The invisible Wi-Fi waves are wrecking your health without your knowledge.
Whether one is a netaddict or not, staying without internet connectivity for too long sure gets us nervous. It’s a modern nightmare. So every cafe, library and club in town lures you in with promises of free Wi-Fi, so you never have to stay away from the internet for too long. This very moment, as you read, you are being bombarded with these invisible. Have you ever wondered whether Wi-Fi has any impact on your health? A science experiment conducted by Danish schoolgirls showed that garden cress wouldn’t grow around a Wi-Fi router. If plants react this badly to Wifi, how well would the human body fare?
1 Wi-Fi can cause testicular DNA damage
A study published in 2016 in the Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy studied the effect of prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices on various organs of rats. The study revealed that although the waves didn’t have much impact on other organs, they did affect the testes of the rats. The researchers concluded that the testicles were more sensitive to radiofrequency radiation. Here are some ways in which technology is affecting your health.
2 Wi-Fi raises oxidative stress levels
Another 2016 study published in the same journal had more disconcerting news. Excessive electromagnetic exposure — like from Wi-Fi devices– causes elevated levels of reactive oxygen substances (ROS) and reduced antioxidant defence system in the body. These could lead to oxidative brain and liver damage in human beings. The study conducted on rats concluded that the brain seemed to be more sensitive to oxidative injury compared to the liver in the development of newborns.2
3 Wi-Fi can disrupt kidney development in foetus
In 2004, the journal Bioelectromagnetics conducted a study on Wi-Fi exposure and found that it could lead to delayed kidney development in newborn rats.
4 Wi-Fi affects sperm motility
A study conducted in Argentina and published in the journal Fertility and Sterility in 2012 showed that Wi-Fi had the potential to alter sperm motility. Sperm samples of 29 healthy men were taken. Half was placed under a laptop and the other half elsewhere. Around 25 percent of the sperm from the semen sample placed under the laptop was found to be damaged and immobile. Here are some other things that affect sperm quality.
5 Wi-Fi causes insomnia
Maybe your insomnia doesn’t stem from stress at work. The culprit could be your Wi-Fi router. In 2013, a study described the effects of 900 MHz unmodulated and 900 MHz modulated Hz waves on the brain of rats who were sleeping. Researchers found out that just one hour of exposure to radiation every day for one month caused rats to experience a delay before went into the REM stage or deep sleep. Many people are also turning off their routers at night for a good night’s sleep.
6 Wi-Fi could be responsible for causing cancer
Constant exposure to electromagnetic fields can also pose a cancer risk. The first study in 1979 reported that the children who died from cancer lived in homes that had a higher exposure to electromagnetic fields than the others. There could also be a possible link between higher breast cancer incidences electromagnetic fields.
Reference:
1 Akdag, M. Z., Dasdag, S., Canturk, F., Karabulut, D., Caner, Y., & Adalier, N. (2016). Does prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices induce DNA damage in various tissues of rats?. Journal of chemical neuroanatomy, 75, 116-122.
2 Çelik, Ö., Kahya, M. C., & Nazıroğlu, M. (2016). Oxidative stress of brain and liver is increased by Wi-Fi (2.45 GHz) exposure of rats during pregnancy and the development of newborns. Journal of chemical neuroanatomy, 75, 134-139.
3 Pyrpasopoulou, A., Kotoula, V., Cheva, A., Hytiroglou, P., Nikolakaki, E., Magras, I. N., … & Karkavelas, G. (2004). Bone morphogenetic protein expression in newborn rat kidneys after prenatal exposure to radiofrequency radiation. Bioelectromagnetics, 25(3), 216-227.
4 Doré, J. F., & Chignol, M. C. (2012). Laptop computers with Wi-Fi decrease human sperm motility and increase sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertility and sterility, 97(4), e12.
5 Mohammed, H. S., Fahmy, H. M., Radwan, N. M., & Elsayed, A. A. (2013). Non-thermal continuous and modulated electromagnetic radiation fields effects on sleep EEG of rats. Journal of Advanced Research, 4(2), 181–187. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2012.05.005
6 Caplan, L. S., Schoenfeld, E. R., O’Leary, E. S., & Leske, M. C. (2000). Breast cancer and electromagnetic fields—a review. Annals of Epidemiology, 10(1), 31-44.
