Is EMF Infused Technology Dangerous?
Most of us live in a home with our Wi-Fi on 24/7, a smart meter attached to the outside of our living room wall, and sleep with our iPhone by our heads. Our children use our cell phones or any electronics to learn and play. This EMF-infused technology has become a way of life for many of us. But, we need to be careful. There is a growing body of scientific evidence showing that too much EMF exposure can be harmful to our health. It took decades of anecdotal evidence, scientific studies and lobbying before the health impacts of another consumer good—tobacco—were acknowledged. Be patient. The truth will be known. Learn how to protect yourself and do what you can to educate people in the mean time.
“It has become obvious that new, biologically-based public exposure standards, taking into account long-term as well as non-thermal exposures, are urgently needed to protect public health world-wide. It is not in the public interest to wait. Instead, governments should take decisive action now to protect biological function as well as the health of future generations.” -From the Seletun Scientific Statement, February 2011
1. We Are Electromagnetic. First, recognize that your body is fundamentally electromagnetic, and thus vulnerable to outside sources of artificial electromagnetic fields. The brain, heart and nervous system are the most obviously electromagnetic, but every single cell has an electrical charge, and the functioning of the components of each cell is based on electricity and electron transfers. Read one of the best early classics on this subject, “The Body Electric”, by Robert Becker.
2. Natural Rhythms. Appreciate the body’s need to keep all systems working harmoniously for optimal functioning, including by synchronizing with natural cycles and rhythms, within and external to the body.
3. Minimize Disruptive Frequencies. Consciously choose to minimize exposures to disruptive man-made electromagnetic fields of all kinds: electric fields, magnetic fields, dirty power, radiofrequency fields, microwaves and ‘ionizing’ radiation, such as X-rays and nuclear power. There is a rapidly accumulating body of scientific evidence of harm to health and wellbeing from both short-term and prolonged exposures to very low-intensity, non-ionizing (i.e. non-heating) electromagnetic fields (EMF), when they are at biologically active frequencies or frequency combinations.
4. There Are Greater Risks—As Well As Unknown EMF Risks—to Children. Recognize children, toddlers, and fetuses are more vulnerable to dysregulation caused by electromagnetic fields and will incur further risks from a longer lifetime of exposures.
5. DNA Is a Fractal Antenna and Responds to EMF Fields of Many Kinds. Recognize that DNA, with its ‘coil of coils’ structure, is exquisitely sensitive to electromagnetic fields, including ELF, RF and ionizing radiation. It possesses the two structural characteristics of fractal antennas, electronic conduction and self-symmetry. These properties contribute to greater reactivity of DNA to electromagnetic fields. (See International Journal of Radiation Biology, April 2011). As a result, risks with potentially grave consequences for future generations are now being taken in continually exposing our bodies to electromagnetic fields.
(See video of Martin Blank, PhD, Columbia University, at the Commonwealth Club of California)
An important European review of the EMF science, called The Reflex Report, prepared by 12 scientific institutes in 7 countries, confirmed long-term genetic damage in the blood and brains of users of mobile phones and other sources of electromagnetic fields. See images from that report (below) showing DNA breaks in two exposure scenarios:
24 hrs of cell phone use (considered a ‘non-heating’ exposure) and 1,600 chest X-rays (high intensity exposure from ionizing radiation well-known to break electrons from atoms and to cause cancer):
Note the DNA deterioration occurring from cell phone radiation is similar to 1,600 chest x-rays.
6. Fertility Is Impaired by EMFs. There is a growing body of science showing serious impacts to sperm and fertility from cell phone radiation. For example, in a study published in Fertility and Sterility (Vol. 89) in 2008 by A. Agarwal et al of the Cleveland Clinic, laboratory values of sperm count at an infertility clinic decreased as the duration of daily exposure to cell phones increased. In the highest exposure group, 1/3 of sperm count was lost with over 4 hours of male cell phone use, and 50% of the remaining sperm showed physical abnormalities, did not swim well or were non-viable. Documented cell phone impacts on sperm include: decreased sperm count, motility, viability, and normal morphology. (Read ElectromagneticHealth.org’s “Letter to Parents on Fertility and Other Risks to Children from Wireless Technologies”. Also see a recent article in Holistic Primary Care magazine for health professionals by Alasdair Philips, B.Sc. (Eng), DAgE, “Male Infertility Linked to Cell Phone EMF Exposure”)
7. Cell Phones Cause Brain Tumors. All industry funded and independent case-controlled studies looking at brain tumor risk from cell phone use show an increased risk (commonly a doubled risk) of brain tumors after 10 years of heavy cell phone use. What was considered ‘heavy use’ in these studies would today be considered average or light use. Industry-affiliated parties mislead by focusing on “overall” study results, such as in the Interphone study, instead of on the increased risks of brain tumors found in “heavy” users, who have used a cellphone for 10 years or more. These exposures are comparable with common exposures today. (See “Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone”)
8. Lead Authors of the Interphone Study, Post-Publication, Urge Caution. Post-publication of the Interphone study by IARC/WHO, its lead authors, Elizabeth Cardis, and Siegal Sadetzki, who led the Israeli part of the Interphone study, published an overview of the cell phone/brain tumor science in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.? They said, “While more studies are needed, indications of an increased risk (of gliomas—a particularly dangerous form of brain tumour) in high and long-term users from Interphone and other studies are of concern…Even a small risk at the individual level could eventually result in a considerable number of tumours and become an important public-health issue.”
