria to your gut.

Related: Should You Go Blonde? 

9. Ready-to-feed canned baby formula.

Bisphenol A (BPA) isn't only found in plastic--it's also used to line the inside of cans to keep bacteria out. And according to tests conducted by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, one of the foods that ends up most contaminated with BPA is canned liquid infant formula. (Powdered formula, on the other hand, contains almost no traces of BPA from its packaging.) If you must use liquid canned or bottled formula, make sure not to warm it up in its original container, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommends.

http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/9-health-risks-arent-worth-taking-190800070.html

‘Comply with environmental standards’, NESREA tells Telecom operators

‘Comply with environmental standards’, NESREA tells Telecom operators

To shut down firms violating laws on erection of Telecom masts

The National Environmental Standards Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) in Kebbi has threatened to shut down organisations that violate specifications on the erection of telecommunications masts.

NESREA state co-ordinator, Kasim Ahmed, added that the agency would adhere to all environmental sustainability practices in line with set standards.

“Masts must comply with provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment act and environmental audit,” Ahmed said.

He said there were dangers in locating telecommunications masts close to residential areas, as the masts would result in emission of radioactive elements that impair the immune system and neurological functions in humans.

Ahmed added that the masts also cause cracks in buildings, while depression and fatigue also arise from radiation impacts on fertility, metabolism and other health complications. 

View the original article here

http://spyghana.com/world-news/inside-africa/nigeria-news/comply-with-environmental-standards-nesrea-tells-telecom-operators/

Number of Disabled People Losing Benefits May Top One Million

Number of Disabled People Losing Benefits May Top One Million

Posted on May 15, 2012 by johnny void 

Paralympian medal winners and war veterans may find themselves stripped of benefits and abandoned to lives of poverty and homelessness under the Government’s brutal disability benefit reforms.

Iain Duncan Smith’s comments in the Telegraph over the weekend should place every serving soldier on notice.  The social contract has changed.  If you get your limbs blown off fighting some rich man’s war then don’t expect the Government to support you when you return home.  IDS has made it clear, people who have had limbs amputated, or are wheelchair users, will no longer be guaranteed support.

IDS, who has previously stated that disabled people lead ‘wasted lives’ due to reliance on benefits, has gone one step further over the weekend, claiming that people on DLA have been left to ‘fester’.  After his recent outburst aimed at disabled workers facing the sack at Remploy factories, IDS’ language is increasingly revealing the nasty little prejudices at the heart of this Government.

It is little wonder that disability hate crime is soaring when senior Government ministers like Iain Duncan Smith are ever ready to launch into a tirade of vicious abuse, smears and lies aimed at disabled people.

The UK Paralympic Team may be surprised that the Government seems to think they have been ‘festering’ in the run up to the Olympics.  Far more concerning however will be the changes to DLA which may see many of them stripped of benefits after the tournament is over.  People claiming out of work benefits due to sickness or disability have been told that being able to watch an episode of Eastenders indicates that they might be fit for work and ineligible for benefits.  It is quite likely that Paralympians may find their sporting achievements used as evidence against them to cut benefit payments.

There is no reason why disabled war veterans or Paralympians should be given any special status above the hundreds of thousands of sick and disabled people who also face losing vital and life saving support.  But it is them who will make the headlines when people are forced into suicide, poverty and homelessness.

The Government claims that 500,000 people are to lose DLA when the new Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment begins next year.  As revealed over the weekend, there is no evidence that these people don’t need, or qualify, for the benefit.  Iain Duncan Smith’s pack of lies in the Telegraph,already demolished, shows he either doesn’t actually understand the DLA process, or more worryingly he doesn’t give a shit how many lives are destroyed by the changes.

Shockingly the number of people who may lose benefit may turn out to be far higher if the experiences faced by sick and disabled benefit claimants who have undergone the notorious Work Capability assessment are anything to go by.

People currently claiming Disability Living Allowance are to be forced to undergo the same kind of intrusive and demeaning checks currently being inflicted on those on out of work health related benefits.  French IT firm Atos have the contract to carry out assessments on benefit claimants and the system has already caused untold suffering with an ever growing number of people taking their own lives due to the process.

The Atos assessment has been designed to declare as many people ‘fit for work’ as possible, despite many of them having serious, and often life threatening conditions.  Although claimants who have been judged unable to work by their own doctor, and in most cases an independent DWP doctor, the magical healing Atos Assessment has judged 37% of people ‘fit for work’ after just a short 20 minute chat.  A further 34% have been judged as fit for work at some point in the future, meaning if they are on contribution based benefits they will lose them after 12 months whatever happens to their health.  A recent investigation by the Daily Mirror found that 32 people a week are dying after being placed in this group.

Whilst huge numbers of Atos’ decisions are overturned on appeal, the Government is quite happy with the Atos system, which is finding far more people ‘fit for work’ than ever expected.  It is clear that there will be pressure on whichever private sector poverty pimps are employed to carry out the new assessment for PIP to replicate these results.  So impressed are this Government with Atos’ performance that they have been placed on a list of preferred bidders for the new PIP Assessment contract.

If the experience of the Work Capability Assessment is replicated in the new PIP system then the number of sick and disabled people losing benefits is quite likely to top one million.  This will be seen as just as much a success as the Work Capability Assessment and will be used to demonstrate that people on disability benefits are largely frauds, or faking their conditions.

This is not idle scare-mongering.  It is happening to sick and disabled claimants on out of work benefits right now.

That Iain Duncan Smith thinks he’s being brave by destroying disabled people’s lives reveals everything we need to know about the toff Government.  The Tory party haven’t changed in the slightest despite Cameron’s oily spin.  They are as nasty and out of touch as ever.  But no Government in living memory has been so brutal as to strip vital support from disabled citizens to fund tax cuts for the super rich.

Iain Duncan Smith’s father was a war hero who fought against a fascist government that believed disabled people were a drain on society to be eradicated.  How ashamed he would feel were he alive to see his own son taking yet one more step down that contemptible path.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2012/05/15/number-of-disabled-people-losing-benefits-may-top-one-million/