CELL TOWERS / PHONES SCIENCE & RESEARCH: HEALTH EFFECTS

SCIENCE & RESEARCH: HEALTH EFFECTS

article from: Burbank ACTION (Against Cell Towers In Our Neighborhood)

Burbank ACTION (Against Cell Towers In Our Neighborhood)

https://sites.google.com/site/nocelltowerinourneighborhood/home/science-research-health-effects

This site is best viewed with Mozilla Firefox web browser.  AOL browser has problems viewing the Attachments at the bottom of this page, so use Mozilla Firefox or Internet Explorer browser to view the Attachments.

Above: France is way head of the U.S. in protecting their children.  Here’ a poster that’s part of the public health campaign of the City of Lyon, France.  Thanks to next-up.org for this English-translated version of the poster. Read more about their campaign here: http://www.env-health.org/a/3205

At public hearings, wireless reps and others may stand up and give public comment that there is no conclusive evidence showing cell towers and cell phones cause cancer.  They may even hand city officials a thick packet of documents that they say supports their arguments.  However, you should have your own packet of studies, documents and links for your city officials to review.

There are a growing number of stories, videos and websites about the mounting research and science regarding the harmful effects of wireless technologies on our bodies (this is why many organizations want to repeal or modify the U.S. Telecommunications Act of 1996 because the current exposure standards do not take into account recent scientific findings).

1.  Do cell towers emit radiation?  Yes.

• Even the FCC says so.  Let’s go back to 1996, when the FCC originally set the initial RF radiation guidelines as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996: “Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation, ET Docket No. 93-62,” August 1, 1996.  Go here to read it: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1996/fcc96326.pdf  (This document also reveals federal agencies and other organizations that had problems with the proposed guidelines.)
  

• Also read the FCC’s FAQ about RF Safety: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/rf-faqs.html#Q1, and the FCC’s OET Bulletin 56 (1999): http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf

• OSHA, which contributed to the FCC’s RF radiation exposure standards, has no problem calling RF radiation what it is — go to their website and see for yourself: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiofrequencyradiation/index.html#standards

• The FDA also helped the FCC establish its current RF exposure guidelines. On its website discussion of cell phone health issues, the FDA explains that:
  

• The CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), meanwhile, contributed to the FCC’s RF radiation exposure standards, and on its website, and it posts the CDC’s  “Cell Phone Fact Sheet” (dated 2005), which calls RF radiation what it is:
  

Some officials will avoid saying “radiation” in favor of “emissions” — and if so, here’s the reasoning behind that, even though we know that RF radiation is RF radiation and have First Amendment rights so we can feel free to call it what it really is: RF radiation (Read Page 6+: http://jonathankramer.com/articles/pdf/calbar.public-law-journal_vol-32-No-3_summer-2009.output.pdf.)

2.  Are the current FCC RF radiation exposure standards sufficient?  No.  Read all of the health studies below. Also read and watch these:

• The EPA, which participated in FCC’s exposure standard setting, explains the  limitations and uncertainty of the FCC’s adopted standard in protecting human health.  In a July 16, 2002 letter, EPA’s Norbert Hankin, Center for Science and Risk Assessment, Radiation Protection Division explains to Ms. Janet Newton, President of the EMR Network:I believe it is correct to say that there is uncertainty about whether or not current guidelines adequately treat nonthermal, prolonged exposures (exposures that may continue on an intermittent basis for many years).  The explanation that follows is basically a summary of statements that have been made in other EPA documents and correspondence….The FCC’s current exposure guidelines, as well as those of the Institute of Electrical and  Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, are thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, nonthermal exposure situations….The FCC’s exposure guideline is considered protective of effects arising from a thermal mechanism but not from all possible mechanisms.  Therefore, the generalization by many that the guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified.…The exposure guidelines did not consider information that addresses nonthermal, prolonged exposures, i.e., from research showing effects with implications for possible adversity in situations involving chronic/prolonged, low-level (nonthermal) exposures.  Relatively few chronic, low-level exposure studies of human populations have been reported and the majority of these studies do not show obvious adverse health effects.  However, there are reports that suggest that potentially adverse health effects, such as cancer, may occur.  Since EPA’s comments were submitted to the FCC in 1993, the number of studies reporting effects associated with both acute and chronic low-level exposure to RF radiation has increased.…The FCC does not claim that their exposure guidelines provide protection for exposures to which the 4 W/kg SAR basis does not apply, i.e., exposures below the 4W/kg threshold level that are chronic/prolonged and nonthermal…there is uncertainty about possible risk from nonthermal, intermittent exposures that may continue for years.

