Bit by bit the world is gradually waking up to the dangers of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMFs). It’s a long slow process. We are moving forward on EMF awareness but slooooowly.
Rather like your 4 year old child who doesn’t want to go to school. You explain and explain again to them the reasons why they need to go. Deep down they know you’re right but there is inertia. Its difficult to face up to reality. They're not quite ready.
Sometimes the negotiation just doesn’t work and you find yourself pulling them out the front door with them holding onto the door frame as they bawl their eyes out.
Sometimes there’s another family member who helps you get out of the impasse. Maybe its another child their age or maybe its an aunt, uncle or some other authority figure.
Well it’s a similar story with EMFs. Deep down people know that EMF exposures are dangerous. But like the reluctant child they are having a hard time facing the truth. The BioInitiative Report 2012 is another big slice of truth. Its the authority figure.
What’s So Important About The BioInitiative Report 2012?
The same thing that made the BioInitiative Report 2007 [1] important. The 2007 report was a big slice of truth. 610 pages of it. It was a way of saying, if we take an honest look at all the EMF studies to date, this is what we can say about EMF dangers. It was comprehensive.
The BioInitiative Report 2012 is an even bigger slice of truth. This time 1479 pages. It takes up where the 2007 Report left off, reviewing 1800 studies published since the last report.
Its pretty heavy going for the uninitiated. Not quite War & Peace but War & Peace is probably easier to read. But then it's written by scientists, not Tolstoy.
A Group Effort
The 2007 report was a collective work written by a group of 14 independent scientists, researchers, and public health policy makers. It wasn’t the work of a lone ranger scientist which the telecommunications companies could easily discredit.
The same is true of the 2012 Report. Its the work of 29 independent scientists and health experts from 10 countries.
Yes independent. Scientists who aren’t scared to tell it like it is. Scientists who’ve fought to get funding. And then fought to get their study published when perhaps the findings weren’t in line with what the study’s paymasters wanted.
And not just any old group of scientists. As the preface says “ten hold[] medical degrees (MDs), 21 PhDs, and three MsC, MA or MPHs. Among the authors are three former presidents of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, and five full members of BEMS. One distinguished author is the Chair of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation. Another is a Senior Advisor to the European Environmental Agency.” But more important than who is saying it its whats said that really counts.
BioInitiative Report 2012– More Of The Same?
Not exactly. In 2007 the science was telling us things were pretty bad. That chronic exposure (24/7) to low level wireless technologies was detrimental to our health. With the 2012 Report we now have evidence that these exposures are more dangerous than previously thought.
The 2007 Reports’ main thrust was to highlight the link between cancer and RF radiation exposure (from cell phones particularly). The new Report shines the spotlight on exposure to EMFs and Autism, Fetal Exposure, Fertility, Alzheimer's Disease and other neurological and autoimmune disease effects. Click here to read the Report in full [2].
Now all this very well. But how does this help you?
The Million Dollar Question
Its the question I get asked most often. Its probably the reason you are reading this. Lets be honest, do you really want to read the new BioInitiative report? I doubt it.
What you really want to know is: what are safe levels of EMF exposure?
What Are Safe Levels Of EMF Exposure?
Hold on to your hats….they are low. How low? Well according to the Reports authors the prescribed safety limits around the world are some 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than what the BioInitiative Report recommends. Yes I did say 1,000 to 10,000 times.
Lets just think about that for a moment. Take road safety. A whole load of studies have been done on this for decades and the upshot is that a legal limit, a safe speed, in towns and cities has been fixed at around 30mph (or 50km/h). These legal limits are broadly applied the world over. There are some variations on these levels, some countries apply a 20mph limit. Which is some 33% below the “norm”. In other countries a 15mph limit is applied (around schools for instance). So 50% below the “norm”. That’s to say twice as stringent.
With EMFs, its not twice or ten times or a hundred times more or less stringent. The laws that are there to protect us are thousands of times higher than what the BioInitiative report considers to be safe. So to go back to the road safety analogy it would be like fixing a legal speed limits of 30,000mph in towns. Which amounts to having no speed limit at all.
Guess what, the EMF legal safety limits are like having no safety limits at all.
What Does the BioInitiative Report 2012 Recommend?
For RF radiation the 2007 Report recommended a limit of 0.1 μW/cm2 ( 0.61 Volts/meter) for outdoor exposure. The 2012 report recommends a precautionary level of 0.0003 μW/cm2 to 0.0006 μW/cm2*. For magnetic fields the 2012 Report recommends a limit of 1 mG.
(* Expressed in volts per meter this equates to approximately 0.03 V/m – 0.05 V/m.)
Are these levels achievable? I'm not sure they are.
Are they safe? I'm not sure of that either. The truth is nobody truly knows whats safe. What I can say is if anyone knows what can be considered scientifically safe then its the authors of the BioInitiative Report.
My Conclusion
Here is what you really need to understand; EMF exposures at even very very low levels can be very very harmful. What can you do? Plenty. Start by applying some good solid EMF protection. My free report outlines how to do this. Aim to reduce the EMF exposures in your home, click here [3] for information.
Act Now. Let the BioInitiative Report 2012 be your wake up call.
Resources:
Download the BioInitiative Report here [2].