February 12, 2016
‘It is astonishing to see that the proponents of thermal effects of electromagnetic fields have learned nothing new over the past 40 years. The incorrect concept affects European and U.S. Exposure limits, which cannot claim to provide protection. It affects research projects that only conduct short-term studies. It affects policies that claim safety where a warning should be in order.’
Dr Karl Hecht
(see Rodney Croft video below)
From Reykjavik – Wireless Radiation and Children’s Health
Reykjavik appeal – to all schools, signed by several prominent scientists, including Hardell, Cindy Sage, Franz Adlkofer and David Carpenter
Dariusz Leszczynski’s lecture
Familiar themes- precautionary principle should be applied
No place for wifi in schools – existing science is insufficient to determine how risky it might be
RF should be a 2A probable carcinogen
Not much time for the ‘echo chambers’ – Bioinitiative group, ICNIRP, SCENIHR etc
Safety standards do not protect all users
Genotoxicity not proven
EHS studied by psychologists using wrong methods
Inadequate exposure data in all epidemiological studies
5G risks (expert panel)
Interesting perspective from a non-EMF scientist
Includes some observations on how and why the mainstream press have attempted to downplay the significance of the NTP study (which he thinks is highly significant)
Smart meter fire – customer is liable (thanks to Take Back Your Power for this one)
If you have a 'Smart' Meter on your home, you may want to pay attention to this story. This Canadian homeowner was shocked to find out he was responsible for $5000 in damages caused by his Smart Meter catching fire. Is this fair? There are so many layers to this story. Please stay tuned for the follow up.
Posted by Collective Evolution on Tuesday, March 14, 2017
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/m…..homes.html – Won’t work for many UK homes
Maybe they should be renamed ‘downright stupid meters’
Huge video from a Wireless industry event.
Skip to 06.08.00 for Rodney Croft (c 20 mins) and the gospel according to ICNIRP.
This has to be taken seriously because of the enormous power and influence ICNIRP has.
You will hear that there is no cause for concern:
The ICNIRP guidelines protect all people (this contradicts ICNIRP’s own documentation)
The only effects we need to worry about are thermal – there are no non-thermal effects (so why has the FDA licensed therapeutic PEMF devices?)
EHS symptoms ‘have nothing to do with exposure’ – the studies prove it’s a result of belief, not exposure.
No evidence for chronic or long term effects
A cell tower on top of your building is definitely safe.
ICNIRP is free of any bias.
No evidence that a single person has been harmed at levels below ICNIRP guidelines.
Guidelines protect against all effects, not just thermal (this too is contradicted in their documentation).
The final slide sums up both sides of the debate.’Convincing people they are wrong is difficult’. Certainly is if they are part of ICNIRP.
All the above directly contradicts what Dariusz Leszczynski was saying in Reykjavik (and what he has said in the past about EHS).
The quote from Karl Hecht, above, is also relevant.
http://linkis.com/inquirer.net/ORSCZ and a favourable report on Dr Croft’s speech.
More coverage, nothing substantial new.
https://tobacco.ucsf.edu/ucb%E2%80%99s-joel-moskowitz-springs-suppressed-cell-phone-health-guidance-prepared-cal-dept-public-health – A slightly different perspective, comparing with tobacco
EHTrust announcing their latest ‘Safe Technology’ competition
More pressure on the WHO
https://t.co/J41XObsVCg – Bioinitave group proposing replacements for several members of the WHO EMF Working Group – not all from their own ranks.
EHS – a 10-step approach (from the Nutritional Balancing team)
Roundup – what the news sources are saying
wireless and addiction interview
http://newstarget.com/2017-03-…..to-us.html – more on antisocial phone-related habits
https://muditalab.com/mobile-phone-radiation-the-largest-biological-experiment-ever-5db1b498c2fa#.c6oir5sm2 -article connecting Salford’s blood-brain barrier research with the NTP study.
http://www.ntd.tv/2017/02/14/s…..ne-tablet/ Don’t give your child a smartphone
http://www.thefinancialexpress…..ile-phones – cautionary advice from an unexpected source. I wonder if it’s applied in his offices
http://www.electronicsilentspr…..r-schools/ Katie Singer on screen time, EMF issues etc. Many references
http://www.naturalnews.com/201…..e-you.html – maybe video games are not so bad after all?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/11/opinion/sunday/resist-the-internet.html?_r=1 NY Times suggesting reasons to manage our internet usage/addiction
http://www.dcclothesline.com/2…..monitored/ a different approach to phone security
https://www.wirelessweek.com/data-focus/2017/03/could-unlimited-mobile-data-kill-home-broadband – is the end in sight for landlines?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/02/06/these-smart-tvs-were-apparently-spying-on-their-owners/?utm_term=.aab9de71c486 – mainstream coverage of spying TV’s
https://knowridge.com/2017/02/give-yourself-a-tech-break/ Need for a tech break
http://timesofindia.indiatimes…..485854.cms -from India
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-…..a-39324696 also in India – Big Telecom getting bigger
http://brightsandz.com/the-fal…..e-sparrow/ Urban sparrows disappearing
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2017/9218486/ Phone radiation should be a Class 1 (definite) carcinogen according to Carlberg and Hardell
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28144593 – liver and spleen effects (rat study)
http://digital-library.theiet…….2016.3488 – industry-friendly scientist suggesting that (thermal) exposure guidelines may need to be revised for millimetre waves
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/doc…..t/7874434/ more gee-whizz technology for wearables
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/doc…..t/7873145/ and more – an implantable antenna – one way to ensure you get the maximum dose of radiation
http://journals.plos.org/ploso…..ne.0172986 – increasing cancer rates in teens – needs investigation and explanations
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28314060 – attempting to connect risk perception and perceived health effects from power lines?
Surely this can easily be defeated – don’t put your photo on Facebook (or if you’re feeling mischievous, use someone else’s)
More Big Brother technology for which the remedy is reasonably obvious
Ever more bizarre ways of stealing data
Saving the best until last….. thanks to Microwave News (indirectly) for this gem
Most Users Ever Online: 176
Currently Browsing this Page:
Peter Williamson: 43
Paul Vonharnish: 12
Guest Posters: 2
Newest Members:ozbod, dotty-88, MJ, EMFguy, Saba, OldHotRod, brjarrard, bnsh8, Anonymous, appleannie
Moderators: Wifikid: 16, officeman: 0, WiFi96: 4, Peter Williamson: 119, peter williamson: 189
Administrators: Lloyd Burrell: 68, Lloyd backup: 0, Shabab: 0, shabab-test: 0