Living off grid, in the woods, away from all tech not such a loony idea after all
Analysis A study of 913 pregnant women in the San Francisco Bay Area, California, found those exposed to high levels of magnetic field (MF) non-ionizing radiation had a 2.72x higher risk of miscarriage than those exposed to low MF levels.
The Kaiser Permanente study, “Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A Prospective Cohort Study,” was published this month in the journal Scientific Reports.
The authors, Kaiser researchers De-Kun Li, Hong Chen, Jeannette R. Ferber, Roxana Odouli, and Charles Quesenberry, say their findings add to the evidence that “MF non-ionizing radiation could have adverse biological impacts on human health.”
Mobile phones and Wi-Fi transmitters fire out radio-frequency MF radiation, but are not the only sources of such emissions; as such the study should not be construed as a specific indictment of those devices. Indeed, rather worry solely about smartphones or wireless networks peppering you with radiation, being surrounded by everyday electrical things – from fridges and freezers to hairdryers and clothes irons – may be more harmful than you may think. Possibly.
“In this study, we found an almost three-fold increased risk of miscarriage if a pregnant woman was exposed to higher MF levels compared to women with lower MF exposure,” the study says. “The association was independent of any specific MF exposure sources or locations, thus removing the concern that other factors connected to the sources of the exposure might account for the observed associations.”
Threshold
Study participants were classified in four MF exposure groups – <2.5mG; 2.5–3.6mG; 3.7–6.2mG; and ≥6.3mG – based on 24 hours of measurements with an EMDEX Lite meter as a representation of daily exposure. The researchers did not find the miscarriage risk increased with doses above 2.5mG, leading them to theorize that 2.5mG represents a threshold level for health effects.
In an email to The Register, Dr De-Kun Li, senior research scientist at the research division of Kaiser Permanente Northern California, said: “Please keep in mind that our study was not specifically designed to study radio-frequency magnetic fields, which are more applicable to cell phones and Wi-Fi. Also, we are at an early stage in understanding the health effects of magnetic fields; this is not a settled issue.”
Li said past studies of magnetic fields suffered from poor methods of measurement.
“The controversy over health effects from electromagnetic fields is, to a large extent, a product of earlier studies that did not find many associations between EMF and health risk,” he said. “Looking back, the main reason for the ‘negative findings’ is that those studies were not able to actually measure EMF exposure. When one can’t measure an exposure (e.g., EMF), the ‘study finding,’ by definition, won’t be able to find any association, thus negative findings. This applies to any study, not just those related to EMF. (For example, if one can’t measure the amount of calorie intake, one would conclude that calorie intake has nothing to do with being overweight.)”
Li said his group’s study supports the previously reported association between exposure to high MF levels in pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage, which has been suggested in at least seven other studies.
As Li observed, there is no scientific consensus that MF exposure harms human health. According to the National Cancer Institute, “[A]lthough many studies have examined the potential health effects of non-ionizing radiation from radar, microwave ovens, cell phones, and other sources, there is currently no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk.”
The Kaiser researchers contend that the focus on studying the effect of MF radiation on cancer has made a more general focus on other health effects more difficult because the length of time required before cancer develops has led to inconclusive studies and has supported the impression that MF is entirely safe.
Emf Exposure And Autism, Emf Exposure And Pregnancy, Emf Exposure From Wifi, Emf Exposure Guidelines, Emf Exposure Health Effects, Emf Exposure Limit Is Measured In, Emf Exposure Regulations, Emf Exposure Risks, Emf Exposure Side Effects, Emf Exposure Treatment, Emf Exposure Wifi, Emf Exposure Wiki, Emf Health Canada, Emf Ionizing Radiation, Emf Occupational Exposure Limits, Emf Radiation Cell Phones, Emf Radiation Effects On Human Body, Emf Radiation In Fitbit, Emf Radiation In Schools, Emf Radiation India, Emf Radiation Ipad, Emf Radiation Sources, Emf Radiation Tanning Beds, Emf Radiation Testing, Emf Radiation Who, Emf Standards Of Exposure, Emf/ Electromagnetic Radiation Detector, Exposure To Emf, Exposure To Emf Symptoms, Occupational Emf Exposure
The invisible Wi-Fi waves are wrecking your health without your knowledge.
