In France there is a professor who has been doing some groundbreaking work to bring the medical community up to speed.
His name is Professor Dominique Belpomme and he is (in my view) one of the world’s leading authorities on EMFs and health.
He recently gave a brilliant presentation in Poland entitled: ‘Diagnosing, Treating And Preventing The EMF Impact On Adults And Children’.
Watch Professor Belpomme’s presentation and learn:
- the difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation
- why the official safety guidelines do not protect us
- how it is clear that there is a cancer risk when you are exposed to EMFs
- how this is a condition that affects significantly more women than men
- the 9 most common symptoms associated with electrohypersensitivity (EHS)
- the link between Alzheimers disease and EHS
- the biological markers which enable diagnosis of EHS
- the 2 best imaging techniques for diagnosis
- the 2 stages of treatment of EHS
- the plant-derived drugs, vitamins and anti-oxidants which may be used for treatment
- and a lot more
Warning: This presentation was aimed at educating doctors and physicians. It is technical. Don’t be surprised if you don’t understand it all.
BUT he does explain how to diagnose AND treat electrical hyper sensitivity. This IS information that your medical doctor CAN use.
I’ve transcribed the video below so if you prefer to read it you can.
Here is a transcription of Professor Belpomme’s presentation:
‘This is a very difficult topic I will speak about. Health is already a complicated approach. But in addition to that, the interaction of electromagnetic fields with health problems is very complicated. So I would like to try to simplify but to present the truth at the moment and as you will see, the children problem is a very important problem.
This is to record the technological advances that we are dealing with since 1900, the first discovery of electricity, radio, wireless radio, radar, television, computers, cell phones, and now smart meters. So associated with these technical advances, there are some diseases, some pathological disorders which have been described. Electrocution, cancers, what we call radio wave sickness, cancers again, and screen dermatitis which was described in Sweden first. It’s a cutaneous disorder which was associated with the cathodic computer at that time. And now, brain tumors notably in children and what we call electro-hypersensitivity .
Ionizing And Non-Ionizing Radiation
So I would like to make a very important point. We have to distinguish ionizing radiation which has been clearly demonstrated to induce cancer and other diseases such as haematological aplasia, for example. And what is called non-ionizing radiation which include extremely low frequencies, low frequencies. This is on the left of the electromagnetic spectrum, radio frequencies, hyper frequencies, microwaves are all non-ionizing radiation.
The problem is at the moment, scientists and operators and politicians still believe that only exposure to non-ionizing radiation at heating intensity is associated with some thermal effect leading to health intolerance. And so, they have based the official reference limits to such thermal effects. Whereas on the contrary, new scientific investigations have shown that non-thermal radiofrequency microwave chronic exposure can cause detrimental health effects. Meaning that the present accepted official limits do not protect people and not particularly, as we will see, children. This is a very important point and makes for some discrepancy between what is at the moment, accepted as a societal level and what the medical scientific community is thinking.
Electro-hypersensitivity A Detrimental Medical Condition
So I will refer to the WHO and the WHO recognized in 2002 that extremely low frequencies can be classified as possibly carcinogenic, which means it is in the group (2B). That means it is not certain but it’s highly possible. In 2013, radiofrequencies were classified as (2B) group, as possibly carcinogenic. So, it is clear now that there is a risk to have cancer when you are exposed to electromagnetic fields, including extremely low frequencies and radiofrequencies. I would like to focus my talk on electrohypersensitivity because it is a type of silent enemy at the moment and the children are mainly concerned. In 1996, in Berlin, WHO organized a workshop on electro-hypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity which is as we will see, a disorder which is frequently associated with electro-hypersensitivity. So you will have both electromagnetic fields and chemicals that can give this type of disorder. It was classified in 1996 as ”Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance’. It was already recognized. In 1997, Stockholm, there was a report of the European Commission which accepted the fact that people which use mobile or cordless telephones or were in the proximity of electromagnetic fields, WiFi and so on, accept the concept of electro-hypersensitivity. This was confirmed in 2005 officially by WHO report who recognized the fact that electro-hypersensitivity was a detrimental medical condition.
More Than 2000 Patients Studied
So I would like to present to you some of the investigations we have done. This deals with the most important series worldwide because at the time in 2005, we had investigated more than 1,000 people who presented to me with electro-hypersensitivity or multiple chemical sensitivity, self-reporting disease. I investigated personally – and my team too –more than 2,000 patients with this type of diseases. I would like to present to you the results that we published in 2015. As you can see, the maximum of patients were associated with electro-hypersensitivity. But about 25% were associated with not only electro-hypersensitivity but also with multiple chemical sensitivity. There is a feminine predominance as you can see, because the sex ratio is about two female for one male, And with a percentage of 66% to 76%. The median age in our series was about 47 – 48 years old. I exclude from this series infants and children. Now we are publishing electro-hypersensitivity in children and infants which is a very poor situation, in fact.