  ….Federal health and safety agencies have not yet developed policies concerning possible risk from long-term, nonthermal exposures.

(Source: 2002 EPA letter re: limitations of FCC RF radiation exposure guidelines: http://www.emrpolicy.org/litigation/case_law/docs/noi_epa_response.pdf)

• 2010 Study finds current ICNIRP RF safety standards in Europe (similar to FCC’s) may be non compliant with existing safety standards, in respect to cell tower exposure, by G Verneeren (2010), The influence of the reflective environment on the absorption of a human male exposed to representative base station antennas from 300 MHz to 5 GHz: http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155/55/18/018
• Flaws with FCC Guidelines: Excerpt from “Electromagnetic Fields: A Consumer’s Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Harcourt Brace” (1995) by B. Blake Levitt: http://www.emrpolicy.org/faq/fcc_flaws.pdf
  
• VIDEO – Watch this enlightening and disturbing clip from the “Radiant Day” documentary by Norwegian (NRK) television (with English subtitles) about the harmful effects of cell towers; this particular clip reveals the conflict of interest in the membership of the engineering association that sets our RF safety standards — many of its members are from the telecom industry: http://www.youtube.com/user/BurbankACTION#p/f/1/AHhfjQ1_JVw and to watch the complete original documentary (with English subtitles), go here: http://www.nrk.no/nett-tv/klipp/428197/ (video will take some time to load, so please be patient, this documentary is definitely a must watch).
• VIDEO: Watch the “Full Signal” documentary: www.fullsignalmovie.com and/or contact its director Talal Jabari to arrange for a screening in your community.
  
• VIDEO: Interview (40 minutes) with Environmental Consultant Cindy Sage regarding Bioinitiative Report and non-ionizing radiation, including warnings about cell towers and how our standards of safe levels need to be changed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tZDor-_co0 or  http://videos.next-up.org/BioInitiative/InterviewCindySage/012008.html

Are there studies finding adverse health effects, including cancer, in those living near cell towers (mobile phone base stations) compared/in contrast to those living further away?   Yes!  In contrast, most of the studies examining base station exposure on humans in laboratory settings were SHORT-TERM (not realistic) exposure and did not yield the same results.  Here are some of these studies, as well as articles about health concerns from cell tower radiation exposure:

• New study: An NIH study of cell phones and the brain showed definite effects on the brain and nervous system from cell phone use. The lead researcher, Nora D. Volkow, said “I confess that after the findings I changed my behavior”. She now uses it on speakerphone or earphone. She says “We have a responsibility to investigate whether there are or there are not long lasting consequences from repeated stimulation after five or ten years of cell phone exposure. Watch the ABC World News report on Feb 22, 2011: http://abcnews.go.com/watch/world-news-with-diane-sawyer/SH5585921/VD55113679/world-news-222-new-zealand-earthquake-the-search-for-survivors. The cell phone story is at 14 minutes 25 seconds. You can click to it on the progress bar by going to 14:25.  Published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), “Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism,” 2011; 305(8): pages 808-813: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/305/8/808.abstract

• New study: Important review of the biological effects for those living near antennas: “Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays,” by Blake B. Levitt and Henry Lai, published in Environmental Reviews, a journal of the Canadian National Research Council. Received 30 April 2010. Accepted 6 August 2010. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at er.nrc.ca on 5 November 2010:: http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Blake_Levit-Henry_Lai.pdf

• New study finds “an increased prevalence of adverse neurobehavioral symptoms or cancer in populations living at distances less than 500 (1500 feet) meters from base stations in 80% of the available studies,” by Khurana et al. (2010), “Epidemiological Evidence for a Health Risk from Mobile Phone Base Stations”: http://www.brain-surgery.us/Khurana_et_al_IJOEH-Base_Station_RV.pdf
• New peer-reviewed study finds adverse health symptoms increase for those living closer to cell tower, and current exposure limits do not provide adequate protection, by Horst Eger and Manfred Jahn (Feb 2010):
  • English-language version: https://sites.google.com/site/nocelltowerinourneighborhood/home/horst-eger-manfred-jahn-study-feb-2010 (translation to English by Katharina Gustavs)
    