Whether one is a netaddict or not, staying without internet connectivity for too long sure gets us nervous. It’s a modern nightmare. So every cafe, library and club in town lures you in with promises of free Wi-Fi, so you never have to stay away from the internet for too long. This very moment, as you read, you are being bombarded with these invisible. Have you ever wondered whether Wi-Fi has any impact on your health? A science experiment conducted by Danish schoolgirls showed that garden cress wouldn’t grow around a Wi-Fi router. If plants react this badly to Wifi, how well would the human body fare?
1 Wi-Fi can cause testicular DNA damage
A study published in 2016 in the Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy studied the effect of prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices on various organs of rats. The study revealed that although the waves didn’t have much impact on other organs, they did affect the testes of the rats. The researchers concluded that the testicles were more sensitive to radiofrequency radiation. Here are some ways in which technology is affecting your health.
2 Wi-Fi raises oxidative stress levels
Another 2016 study published in the same journal had more disconcerting news. Excessive electromagnetic exposure — like from Wi-Fi devices– causes elevated levels of reactive oxygen substances (ROS) and reduced antioxidant defence system in the body. These could lead to oxidative brain and liver damage in human beings. The study conducted on rats concluded that the brain seemed to be more sensitive to oxidative injury compared to the liver in the development of newborns.2
3 Wi-Fi can disrupt kidney development in fetus
In 2004, the journal Bioelectromagnetics conducted a study on Wi-Fi exposure and found that it could lead to delayed kidney development in newborn rats.
4 Wi-Fi affects sperm motility
A study conducted in Argentina and published in the journal Fertility and Sterility in 2012 showed that Wi-Fi had the potential to alter sperm motility. Sperm samples of 29 healthy men were taken. Half was placed under a laptop and the other half elsewhere. Around 25 percent of the sperm from the semen sample placed under the laptop was found to be damaged and immobile. Here are some other things that affect sperm quality.
5 Wi-Fi causes insomnia
Maybe your insomnia doesn’t stem from stress at work. The culprit could be your Wi-Fi router. In 2013, a study described the effects of 900 MHz unmodulated and 900 MHz modulated Hz waves on the brain of rats who were sleeping. Researchers found out that just one hour of exposure to radiation every day for one month caused rats to experience a delay before went into the REM stage or deep sleep. Many people are also turning off their routers at night for a good night’s sleep.
6 Wi-Fi could be responsible for causing cancer
Constant exposure to electromagnetic fields can also pose a cancer risk. The first study in 1979 reported that the children who died from cancer lived in homes that had a higher exposure to electromagnetic fields than the others. There could also be a possible link between higher breast cancer incidences electromagnetic fields.
Reference:
1 Akdag, M. Z., Dasdag, S., Canturk, F., Karabulut, D., Caner, Y., & Adalier, N. (2016). Does prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices induce DNA damage in various tissues of rats?. Journal of chemical neuroanatomy, 75, 116-122.
2 Çelik, Ö., Kahya, M. C., & Nazıroğlu, M. (2016). Oxidative stress of brain and liver is increased by Wi-Fi (2.45 GHz) exposure of rats during pregnancy and the development of newborns. Journal of chemical neuroanatomy, 75, 134-139.
3 Pyrpasopoulou, A., Kotoula, V., Cheva, A., Hytiroglou, P., Nikolakaki, E., Magras, I. N., … & Karkavelas, G. (2004). Bone morphogenetic protein expression in newborn rat kidneys after prenatal exposure to radiofrequency radiation. Bioelectromagnetics, 25(3), 216-227.
4 Doré, J. F., & Chignol, M. C. (2012). Laptop computers with Wi-Fi decrease human sperm motility and increase sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertility and sterility, 97(4), e12.
5 Mohammed, H. S., Fahmy, H. M., Radwan, N. M., & Elsayed, A. A. (2013). Non-thermal continuous and modulated electromagnetic radiation fields effects on sleep EEG of rats. Journal of Advanced Research, 4(2), 181–187. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2012.05.005
6 Caplan, L. S., Schoenfeld, E. R., O’Leary, E. S., & Leske, M. C. (2000). Breast cancer and electromagnetic fields—a review. Annals of Epidemiology, 10(1), 31-44.