So what we use as a clinical diagnosis criteria here is absence of known pathology accounting for the observed clinical symptoms, reproducibility of symptom occurrence under the influence of EMFs whatever heir incriminated source, regression or disappearance of symptoms in the case of EMF avoidance and chronic evolution. These criteria are the best criteria that we can use when we investigate such a patient population.
Headaches Most Important Symptom
These are the clinical symptom occurrence in such patients. This is still not published but will be very soon. So, headaches. That means that the patients – this is the most important symptom, more than 80% of the people self-report headaches. Dysesthesia (burning sensations) is the medical term which means that such people have superficial sensitivity such as stings, [inaudible 13:43] or burning sensations. Myalgia (muscular pains) and arthralgia (joint pains) is relatively common and ear heat, that’s very important because it is one of the first symptoms the patient may have when he use’s a mobile or cordless phone. Tinnitus and hyperacousis, they don’t really tolerate noise, for example and they have hypersensitivity to noise. Dizziness and balance disorder, which means some alteration of the deep sensitivity.
What is the most important symptom? It is cognitive defects and confusion. Loss of immediate memory. This is in my mind as a physician, is the first stage of what we call pre-Alzheimer disorder. This is the reason I believe that this pathological disorder is a very severe one. Fatigue and insomnia, depression tendency with suicidal ‘ideation’ is 20% to 40%. There are other abnormalities including skin lesions which are objective lesions. So people who say that this disorder is subjective, in the mind of the patient, it’s not true. We have skin lesion and neurological signs which lead us to accept the idea that we’re dealing with a true pathological disorder.
Biological Markers Which Give Objectivity
But it’s not enough for scientists. We need to have objective criteria and this subjective criteria, we first demonstrated worldwide that we could detect in these patients, some biological markers which gives objectivity. The objective markers are histamine, S100B, nitrotyrosine – we will speak about that – chaperone proteins and anti-O-myelin. That means that such patients can make antibodies against their own white substance in the central nervous system. But the key medical imaging investigation is the transcranial and brain pulsed ultrasound echodopplers, we will speak about that.
So, mean values and standard deviations of biomarkers and percentage of patients with abnormal values in the peripheral blood according to the two electro-hypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity, previously individualized groups.
This is a little bit complicated but it’s only to show to you that using these types of markers that has been published in the 2015, the American Review, we can have some objective diagnosis of what we call electro-hypersensitivity. The best marker is probably the melatonin-creatinine ratio that we can detect in the urine of patients. Now, we are dealing with an objective pathological disorder that we described as Hippocrates did 5 centuries before J.C.
Oxidative And Nitrosative Stress
There is now no doubt that we are dealing with a true disorder. In addition to the biological markers, we have now some pathological markers. In addition to the [inaudible 18:47] markers, this is still not published – we are able to detect in about 70% of the patients, some oxidative and nitrosative stress. That means that many other disorders like cancer, Alzheimer’s, even Diabetes type 2, we have in these patients some oxidative or nitrosative stress. This is important to underline because it’s another biological argument to say we’re dealing with two disorders.
So in addition to biology, we now have radiology. The normal, the classical tests, imaging techniques such as brain CT scan, MRI, Brain Angioscan all are normal and this normality cannot exclude the diagnosis. This is on the contrary, an argument to say that we may relate to electro-hypersensitivity.
Echodoppler Of The Middle Cerebral Artery
So one of the best imaging techniques you can do in Poland [inaudible 20:16] is the echodoppler of the middle cerebral artery because it is a recognized imaging investigation. This is still not published but this echodoppler reflects the vascularization, the blood-brain flow of 60% of the brain. What we will be publishing soon is that 70% of the patients, you have some decrease in the blood-brain flow. This is still an objective criteria to identify and characterize a disease.
There is another test that we use in France but unfortunately, this means it’s still not used in many countries because only in France at the moment – maybe in the U.S. This is what we call the centimetric ultrasound recording of cerebral pulsativity, what is called an encephaloscan. This is a very good approach because we can follow the effects of the treatment for example in such patients, using such an investigation.