• Very new study finds that the the longer these rats were exposed to cell phone radiation, the shorter their lives; this study funded by the telecom industry has disturbing implications, by Bartsch, Küpper, Scheurlen, et.al, Neuro Endocrinol Lett., August 2010: http://www.emf-portal.org/viewer.php?l=e&aid=18588   (Thanks to Dr. Horst Eger for alerting us to this study.)
• 10 out of 14 peer reviewed studies show health effects from wireless base stations (as of end of 2007): http://www.mast-victims.org/resources/docs/10%20out%20of%2014%20peer-reviewed%20studies%20on%20base%20stations.pdf.
• Another summary of research findings: http://www.chronicexposure.org/basestations.html
• Powerwatch UK also has a helpful list of studies: http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp
• More studies can be found on this website: http://www.emf-portal.org/
  
• Nalia, Germany, study finds increased cancer risks within 400m (1200 ft) of mobile phone masts:“The Influence of Being Physically Near to a Cell Phone Transmission Mast on the Incidence of Cancer,” by Horst Eger, et al, published in Umwelt·Medizin·Gesellschaft, April 17, 2004:   http://www.vws.org/documents/11GermanreportInfluencemastcancer.pdf and summary: http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20041118_naila.asp.
  
• Germany, study finds adverse health symptoms for people living 500m (1500 ft) within cell phone towers: “Mobile phone base stations and adverse health effects: phase 1 of a population-based, cross-sectional study in Germany,” by Blettner M, et al, published in Occup Environ Med, Feb. 2009: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19017702?log$=activity
• Austria, Study shows health effects from living near cell phone base stations: “Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems, and cognitive performance in subjects living near mobile phone base stations” by Hutter HP, et al, published in Occup Environ Med, May 2006: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16621850
• France, Study documenting adverse health effects for those living near mobile base stations (cell towers) recommends stations should not be less than 300 meters (900 feet) away from populations: http://www.next-up.org/pdf/RogerSantiniStudyHeealthPeopleLivingMobilePhoneBaseStations2002.pdf
• Israel, Study finds more cancers among population living within 350m of cell phone transmitter station: “Increased incidence of cancer near a cell-phone transmitter station,” by Ronni Wolf, MD and Danny Wolf, MD, International Journal of Cancer Prevention, April 2004: http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20050207_israel.pdf
• Egypt, Study reveals health effects from living around mobile phone base stations: “Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile phone base stations,” by Abdel-Rassoul G, et al, published in Neurotoxicology, Mar. 2007: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16962663 and summary also here: http://www.canceractive.com/cancer-active-page-link.aspx?n=1471&Title=Living%20near%20mobile%20phone%20base%20stations%20-%20research%20worries

There are a host of other studies, reports, and conferences documenting the harmful effects of cell tower radiation. 

• New: All-star panel of EMF and environmental health experts discuss harmful effects of RF radiation at Commonweal in San Francisco, CA, November 18, 2010.  Read more and watch video here: http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/cc-video/
  
