The most amazing thing in the following video is not the fact that this is a brilliant presentation, which it is, its the fact that so little has changed since this talk was given in 2001 at a Congressional Staff Briefing.
Back then the International Institute of Cancer Research had said that electromagnetic fields were possible carcinogens.
10 years down the line the World health Organization has concurred.
Better late than never!
Question: Do we have to wait another 10 years before this reaches the statute books?
I sincerely hope not.
That's one of the reasons I am talking about it, the other reason is to encourage you to take action to protect yourself from EMFs.
What you will learn in this video:
– that even 10 years ago it was clear that SAR was offering little or no protection from RF radiation
– that 10 years ago there were research papers showing biological effects at 0.3w/kg and yet the standard (in the US) is still at 1.6w/kg
– that there are biological effects at 76000 times lower than the standard
– that already 10 years ago the potential of EMFs to cause Alzheimer's, cancer and heart attacks was already known about
– that already the link between cell phone radiation and aging was already established
– that even back then it had been shown that cell phone radiation causes DNA damage
Just one thing I have difficulty in believing in this presentation, is when Mr Litovitz says that the people who defend the thermal standard defend it honestly, if this is true then they must be very stupid people.
If you still think electromagnetic fields are harmless, humor me, just watch the presentation….
Below is an edited version of the transcript.
Dr. Ted Litovitz: “I'm Ted Litovitz from the Catholic University. I’ve been working on the effects of electromagnetic fields on biological cells for about 15 years. The question today is very simple. You, as legislatures, are being asked by consumer groups to put in place some legislation. They are concerned, they are worried; the real question is: are they irrational? You cannot start making legislation which limits commerce on the basis of irrational fear. So before you leave this room you have to make a decision if there’s a reasonable fear on their part. What I would like to do is to go through the science and you can make that decision at the end.
Thermal and Non-Thermal Effects
What you worry about at first is can electromagnetic field have any effect at all on your body. Sunlight has an effect on your body, but it's not going to kill you. Just because there is a biological effect doesn’t mean that there is a health hazard. Second question is, have any electromagnetic fields effects been seen for non-thermal radiation. What you're probably asking is why is he worried about non-thermal effects, because the standards that protect you today are based upon the heating of the tissue. That's your total protection. If there's any effect out there that can cause a biological effect on your tissue that doesn’t heat it, if it’s at level well below the energy necessary to raise the temperature several degrees, you have no protection by law. So it's an enormously important issue. Many papers have been reported in which they've seen non thermal effects below those levels considered safe by government agencies. For example, the safety standard is 1.6 Watts per Kilograms for energy deposited in your head from a cell phone. It's based upon heating. There are papers showing psychological changes at 0.3, that's much less, effects on immune system, effects on calcium influx in cells, induction of DNA damage, stress responses, effects on the blood brain barrier, effects calcium in the heart and hence the cell proliferation.
It could be that these effects are occurring but they don’t mean a thing. So it could be the standards are great, but let’s look a little further. If it's so obvious that you can get biological effects at levels 76,000 lower than the standard (4 mins in), why is there controversy? Why doesn’t everybody come in and say, “Oh thermal standards don’t mean a thing.” But that isn’t true. Not everybody believes. Those who defend the thermal standards defend them honestly. But let me summarize the argument. The argument is that your standards are based on only heat can cause damage to you. You need to put your head in a microwave oven and that causes death. But what we've discovered, and it' not just my lab, is there is information sent to a cell which is signals and turns the cell on and causes it to do something it wouldn’t normally do. You don’t have to heat it to stimulate it with an electromagnetic field. So weak electromagnetic fields cause an effect and presently the standards don’t take this into account.
Electromagnetic Fields Are Carcinogens?
International Institute of Cancer Research has stated that electromagnetic frequencies are possible carcinogens. That is a strong statement. It's very strong because EPA tried to make it for years and was never allowed to. This statement was based upon research just published 4 months ago in which 10 labs got together on only 10 epidemiologic studies which included a study by NIH.
How can this ionizing radiation increase the probability of cancer? Every day, every cell in your body creates reactive oxygen, in total 100 million reactive oxygen molecules in your body. These come from a habit called breathing. Because you breathe you generate reactive oxygen and 100 million of these reactive oxygen species go after your DNA. If it wasn’t for your defense mechanism you wouldn’t last a few days after you were born. Because of antioxidants, these 100 million reactive oxygen molecules only end up being 1 million molecules attacking your DNA. So you have 1 million DNA alterations a day in your body, but those little beautiful stress proteins are there working every day and they repair most of them. So you only have a 100 and then your immune system comes in and then you end up with 1 on average. Get the picture? You are being bombarded by these reactive oxygen molecules, you're being bombarded by stimuli which tend to break DNA and you're being protected.
Anything which diminishes the protective mechanism is a problem. Electromagnetic radiation diminishes prevention because it lowers melatonin, which is an antioxidant, and lowers these stress proteins which are antioxidants. Electromagnetic radiation will also diminish repair if it’s on every day. It diminishes the ability to repair and the immune response that protects you from any tumor that tends to form. What is the effect of reducing you protective mechanism? You will have a higher probability of mutations; instead of one you might have 2 every day, at the end of the year you have 600, at the end of 10 years you got 6000. This enhances the probability of cancer. This enhances the damage due to stroke. It enhances the effect of Alzheimer’s because the same proteins remove the plaque as it’s formed. If you're being radiated, it makes a heart attack more acute; if you have a heart attack it's going to be worse.
If you continue to use a cell phone, you continue to accumulate these broken DNAs and you’re contributing to aging. That is what happens to you life. As you get older your DNA is much more defective than that of a 10 year old and the reason you get frail and cannot handle disease as well. In summary, everything is a question of dose. To protect the public health we must determine the allowable dose for each of the above conditions.“
Electromagnetic fields are dangerous, can you afford to delay protecting yourself from EMFs?