At the top level (referring to a slide) you have a normal scan for this type of pulsed echodoppler. On the low level, you have colors which are yellow or blue, which means there is a decrease in brain-blood flow in the temporal lobes. This echodoppler analyzes what’s going on in the temporal lobes which are involved in this pathology. And it is difficult to show to you but there is some decrease in some areas which is called the capsule autonomic area which is constantly abnormal in such patients and which corresponds to what we call the limbic system and the thalamus which are two nuclei in the temporal lobes which are involved in this pathology. So now, not only we have some diagnosis tools to identify and recognize the diseases, but also some impact for explaining it, what is the disease – as what we will see in a few minutes – and explain what is going on with the interaction of electromagnetic fields on the brain.
Risk Of Degenerative Impairment Of The Central Nervous System
Evolution. Without any treatments, the evolution will, maybe, be very difficult. In the case of early treatment and EMF avoidance, you can have some concrete [inaudible 24:10]. But these [inaudible] is not very often because as I’ve said, electro-hypersensitivity is a chronic disease. But in some cases, 5% to 10% of the cases, using an adapted treatment and adapted avoidance, we can have a complete remission. The risk is to have some degenerative impairment of the central nervous system. And with the spatio-temporal disorientation, confusion and absence – for the physicians that are here maybe, they remind us of what we call temporal epilepsy. This disease, you may have absence as temporal epilepsy. But the main complication is neurodegenerative CNS diseases such as Alzheimer’s. It is not necessary the true disease as what is described as Alzheimer’s but a state which simulates Alzheimer’s disease.
Cognitive And Behavioral Problems In Children
But the most important problem at the moment concerns the cognitive and behavioral problems in children. That’s very important. We have to consider the problem in children for many reasons, because there is a specific susceptibility of children to electromagnetic fields. This is acknowledged – not officially – by the members of WHO at the moment. The reasons are, first, as it is presented here, there is a specific absorption rate higher in children than in adults. You see here on the right, what’s going on in an adult and on the left, what is going on in children. So no doubt that children are very susceptible to electromagnetic fields. Second, children are still associated with a developing central nervous system. So since this system is in expansion, as you know, after birth, what we call the epigenetic problems and development. So this is why it’s the second reason children are susceptible to electromagnetic fields. Point number three, their skull is still immature so it does not protect them against electromagnetic fields. Finally, the lifetime duration of exposure is longer for children than for adults. So we have many reasons to think that children are a priority to be protected at the moment. And it is clear that the accepted reference limit that we’re using at the moment do not protect children. So as a scientist, I cannot accept the present situation as far as reference limits are concerned. And I am not alone worldwide. Many, many scientists in the U.S., in the Europe, think the same. But unfortunately, there is a denial of this message when we consider the economical and political problem.
Opening Of The Blood-Brain Barrier
So we have now some explanation. We describe and publish what we call EMFIS, which is electromagnetic field intolerance syndrome, and multiple chemical sensitivity are two aspects of a unique pathological disorder. Does it involve the limbic system and the thalamus, as I said? You have the reference for those who are interested with our research. We published in 2015, a 25-page report on this. So we believe that we are dealing with a unique pathological disorder that susceptibility to chemicals and electromagnetic fields because similar symptomatic pictures, similar biological abnormalities, opening of the blood-brain barrier in both cases, – this is a very important problem. We know now that in such patients have what we call blood-brain barrier opening – association of the patients in physical and biological entities, and similar therapeutic results.
This slide is very difficult to understand but we should distinguish for physicians and medical doctors in this room so that it’s easy to understand. We have to distinguish intolerance from susceptibility to hypersensitivity. Susceptibility, it can be innate or acquired by some type of hereditary transmission. Hypersensitivity is defined as a decrease in the tolerance threshold and extension of intolerance to the whole EMF frequency spectrum. So it’s a problem of tolerance level.
Why Man-Made EMFs Are More Toxic Than Natural EMFs
So you know that we have in our central nervous system many receptors which are called [inaudible 31:23] receptors. And one explanation of susceptibility was to think of some interference, connection of electromagnetic fields and these receptors. But unfortunately, I don’t believe this approach is correct because there is a very important notion to have and this is due to the physicists. They distinguish natural electromagnetic fields. As you know that we are dealing with terrestrial earth electromagnetic field and artificial electromagnetic fields. We’re dealing with man-made electromagnetic fields which are polarized and pulsed. Natural electromagnetic fields are not polarized. That means that the waves are in all the directions. But for man-made electromagnetic fields, we use polarized radiation. That means in a unique direction. Biologically, this is very toxic and this is not continuous natural magnetic field, but pulsed. These two differences explain why the man-made electromagnetic fields are more toxic than the natural electromagnetic fields. And this is the reason I don’t believe that the toxicity involves this type of [inaudible 33:13] receptor.