It is noteworthy that though it has been over six years since the Interphone study was completed, approximately 50% of the data has still not been released, including data on the risk of acoustic neuromas and salivary gland tumors, which are closest to where the cell phone is placed against the ear. While global scientists are left wondering what those unpublished Interphone studies actually reveal, following the Cardis/Sadetzki paper, on May 31, 2011, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified cell phone radiation as a class 2B “Possible Carcinogen”. This was quite a welcomed surprise as IARC’s own Interphone study downplayed any risk, using overall risk levels found to deflect from the very serious risks found in heavy users, but still does not resolve the question of what the unpublished studies show.
9. NIH Study Showing Brain Metabolism Effects Published in JAMA. Brain metabolism changes from cell phone use were found by Nora Volkow et al of NIH and Brookhaven National Laboratories, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in March 2011. The finding that cell phone radiation speeds up glucose metabolism, a marker of brain activity, at non-thermal levels of microwave exposure, raises concern that this may be a mechanism involved in cancer development. There is additional concern that if cell phone radiation is impacting glucose levels, is it also impacting neurotransmitters and neurochemical activities? Further studies are needed. While to date much focus has been placed on the possible risk of brain tumors from cell phones, this study, which was statistically significant, confirms important neurological impact.
10.Cell Phones Are Associated With Many Cancers. Recently, in May 2011, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified wireless radiation from cell phones as a category 2B “Possible Carcinogen” based on evidence for association with brain tumors (gliomas) and acoustic neuromas. Scientific studies show increased risk of cancers from long-term use of a cell phone, including: gliomas, acoustic neuromas, meningiomas, salivary gland tumors, eye cancers, testiculal cancers and leukemia. Cordless (i.e. portable) phones, as well, have been associated with gliomas, acoustic neuromas, and meningiomas. A recent Chinese study in the International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery found risks for parotid gland cancer “as large, perhaps larger, than the risk of lung cancer from smoking”, according to brain tumor risk analyst, Lloyd Morgan. For example, the landmark study found use of a cell phone for greater than 2.5 hours a day to have as much as a 3,000% increased risk for parotid gland tumors.(See presentation on EMF & Cancer by L. Lloyd Morgan, Senior Research Fellow of the Environmental Health Trust given at ElectromagneticHealth.org’s EMF Forum at the Commonwealth Club of California November 2010.)
Become Self-Reliant – Learn to Measure EMFs and to Shield.
Read the EMF-Help Blog™ and listen to the EMF Remediation Interviews found at Campaign for Radiation Free Schools (Facebook) or at ElectromagneticHealth.org. Learn the risks of improper shielding and the benefits.
Listen to Interviews with Scientists and Doctors at ElectromagneticHealth.org. Learn about what is happening to patients from wireless exposures, and the deceptions in science and politics interfering with a proper response to this emerging public health issue. Alert patients about what they can do to minimize exposures.
Download 1-Page EMF Resources Handout for Patients.
15 Videos on EMF & Health from the Commonwealth Club of California November 2010. Videos from a half-day program on EMF & Health at our nations largest and oldest public affairs forum, featuring 15 presentations, can be viewed here.
Read EMF Books. Whether it be the classics, such as books by B. Blake Levitt or Robert Becker, or The Powerwatch Handbook by Alasdair and Jean Philips in the U.K., or newer books like Zapped by Anne Louise Gittleman and Dirty Electricity by Sam Milham, MD, read up! Go to www.BestEMFBooks.com to find them.
Join Campaign for Radiation Free Schools on Facebook. Here you will learn about science, health policy and news related to wireless exposures to children in schools. The Campaign for Radiation Free Schools encourages all parents to read the BRAG Antenna Ranking of Schools Report by Magda Havas, PhD and to encourage schools, school districts, municipalities and states to call for an FCC ruling requiring 1,500 foot setbacks for any/all wireless infrastructure near schools. This is the distance within which studies show increased incidence of electrosensitivity symptoms from neighborhood antennas in adults and increased incidence of cancers. The BRAG report offers an excellent compilation of EMF resources toward the end.
Sign the “EMF Petition to Congress”. The petition is calling for 1) the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to lower exposure guidelines for radiofrequency radiation (RF); 2) repeal of Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which took away the rights of state and local governments to stop the erection of cell towers and wireless antennas on health or environmental grounds; 3) a national moratorium on further wireless infrastructure build-out until more research is conducted, 4) and protections for people who are currently sensitive. Sign the petition at http://tinyurl.com/2cjq54y.
Olle Johansson, PhD, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Sweden
Download PDF of “50+ EMF Safety Tips and Insights”