February 12, 2016
‘I do fear that there will come a day that we will all cry because of the irreversible damage that we, in our own hands, cause the future generation’
Rabi Yaakov Litzman, Israeli Minister of Health
Another monster edition, but extensive (including mainstream) coverage of some positive developments.
The good news…..
Victory for Berkeley and warnings about phone safety
But my favourite comment came from Louis Slesin (Microwave News) via Twitter
‘.@CTIA loses Berkeley cellphone right-to-know suit http://bit.ly/2poxH3i
Good to know that 800lb gorilla w/fat wallet doesn’t always win’
Italian court rules mobile phone use caused brain tumour
Not for the first time, an Italian court has awarded compensation for health problems caused by mobile phone usage. But the costs fall on the state (ie taxpayer?), not the manunfacturer or employer.
The previous case, which commentators seem to have overlooked
And the rest…..
Science or non-science?
Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child behavioral problems
‘This association was fairly consistent ……..’
‘High prenatal cell phone use linked to hyperactivity/inattention problems in child.
No prenatal cell phone use linked to low risk for any behavioral problems in child.’
‘Should pregnant mothers hang up their cell phones?’ Based on the study, the answer would seem to be ‘yes’, if only as a precaution, but….. lots of discussion of other possible explanations (fair enough, as correlation does not necessarily imply causation), but no mention of other studies which support their conclusion (eg Hugh Taylor’s animal studies, Dietrich Klinghardt’s work, and previous Danish? study). Also neither the article nor the abstract point out that ‘no cell phone use during pregnancy’ does not equate to no exposure, because of masts, passive exposure etc – all of which could reduce the impact of any findings. So once again we have a scientist distancing herself from her own conclusions which could have major implications for public health. But is it surprising, with at least two industry-friendly names on the extensive authorship list, and the article from a mainstream source?
As well as not being very smart it seems that some meters are not very robust either
http://rdnewsnow.com/article/5…..witch-over – another one-person campaign against the smart meter menace
http://www.wcpo.com/money/cons…..s-go-crazy – smart meter or spooks? The ghost in the machine?
French petition against wifi on public transport.
Two articles in more depth than usual
https://maisonsaine.ca/sante-e…..royfo.html – EHS article
http://www.globalresearch.ca/e…..em/5584676 – questions about microwave weapons. Better article than the headline might suggest.
https://ehtrust.org/key-issues…..and-sleep/ – screens and sleep
https://ehtrust.org/public-new…..-children/ – recommendations for protecting children
http://newstarget.com/2017-04-…..reens.html – children and screens
http://www.sfgate.com/mommyfil…..088257.php Bill Gates following Steve Jobs in keeping his kids away from technology.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne…..story.html Devra Davis on wifi risks in schools
http://www.publicnewsservice.o…..le/56806-1 – technology and Maryland schools
https://www.romper.com/p/shery…..ason-51148 – another celebrity speaking out against screen time
http://www.thepantheronline.co…..ensitivity – another documentary on Greenbank and EHS
http://www.bbc.com/news/busine…..s-39640704 – presumably the campaigners have not worked out that there might be greater benefit in elimination what public wifi there is.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes…..155972.cms – India studying radiation effects
Documentary on cell tower radiation, from India
https://ehtrust.org/key-issues…..-warnings/ – updated ‘fine print’ warnings
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com…..0/abstract – teenagers and headaches
http://www.clearlightventures……elesscard/ – wireless safety card
http://www.nbcnews.com/better/…..-t-n745801 – more on addiction
http://www.rcrwireless.com/201…..city-buses – Barcelona continues its campaign to make the city inaccessible to EHS people.
See also above ‘Science or non-science’
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…..d/28414399 ELF study. ‘Current understanding….’ No pun intended? ‘consensus from multiple studies is that there is no causal role of extremely low-frequency EMFs in childhood cancers, including brain cancer.’
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…..d/28413651 Hardell & Co have been prowling around Stockholm again, armed with meters. Levels way above Bioinitiative recommendation, but well below ICNIRP. So we are all doomed or saved, depending on who you believe.
https://www.emf-portal.org/en/…..icle/31695 – Iranian study which seems to point to increased risk of problems for pregnant women living near overhead power lines. Maybe some clarity ‘lost in translation’?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…..d/28425691 Health impact of ‘new age’ technology on adolescents.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…..d/28429106 Elevated risk of nervous system diseases from ELF exposure.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…..d/28426166 – 2 psychologists and an engineer looking at health effects of phone radiation.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…..d/19667804 – eye damage from millimeter waves
https://t.co/uRJiZHrh8M IARC has noticed an increase in childhood cancers. I wonder if they will connect it to their own determination on RF radiation as a class 2 carcinogen? This question was raised some years ago by Eileen O’Connor (UK campaigner). [See https://takebackyourpower.net/who-knew-the-elephant-in-the-room/ (long article by Susan Foster)].
An unlikely source of spyware – wireless headphones