How EMFs Impact The Brain
So this is a little bit complicated too. This has been published too, our explanation of how electromagnetic fields act on the brain, the organism in particular of the brain. As you can imagine, histamine is a key molecule but there are other mediators. The injection of oxidative and nitrative stress is also a very important alteration. This oxidative stress and nitrative is responsible for the disruption of the blood-brain barrier. And when you have a disruption of this blood-brain barrier, you have an inflammatory stress that alters the brain. There are some neuroinflammation in the capsulothalamic area. This is what we can conclude.
Treatment – 2 Stages
Treatment, this is very important. This is a complicated way but you see, there are two stages. The first stage can be called the pre-disease stage which can be reversible and which can be accessible to primary or secondary prevention. And the state which is a disease stage which many be irreversible and at that time, we are dealing with cancer and also with neuronal destruction and probably with CNS degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease. When you have some such irreversible states, this is finished. You are in the classical medicine, with Alzheimer’s disease or cancer, but this is irreversible. So the problem is to avoid this irreversible state and so, to treat the patient as soon as possible.
Plant-Derived Drugs, Vitamins and Anti-Oxidants
What to do? You have to consider the biological results we have obtained first. Try to fight against the cerebral hypoperfusion that we have evidenced using the brain echodoppler. There are two good drugs that you can use. It’s Gingko Biloba which is plant-derived and also fermented papaya, which we published now to have an objective result in these patients. Anti-histaminics, when you have an increase in the histamine levels, use them. Antioxidants, that is a very important [inaudible 36:56]. Vitamins and CNS tonics – the problem is, is this treatment sufficient? We could have allowed 70% good response. This is not bad because patients, could again, have a quite normal life. So I think that the treatment is very important as soon as possible. But is it enough? The answer is no because we need to have some electromagnetic avoidance.
This is ‘ImmuneAge’. This is commercialized here. I can give you some information about this product if you don’t know it. This is what we’ve obtained and published at the moment. This one, on the left, is a scan of an electromagnetic field patient and on the right, what we obtained after three months of treatment.
Prevention. Treatment is not enough, so electromagnetic field avoidance. First we have to understand what is going on. [Inaudible 38:28] spoke about the problem of antennas and cell masts but the most important thing I guess, is the use of mobile and cordless telephone. This is clearly shows that if you use, for example, one hour per day and more of your mobile, you may have electro-hypersensitivity. WiFi also. These are estimations but in 30% of the cases, we have no clear electromagnetic source which can explain the disease.
Another point to be considered is that dental metallic fillings can increase the toxicity of electromagnetic fields. So we have to consider this point and so exclude these dental metallic fillings.
As far as the health problems are concerned, we’re dealing with a silent pandemic. This is written in French but there are many social problems. It’s a type of social exclusion for these patients such as loss of work, couple separation/divorce, living area changes and usually, depression.
Electro-Hypersensitivity Patients Increasing Worldwide
So this is what the prevalence of people for electro-hypersensitivity at the moment, it’s been published in 2006. I don’t know if this will be the case but the number of electro-hypersensitivity patients is increasing worldwide. In Europe, the prevalence is between 2% to 10% and in the U.S., similar situation in California for example. So we’re dealing with a really silent pandemic because we have no clear recommendations to make. I agree with [inaudible 41:55] by law is a good step. But it is only one step, not enough to solve the problem at the level of the world. There are individual recommendations that I would like to outline.
Recommendations For Children
Use of mobiles by children  should be forbidden. No electromagnetic field exposure during pregnancy because of the high susceptibility of the fetus, and that concerns not only mobile phones, but WiFi exposures too. For adults, no more than 20 minutes of communicative exposure per day. How many adults respect this rule? This rule was proposed by operators but that was not respected. Is it enough? No. We need to have policy and politics. No cellular masts around schools, nursery schools and hospitals. That’s clear. No iPads at school. Complete interdiction of using mobiles at school. And a decrease in the standard reference limit values. This is what we’re going to negotiate now, a group of [inaudible 43:58] with WHO. I was last May in Geneva to negotiate this decree in a accepted level and this is a very difficult discussion as you can imagine because of pressure that comes from lobbyists and so on. So I think that now medical doctors have some ethical responsibilities to convince the authorities that now, there is a real problem and not only for children….’
Note: the sub-headings are mine and I made some very slight corrections to the grammar.
A big thank you to Professor Belpomme for his outstanding contribution to this field. Professor Belpomme is a researcher with the ‘Association pour la Recherche Thérapeutique Anti-Cancéreuse’ (French association for anti cancer therapy research) to learn more about his work or make a donation click here .