A Complimentary Broadband And Wifi Health Check, Broadband And Wifi Health Check, Health Canada Wifi, Health Effects Of Wifi, Health Wifi Schools, Talktalk Broadband And Wifi Health Check, What Is The Wifi For Metro Health, Wi Fi Damages Health, Wi-fi Are There Any Health Risks, Wi-fi Health Facts, Wifi Affecting Health, Wifi Danger To Health, Wifi Health, Wifi Health Check, Wifi Health Concerns, Wifi Health Issues, Wifi Health Risks, Wifi Scale & Health Tracker, Wifi Signal Health
After numerous studies over two decades, there is no convincing evidence that cellphone use increases the risk of cancer. The consensus within the medical profession is that the health effects of regular cell phone use are quite small, if they exist at all. Some studies even show health benefits.
95% of Americans own a cell phone. Children now get their first cell phone around age 10, and most millennials keep their phones on or near them most of the day, even when they sleep.
So it would seem relevant to know whether or not it could be dangerous. But after years of study, the International Agency for Research on Cancer at the World Health Organization only classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as ‘possibly’ carcinogenic. Conspiracy theorists got more excited about that than the medical community.
In one study that followed more than 420,000 cellphone users over a 20-year period, researchers found no evidence of a link between cellphones and brain tumors, the obvious cancer of concern. Other studies, especially from Oxford and the Swiss Public Health Institute have also found no correlation.
Cellphones send and receive radio wave signals to and from cellphone towers. These signals are a form of electromagnetic radiation called radiofrequency (RF) energy, like that generated by TV and radio transmitters. When a phone sends signals to a tower, the RF energy goes from the phone’s antenna out in all directions, including into the head and body of the person using the phone.
Cellphones also emit RF energy when using Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, but at lower levels.
Unlike ionizing radiation like gamma rays, neutrons and alpha particles, RF does not have enough energy to split chemical bonds, such as those in compounds like DNA in our cells, which can cause cancer at really high doses.
Some think that, while RF can’t split bonds, it might heat up cells enough to cause damage. But our bodies are really good at heat regulation so you’d have to get an awful lot of dose to do anything, like put your head in a microwave oven, and there is no evidence this happens with cell phones.
(This type of RF heating is quite different from the hot phones that recently spontaneously began burning and were recalled. That was from the batteries overheating)
With years of study and billions of people using cell phones, the fact that we have no real evidence that cellphone use causes cancer means there is little need to worry about it. It’s one of those phantom worries, like low levels of radiation, that is so far below the noise of everyday risks that it’s foolish to spend any effort or money trying to guard against it. Especially since you’ll end up not spending that effort and money addressing real risks – like air pollution, eating too many carbs or driving while texting.
If holding the cell phone to your head is the real vector, then just put it on speaker or facetime, or use the hands-free option in your car. I always put my calls on speaker anyway, not for this reason, but because my old arms get tired.
Or you could just text instead…but not while driving.
Dr. James Conca is an expert on energy, nuclear and dirty bombs, a planetary geologist, and a professional speaker. Follow him on Twitter @jimconca and see his book at Amazon.com
Some people are electrically sensitive, that is they are aware of the presence of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), but are not adversely affected by them. Other people may or may not be aware of the presence of EMFs, but can become seriously ill in their presence. These people we refer to as electrically hypersensitive (EHS). People who have developed EHS have a physiological disorder, characterized by neurological and idiopathic reactions, that noticeably appear or intensify near sources of EMFs such as electrical appliances, especially VDUs (computer monitors), power lines, fluorescent lights, mobile phones, cordless phones, wireless computers (wLANs), mobile phone base stations, etc.
Some people are electrically sensitive, that is they are aware of the presence of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), but are not adversely affected by them. Other people may or may not be aware of the presence of EMFs, but can become seriously ill in their presence. These people we refer to as electrically hypersensitive (EHS). People who have developed EHS have a physiological disorder, characterized by neurological and idiopathic reactions, that noticeably appear or intensify near sources of EMFs such as electrical appliances, especially VDUs (computer monitors), power lines, fluorescent lights, mobile phones, cordless phones, wireless computers (wLANs), mobile phone base stations, etc.