• Austria, Adverse health effects and cell phone base stations: http://expelcelltowers.org/download/CellTowerSitingHealthIssue.pdf
• Dutch study finds 3G cell phone towers cause health problems: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3157676.stm
• Health effects associated with mobile base stations: http://www.mapcruzin.com/radiofrequency/cherry/neil_cherry1.htm
• Cell tower removed by phone company after residents die of cancer: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23407354-orange-to-remove-mobile-mast-from-tower-of-doom-where-cancer-rate-has-soared.do
• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has unanimously concluded that power-frequency magnetic fields are possible human carcinogens. This finding, announced on June 27 (2001) in Lyon, France, is based on the consistent association between childhood leukemia
  and residential exposure to extremely-low-frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF EMFs): http://www.microwavenews.com/news/backissues/j-a01issue.pdf
• Lists of studies on RF radiation health effects on humans, biology, animals and plants: http://www.livingplanet.be/emrlinks.htm
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Dept. concerned over potential adverse cell tower radiation effects on wildlife populations: http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/manville_wildlife_towers.pdf
• Cell phone towers and its adverse effects on wildlife: http://www.wifiinschools.org.uk/resources/Balmori+2009.pdf and http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/lebm_balmori.pdf and http://www.emrpolicy.org/litigation/case_law/beebe_hill/balmori_amphibian.pdf
• Firefighters report adverse health effects from wireless towers on their stations; International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, pass moratorium on installing cell towers above fire stations: http://www.labornet.org/news/0904/celltower.htm and http://www.iaff.org/hs/Resi/CellTowerFinal.htm
• Communication Workers of America also concerned about health effects from RF radiation exposure: http://www.cwa-union.org/pages/Microwave_and_Radio_Frequency_Radiation
• Opposing cell towers near or in schools due to harmful RF exposure, May 22, 2009 letter to Los Angeles Unified School District from Dr. Martin Blank of Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons: http://www.cloutnow.org/lausdpdf/ColumbiaUniversity.pdf
• Threat of harmful effects on human health and public safety from proposed Beebe Cell Tower: statement to Connecticut Siting Council at Oct. 12, 2006 public hearing from EMR Policy Institute, includes radiation exposure levels from site, and studies on health effects of low-intensity RF radiation: http://www.emrpolicy.org/litigation/case_law/docs/health_statement.pdf
  
• Nov. 2009, international scientists and medical doctors issue Porto Alegre Resolution addressing low-level RF radiation exposure effects and including recommendations about tower siting: http://www.icems.eu/docs/resolutions/Porto_Alegre_Resolution.pdf
• Other doctor initiatives: http://www.chronicexposure.org/doctorinitiative.html
  
• Cellular Towers: A Medical Issue by Blake Levitt: http://www.wave-guide.org/archives/waveguide_3/medical-issue.html
• The largest biological experiment ever by Arthur Firstenberg, from the March 2007 Idaho Observer: http://proliberty.com/observer/20070307.htm
• Health Effects from Cell Phone Tower Radiation by Karen J. Rogers: http://www.mountshastaecology.org/Archive/Health_Effects_from_Cell_Phone_Tower_Radiation.html
• The Radiation Poisoning of America by Amy Worthington: http://www.next-up.org/pdf/AmyWorthingtonTheRadiationPoisoningOfAmerica17112007.pdf
• Cell Towers: Wireless Convenience or Environmental Hazard (includes studies about cell tower radiation and biological effects): http://www.emrpolicy.org/resources/books_videos/cell_towers_levitt.pdf
• Alaska Supreme Court case reveals problems with FCC RF radiation safety standard: http://www.cwa-union.org/news/entry/radio_frequency_radiation
• Article on mobile phone towers and radiation: how dangerous are they?  Author Eileen O’Connor cites various studies proving health and cancer risks for those living near towers: http://www.canceractive.com/cancer-active-page-link.aspx?n=970
• Breast Cancer Fund, on the health effects of Non-Ionizing Radiation: http://www.breastcancerfund.org/clear-science/chemicals-glossary/nonionizing-radiation.html and write to the FCC to update their standards: https://secure3.convio.net/bcf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=158
  
• EM-Radiation Research Trust, United Kingdom: http://www.radiationresearch.org/pdfs/20061101_base_stations_health_concerns.pdf
• San Francisco Medical Association Journal, “Microwave And Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure: A Growing Environmental Health Crisis?” by Cindy Sage, about RF radiation exposure in our environment, including cell towers: http://www.sfms.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=1770&TEMPLATE=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&SECTION=Article_Archives.
• Pediatrics Journal, American Academy of Pediatrics: Study reveals children have higher sensitivity and absorption of radiation from electromagnetic and radio frequency fields: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/116/2/e303
• Latest studies on EMF and health, “Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Special Issue,” Pathophysiology (Journal of the International Society of Physiology), August 2009, Vol. 16, Issue 2-3, Pages 67-250, edited by Martin Blank: http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/patphy/issues/contents?issue_key=S0928-4680%2809%29X0003-9
• Eileen O’Connor’s Breast Cancer Story: http://www.canceractive.com/page.php?n=1557
• Dirty Electricity: Electrification and the Diseases of Civilization – New Book by Sam Milham, MD, MP: http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/sam-milham/

What does the telecom industry know about low-level RF radiation and its health effects?  What are they not telling us?