Being EHS means experiencing recurring feelings of stress or illness when near an EMF source. Any noticeable, recurring ill health that is triggered by an electromagnetic field, and that diminishes or disappears away from the EMF source, constitutes a case of electrical hypersensitivity. While symptoms may diminish quickly after the exposure is reduced, it can take several days, weeks or occasionally months if the person has become severely sensitised, for the effects to disappear.
Electricity Sensitive, Electricity Sensitive Load, Power Consumption Sensitive, Power Wash Sensitive, Power Wash Sensitive Baby, Power Wash Sensitive Baby отзывы, Power Wash Sensitive Hauch, Power Wash Sensitive отзывы, Sensitive Hearing Electricity, Sensitive Power Razor, Sensitive To Electricity, Sensitive To Electricity And Electromagnetic Fields, Sensitive To Static Electricity, Static Electricity Sensitive Devices
New research reveals that pregnant women who are exposed to non-ionizing radiation from magnetic fields have a significantly higher miscarriage rate.
Non-ionizing radiation from magnetic fields is generated when common household electric devices, including electric appliances including microwave ovens, GPS systems, cell phones, television stations, baby monitors, cordless phones, garage-door openers, power lines, transformers and wireless devices, are in use.
There are two types of radiation: ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation, such as gamma rays and x-rays, carry sufficient energy to break bonds between molecules and ionize atoms. Non-ionizing radiation, on the other hand, does not have enough energy to break bonds and ionize atoms. Examples of non-ionizing radiation include extremely low frequency electromagnetic radiation, including the visible spectrum, and radio waves.
Though the dangers of being exposed to ionizing radiation are well known and include radiation sickness, cancer and genetic damage, not much is known about the health hazards of non-ionizing radiation exposure.
“Few studies have been able to accurately measure exposure to magnetic field non-ionizing radiation,” said Dr. De-Kun Li, the principal investigator of the Kaiser Permanente study published Wednesday in the Scientific Reports journal. “In addition, due to the current lack of research on this subject, we don’t know the biological threshold beyond which problems may develop, and we also don’t yet understand the possible mechanisms for increased risks.”
Pregnant women over the age 18 were asked to wear a small magnetic-field monitoring device for 24 hours. The participants were also asked to record their activities during the day and were interviewed in person by investigators to eliminate the possibility of confounding factors that could have affected the study’s results.
Researchers also controlled for other factors that increase the risk of miscarriage, including nausea/vomiting, a history of miscarriage, alcohol use, caffeine intake and maternal fever and infections.
Magnetic field measurements and pregnancy outcomes were collected for 913 women, all of whom are members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California.
The findings revealed that 10.4 percent of the women who were exposed to the lowest measured level of magnetic field non-ionizing radiation experienced miscarriage, while 24.2 percent of women with higher measured exposure levels had miscarriages, which is almost three times higher. According to Li, the rate of miscarriage in the general population is usually between 10 and 15 percent.
“This study provides evidence from a human population that magnetic field non-ionizing radiation could have adverse biological impacts on human health,” Li said.
The study has its limitations: researchers studied miscarriages that occurred in a short time frame instead of ones that took place years later as a result of other health issues like cancer and autoimmune diseases, and participants did not carry the measuring device throughout the duration of their pregnancies. But, Li said, “We hope that the finding from this study will stimulate much-needed additional studies into the potential environmental hazards to human health, including the health of pregnant women.”
Health Canada Wireless Device Safety, Health Effects Of Wireless Devices, Health Risks Of Wireless Devices, Wireless Devices And Health, Wireless Devices And Health Concerns, Wireless Devices Bad For Health, Wireless Devices Health Concerns, Wireless Devices Health Effects, Wireless Electronic Devices And Health, Wireless Electronic Devices And Health Summary, Wireless Health Devices, Wireless Health Monitoring Devices
Wireless Device Health Risk, Wireless Devices And Health, Wireless Devices And Health Concerns, Wireless Devices Health Effects, Wireless Devices In Healthcare Settings, Wireless Electronic Devices And Health, Wireless Electronic Devices And Health Summary
Davis explains that we know MW radiation effects do not follow the doses-effects response model; increasing the dose does not mean an increase response or effect follows. She thinks effects have more to do with the characteristics of the signal, which is erratic, and with chronic exposure. In her view, cell phone radiation disrupts “resonance” and “interferes” with body functions, such as DNA repair. Research needs to consider this if we are to have answers, she says. We know that MW radiation disrupts/relaxes the brain-blood barrier, which plays a crucial role in protecting our brains from substances that are in the blood and can be damaging or toxic. The brain-blood barrier develops as we grow. If we introduce a blue dye in the blood of an animal, its entire body will go blue but its brain will remain pink. Cell phone radiation relaxes this barrier reason why is used now to enhance the uptake of drugs into the brain, for instance to treat a brain tumor with medications. We also know that cell phone radiation interferes with DNA repair. And, we know that it penetrates further into tissue that is not protected by bone or density -breasts, chest, gonads, which are more vulnerable to its effects. (11)
Davis believes that current regulations are lax. The standard to estimate radiation exposure -the “standard anthropomorphic male” or SAM is not representative of the population exposed to cell phone radiation. SAM was taken from the top 10% of military recruits in 1989 -a six-foot-three 220 pounds male with an 11-pound head. Most people in the world do not have SAM’s head and we know that radiation goes more deeply into smaller heads than larger ones, and we know that today, three out of every four 12-year-olds, and half of all ten-year-olds, have a cell phone. It is too risky to wait for more science when we already know enough to be concerned. We should change regulations to make it safer for cell phone users and we should inform people about the risks and what they can do to be safe. (5)
There is also a strong concern about pregnant women and their babies because of what is known already about animal studies. It may be legal for companies to show advertisements of phones being used in ways that are not recommended, Davis says, but it is not ethical. Selling phones to people, then telling them in fine print to not use them next to the body while in all advertisements they are shown using cell phones exactly next to the body, it is a serious disconnect, and people need to be aware of this. Some countries around the world, including France, have banned companies from advertising cell phones to children due to the possible risks. (10)
Cordless phones are an issue too; they are dangerous but most of us are unaware. The base station of cordless phones radiates all the time; when we hold the handset to our head we get a huge dose. About a third of our exposure to MW radiation comes from cordless phones. Davis recommends we do not use cordless phones, and if we do avoid having the base station close to our bed or in our bedroom. (6)
Davis understands that cell phones are not going away. Her point is about increasing safety for people using cell phones and for companies to consider the safety of users when they make them. Experimental studies show that good nutrition like “literally exposing animals or cells to the natural hormone melatonin or vitamins A, E, or C before you expose them to RF radiation—may help repair damage.” Good cell phone practices help. They include using a speaker-phone or a headset with the phone held a hand’s distance away, never keeping a phone turned on next to our body, or a wireless headset on in our ear or pocket, without turning off the phone. Also, we should use our phones only when signal quality is good, weaker signals boost MW radiation. And, we should text rather than talk on the phone, and teach our children to do the same. Tweens and teens, and the rest of us, should never sleep with cell phones on under our pillow or next to our beds. Pregnant women should keep their cell phones away from their abdomen; and, new mothers should protect babies from their phones. Men should keep their cell phones off when in their pockets; radiation affects their sperm quantity and quality. We should use a landline at home and avoid cordless phones too. We also need to do some political work and require warning labels about safety in using cell phones be applied to cell phones directly, not in manuals where nobody reads them. Also, cell phones should always include earpieces and speakerphones. And, major revisions of safety standards should be conducted, and specific recommendations should be made about lowering direct radiation to the head. Furthermore, a national survey of cell phone radiation exposure is needed, as well as monitoring of heavy cell phone users by creating access to cell phone billing records to qualified researchers, increasing the power of studies made. (5)
In 2015, Dr. Martin Blank (Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University) presented a letter signed by a scientists concerned with electromagnetic radiation and their effects on our health, particularly their impact on our DNA. Blank said:
“We are really all part of a large biological experiment, without our informed consent. To protect our children, ourselves, and our ecosystem, we must reduce exposure by establishing more protective guidelines. And so, today, scientists from around the world are submitting an Appeal to the United Nations, its member states and the World Health Organization, to provide leadership in dealing with this emerging public health crisis”. (12)
Cell phones may be here to stay; but, we can demand that they are safe. We, our children and grandchildren, deserve to be protected from the effects of cell phone radiation. We should challenge the callous disregard cell phone makers have shown for our health and well being. We know enough to make some needed changes, reducing exposure, and implementing appropriate safety guidelines. We know that corporations have vested interest and procrastinate addressing this issue, creating doubt about findings so things continue as they are. This has happened before with tobacco, asbestos, insecticides and so on. We are challenging a more than a trillion dollar global industry. Change never happened without struggle. To act we need to be informed, please be informed.