• Industry bias and cover-ups revealed in this enlightening investigative report, Warning: Your Cell Phone May Be Hazardous to Your Health by Christopher Ketcham, GQ Magazine, February 2010: http://www.gq.com/cars-gear/gear-and-gadgets/201002/warning-cell-phone-radiation
• Industry bias also shows up in cell phone studies: http://www.physorg.com/news174810947.html
• Microwave News investigates and exposes industry bias: http://www.microwavenews.com/docs/mwn.7-06.RR.pdf
  
• Long-term industry suppression and denial regarding research showing harmful effects of cell phone radiation.  Read the illuminating Wake-up Call investigative report and cover story by Rob Harrill, Univ. of Washington Alumni Magazine, March 2005: http://www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/march05/wakeupcall01.html
• T-Mobile knew since 2000 about adverse health effects from cell phones and wireless base stations: http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/phone_cancer_report_buried.htm
• T-Mobile & Ecologic Institute Germany study finds adverse health effects from cell phone and base stations: http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/ecologsum.php
• Swisscom Telecom company patent reveals dangers of wireless networks on DNA and health (thanks to Drs. Horst Eger and Dr. Manfred Jahn for referencing this patent in their Feb. 2010 study, and providing us with a copy, scroll to the bottom of this page and see “Attachment”); you can also read the Patent here with additional details: World Intellectual Property Organization website: http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2004075583, and here, European Patent Office website:  http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=AU&NR=2003303939&KC=&FT=E.  View/download PDF Version of the patent document: http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20040902&DB=&locale=&CC=WO&NR=2004075583A1&KC=A1
• Dr. George Carlo talks about the wireless technology and its relationship to brain damage, cancer, and mental illness: http://www.commonground.ca/iss/0612185/cg185_cellphone.shtml

Problems with Wi-Fi (Wireless Internet in schools and in or near homes and schools):

• The Looming danger of Wi-Fi (on health), Sep. 14, 2010: http://infoexecutive.itincanada.ca/index.php?id=13165&cid=308
• Telecom company patent reveals dangers of wireless networks on DNA and health (thanks to Drs. Horst Eger and Dr. Manfred Jahn for referencing this patent in their Feb. 2010 study, and providing us with a copy, scroll to the bottom of this page and see “Attachment”); you can also read the Patent here with additional details: World Intellectual Property Organization website: http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2004075583, and here, European Patent Office website:
  http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=AU&NR=2003303939&KC=&FT=E

Problems with Cell Phones: Why We Need Labels

• New Warning Label Legislation introduced: Oregon state Sen. Chip Shields introduced a bill that would require retailers to put warning labels on cellphones and packaging of wireless devices, advising consumers of possible risks associated with non-thermal radio frequency exposure.  Read Washington Post, “Oregon considers cellphone radiation label,” February 8, 2011, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2011/02/oregon_state_senator_chip_shie.html
• New Report: Based on the growing evidence from laboratories and epidemiologic studies, two leaders of the WHO Interphone study on cell phones have recently broken ranks and are now calling for such precautions to be taken broadly. They note the growing biological evidence that microwave radiation from phones has impacts and that epidemiologic studies find increased risks of brain cancer after a decade of heavy use. Professors Elisabeth Cardis and Siegal Sadetzki have urged that it is prudent to reduce exposure by simple means at this time, ranging from using speakerphones and headsets to reducing call time and children’s use of phones generally. “There are now more than 4 billion people, including children, using mobile phones,” they write. “Even a small risk at the individual level could eventually result in a considerable number of tumours and become an important public-health issue. Simple and low-cost measures, such as the use of text messages, hands-free kits and/or the loudspeaker mode of the phone could substantially reduce exposure to the brain from mobile phones. Therefore, until definitive scientific answers are available, the adoption of such precautions, particularly among young people, is advisable.”  See: “Indications of possible brain-tumour risk in mobile-phone studies: should we be concerned?” published in the Journal of Occupational  & Environmental Medicine, January 24, 2011; 68: pages 169-171: http://oem.bmj.com/content/68/3/169.extract?sid=173c57ec-acfa-41ca-9674-c4406b270c7e
• First major official public safety campaign against mobile phones for children launched in France: http://www.next-up.org/Newsoftheworld/Lyon.php#1  (thanks to Next-Up in France for this link)
• San Francisco approves SAR labels at point of sale: http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/telecom/wireless/im-buying-my-next-cell-phone-in-san-francisco
• Long-awaited World Health Organization INTERPHONE study “inconclusive” to some, while others point out cell phone usage data is outdated, and others say study results in the Appendix show cancer risk. Read, CNN, “Study fails to end debate on cancer, cell phone link,” May 14, 2010, http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-14/health/cell.phones.brain.tumor_1_interphone-study-cell-brain-tumors?_s=PM:HEALTH and Dr. Magda Havas, Ph.D., “Lessons from the Interphone Study,” May 10, 2010: http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/05/20/lessons-from-the-interphone-study/. For the Interphone Study, go here: http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2010/pdfs/pr200_E.pdf
• World Health Organization to finally publish findings: mobile phone use increases brain tumor risk: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mobile-phones/6420093/Long-term-use-of-mobile-phones-may-be-linked-to-cancer.html
• “Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern – Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone”: http://electromagnetichealth.org/pdf/Cellphones%20and%20BT-15%20Reasons-for-Concern-USA1s.pdf
• International Municipal Lawyer’s Association: http://imlablog.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/6local-governments-cell-phones-and-health