5. The truth about cell phone radiation, what the industry has done to hide it, and how to protect your family. Devra Davis, 2010. Dutton, Penguin Group, USA.
GREAT BARRINGTON — There was a water meter fight in Housatonic last week.
A plan already underway by the Housatonic Water Works Co. to replace analog water meters with a new wireless model has customers worried about bursts of radiation from its transmitter, which sends water use data to the company using cellular networks.
The private water company and meter manufacturer say the level of radiation is less than that emitted by a text message, and is equivalent to “a brief cell phone call.” But ratepayers are still wary.
“You’re trying to force these meters on people when in fact they’re dangerous,” said Christopher Rowland, a resident, speaking to James Mercer, the water company’s co-owner and treasurer.
The new models, made by Badger Meter, boost accuracy and last 20 to 25 years, said Badger representatives and Mercer, all speaking at an informational meeting Thursday at the Unitarian Universalist Meeting of South Berkshire in Housatonic.
Mercer said his company, which provides water to Housatonic and some surrounding homes, has already installed the new meters for 537 out of 850 customers, and that the state Department of Environmental Protection, which oversees the company’s water operation at Long Pond, required the replacements for accuracy in identifying unaccounted-for water.
“Now we can tell the flow per day,” Mercer said.
Last year the state Department of Public Utilities approved the company’s phased-in 30.3 percent rate hike over two years for system upgrades like the new meters and new mains.
Mercer told residents that the new meters will save the company and customers time and money, since water use can be read remotely, without the need for a visit by a company technician.
The new meters can also detect leaks, and customers will be notified by text or email, he said.
But around 10 customers said they were worried about electromagnetic and radio frequency emissions from a twice-per-day transmission of data.
Radiation questions and confusion all around
“I don’t want to be a guinea pig,” said Corinne Rowland.
“It’s not a smart meter,” said Badger representative Scott Fitzgerald, of the general term for wireless meters that have raised health concerns nationwide. “It doesn’t have radio frequency waves. It’s less [radiation] than a text message of info.”
Radio frequency wave devices will, however, be installed in one area of town that has poor cellular service, Mercer said, adding that the water departments of Great Barrington, Lee and Stockbridge use this type of meter.
But the product description for the Badger E-Series Ultrasonic Plus meters says it does use radio frequency.
Badger representatives did not respond to requests for clarification. Mercer said they were still gathering information about radiation levels for him to pass to customers.
To address concerns about radio frequency waves, a Badger marketing specialist told Mercer in a letter he passed out at the meeting that the meter’s ORION Cellular endpoint transmitter emits radio frequency signals “well below the levels most people come into contact with on a typical day in their home” from TV sets, wireless and cellular phones.
And distance also decreases exposure, the letter said, especially since the transmitter is typically in the basement or outside.
Badger representative Tom Watts said he isn’t a physician or a scientist, and so couldn’t answer health-related questions. He said the transponder emits a signal twice per day at a 900-megahertz frequency as it connects to cellular networks, and said he would talk to company engineers to get more exact information about the device’s electromagnetic emissions.
He did say that the meters meet Federal Communications Commission guidelines for human exposure to radio frequency waves and electromagnetic fields.
But some residents were unconvinced, and unimpressed by adherence to FCC rules.
“I’ve studied this,” said Susan Lord, a Housatonic resident who is also a physician. “[American] standards for toxicity are much more lenient that anywhere else in the developed world. We’re being bombarded by all those things.”
Several people at the meeting expressed fears about health effects from the emissions of the meters.
The American Cancer Society’s website points to some research indicating health threats from radio frequency waves, but says, all told, the impact is unclear. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization, has classified RF radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”
SUNY Albany’s David Carpenter, a physician who is director of the Institute for Health and the Environment, has said there is no evidence that radio frequency waves are safe, and that there haven’t been any studies conducted on people living in homes that have wireless meters pulsing out such waves.
And the World Health Organization is concerned enough that it is currently preparing a report on the health risks of exposure to radio frequency and electromagnetic fields.
Opt-out fees and attempts to vanquish them
Accusations were hurled through the Unitarian meeting room. One customer said Mercer had threatened to shut off her water if she refused the new meter. And Rep. William “Smitty” Pignatelli, D-Lenox, told The Eagle two customers had called him on different days saying Mercer had made this threat.
Mercer denied it, and said he would offer a new mechanical meter if people want it, though cautioned that it might come at a cost. He said he would have to petition the DPU to make the opt-out possible, and told The Eagle that he has no inkling of cost, which would be set by the agency.
But this might all depend on what happens with a bill moving through the Legislature that would allow a free opt-out of wireless meter installations, and would protect ratepayers in other ways. It’s a bill Pignatelli says he supports.
Fitzgerald mentioned the bill, and said he’s knows what’s holding it up.
“It’s the no-charge part of that,” he said.
One provision of the rate increase was that Mercer hold regular informational meetings about various water company issues.
As the meeting wound down on a more peaceful note, with a fraction of the attendees left, Mercer acknowledged that this issue is “sensitive and emotions are running high.”
Lord suggested that the reason for the tension is that there wasn’t an opportunity early on for input from what is a small, close-knit community.
“That’s why this has gotten out of hand,” she said.
Reach Heather Bellow at hbellow@berkshireeagle.com or @BE_hbellow or 413-329-6871
Whether one is a netaddict or not, staying without internet connectivity for too long sure gets us nervous. It’s a modern nightmare. So every cafe, library and club in town lures you in with promises of free Wi-Fi, so you never have to stay away from the internet for too long. This very moment, as you read, you are being bombarded with these invisible. Have you ever wondered whether Wi-Fi has any impact on your health? A science experiment conducted by Danish schoolgirls showed that garden cress wouldn’t grow around a Wi-Fi router. If plants react this badly to Wifi, how well would the human body fare?
After numerous studies over two decades, there is 
Some people are electrically sensitive, that is they are aware of the presence of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), but are not adversely affected by them. Other people may or may not be aware of the presence of EMFs, but can become seriously ill in their presence. These people we refer to as electrically hypersensitive (EHS). People who have developed EHS have a physiological disorder, characterized by neurological and idiopathic reactions, that noticeably appear or intensify near sources of EMFs such as electrical appliances, especially VDUs (computer monitors), power lines, fluorescent lights, mobile phones, cordless phones, wireless computers (wLANs), mobile phone base stations, etc.
New research reveals that pregnant women who are exposed to non-ionizing radiation from magnetic fields have a significantly higher miscarriage rate.
Davis explains that we know MW radiation effects do not follow the doses-effects response model; increasing the dose does not mean an increase response or effect follows. She thinks effects have more to do with the characteristics of the signal, which is erratic, and with chronic exposure. In her view, cell phone radiation disrupts “resonance” and “interferes” with body functions, such as DNA repair. Research needs to consider this if we are to have answers, she says. We know that MW radiation disrupts/relaxes the brain-blood barrier, which plays a crucial role in protecting our brains from substances that are in the blood and can be damaging or toxic. The brain-blood barrier develops as we grow. If we introduce a blue dye in the blood of an animal, its entire body will go blue but its brain will remain pink. Cell phone radiation relaxes this barrier reason why is used now to enhance the uptake of drugs into the brain, for instance to treat a brain tumor with medications. We also know that cell phone radiation interferes with DNA repair. And, we know that it penetrates further into tissue that is not protected by bone or density -breasts, chest, gonads, which are more vulnerable to its effects. (11)
A plan already underway by the Housatonic Water Works Co. to replace analog water meters with a new wireless model has customers worried about bursts of radiation from its transmitter, which sends water use data to the company using cellular networks.