• 3G cell phone radiation more dangerous than GSM: http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/news.php?id=adlkofer
• Health advice given in other countries regarding wireless phones: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6416366/Mobile-phones-the-health-advice-given-in-other-counties.html
  
• Mobile phone use raises children’s risk of brain cancer

  Model estimate of the absorption of electromagnetic radiation from a cell phone in the brain
  

  Scientists Warn U.S. Congress: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080926011656.0kfws57m&show_article=1

• Cancer Institute Director Dr. Ronald Herberman warns of health effects: http://cellphones.procon.org/sourcefiles/Herberman_Testimony.pdf.  Read more info about Dr. Herberman and his recommendations here: http://www.mirm.pitt.edu/news/article.asp?qEmpID=333. 
• Respected Cleveland Clinic study shows cell phone use could damage sperm and fertility: http://www.renalandurologynews.com/cell-phone-use-could-damage-semen/article/157370/
  
• New: If anyone tells you the American Cancer Society says there are no ill effects from cell phones, then read how former American Cancer Society president Elmer Huerta advocates hands-free cell phone use and not allowing children under the age of 10 to use them: http://blogs.elcomercio.pe/cuidatusalud/2008/07/la-salud-y-los-telefonos-celul.html.  In addition, this appeared in November 2009, in Spanish, about a WHO study that Dr. Huerta did: http://sofiabuenasvibras.blogspot.com/2009/11/contaminacion-electromagnetica-parte-ii.html; English translation by Google here, scroll down to “The cell phone and brain cancer,” Publication date 2009-11-09: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogsperu.com%2Fblog%2F16745%2F&ei=cVY7TJfhC4XEsAPx_PzZCg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=18&ved=0CJoBEO4BMBE&prev=%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Delmer%2Bhuerta%2Btelefono%2Bmovil%26num%3D100%26hl%3Den%26prmd%3Do.   Most recently, Dr. Huerta wrote on his blog, June 27, 2010, in major favor of the San Francisco cell phone SAR legislation, in Spanish: http://blogs.elcomercio.pe/cuidatusalud/2010/06/sabe-el-numero-sar-de-su-celul.html, and translated by Google into English: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.elcomercio.pe%2Fcuidatusalud%2F2010%2F06%2Fsabe-el-numero-sar-de-su-celul.html&ei=cVY7TJfhC4XEsAPx_PzZCg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC0Q7gEwAQ&prev=%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Delmer%2Bhuerta%2Btelefono%2Bmovil%26num%3D100%26hl%3Den%26prmd%3Do.  Dr. Huerta is currently the director of the Cancer Preventorium at Washington Cancer Institute, Washington Hospital Center in DC. He is also a Project Investigator at the National Cancer Institute. To read more about his background and why he’s so highly esteemed, go here: http://www.whcenter.org/body.cfm?id=556912, and here: http://crchd.cancer.gov/cnp/pi-huerta.html. More info about Dr. Huerta and his current work here: http://www.whcenter.org/body.cfm?id=556115.
• 2010 Study by Dr. Andrew A. Marino: Study finds cell phone signals detected by our bodies (EEG): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20634119
• 2009 Study by Dr. Andrew A. Marino:  Study shows where low-level EMF is detected in our brains: http://andrewamarino.com/PDFs/155-Synapse2009.pdf
• Health Effects from cell phone use: Terrific resource page from C-SPAN Video Library: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/288879-1

• Mobile phone use may cause long term brain damage

  

  Right: the brain of an exposed rat, where the black spots indicate albumin that leaked through the blood-brain-barrier. Left: the brain of a non-exposed rat, which shows no albumin leakage.

  Also go to our Home page, and scroll down to read the “Related Breaking News” articles in the text box for other health related stories.

• New – VIDEO: CBS 5 Investigates Smart Meter Complaints: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csvmw2frBws&feature=channel.  Also read our Wireless Smart Meter Concerns page to find out more info about this growing and serious problem.

• YouTube Video

  New – VIDEO – CBC excellent news report uncovering the truth about cell phones and their radiation, Sept. 26, 2010, “Cellphone safety: What aren’t they telling us?” : http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV_Shows/The_National/ID=1601162718
  

• New – VIDEO, April 28, 2010: Dr. Santosh Kasari, Director of Neuro-Oncology at the Moores Cancer Center at UC San Diego talks about studies showing increased risk of developing a brain tumor due to prolonged cell phone use: http://www.kusi.com/health/92332494.html and on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MENepGB3GCk
  
• VIDEO: Dr. Ronald Herberman, former director of the Pittsburgh Univ. Cancer Institute, interviewed by Larry King on May 17, 2010, on CNN, highlights: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMe3Jw862gw. For transcript of full interview, read here: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1005/17/lkl.01.html.  
• VIDEO: Recent U.S. Senate Hearing on cell phone radiation and request to NIH to support more funding for studies about adverse health effects: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/288879-1
• VIDEO: EON footage of U.S. Senate Hearings, Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/user/eon3#p/u/9/BresTu5-qs8, Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/user/eon3#p/u/8/hMkVndmhi4E, and part 3: http://www.youtube.com/user/eon3#p/u/7/esCrBbKOjl8
  
• VIDEO: Good Morning America news report in September 2009 says cell phone use safe: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/senate-committee-talks-potential-cell-phone-danger/story?id=8564740
• VIDEO: Good Morning America interview with Dr. Oz in November 2009 says new long-term use studies show cancer risks associated with cell phone use: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/cell-phones-brain-cancer-dr-oz-safety-tips/story?id=9090936
• VIDEO: Nov. 17, 2009: Dr. Oz show on cell phone radiation and brain cancer, includes interviews with experts Dr. Paul Moskowitz (professor at UC Berkeley) and Dr. Devra Davis (epidemiologist and professor at the Univ. of Pittsburgh and founder of the Environmental Health Trust), part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Uc8O2-KV5w  and part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cczwz1SE64c&NR=1   and part 3:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL1q1cEH-cg; for additional info read: http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/link-between-cell-phones-and-cancer
• VIDEO: New Zealand video about adverse health effects from cell towers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzeoaK_1ADU
• VIDEO: 60 Minutes (Australia) “Wake-up Call” TV news story on cell phones and cancer: http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/stories/liambartlett/797215/wake-up-call
• VIDEO: Lateline (Australia) news show on cell phones and cancer, part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoL17roOeo0&NR=1 and part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiZpdSTUe9U&feature=related
• VIDEO (Holland): 26 People Sick in Building with Cell Towers on Roof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy3rxaYfnOo&feature=related
• New: VIDEO: Wi-Fi in our schools health concerns (CBC Canada): http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV_Shows/The_National/ID=1587312590
• New: VIDEO: Wireless health dangers? What are they and what can we do about it?  Watch and learn about the latest science and health effects from wireless technologies, and why we should worry, care, and how we can take action. Public presentation by environmental health experts Dr. Magda Havas and Elizabeth Kelley on Sept. 2, 2010 at Temple Aliyah in Woodland Hills, CA. To contact Dr. Havas, go to her website at www.magdahavas.com, and to contact Ms. Kelley go to her website at www.icems.eu.
  

Increased RF exposure all around us:
so how much RF exposure are we getting in contrast to 10 years go?

 

0.6 V/m is the RF radiation exposure standard recommended in the BioInitiative Report.
Credits: Thanks to Next-Up for this graph.