Public health and safety is an exceptionally important subject and the government will ensure that electro-magnetic radiation from mobile phones and towers across the country is within prescribed limits, minister of communications and information technology Kapil Sibal said today.
Science and technology offer new hazards and solutions that throw up a constant conflict between two public interests. But human health is fundamental and should be placed two steps ahead of scientific solutions,“ he said at an international conference organized by The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (Assocham).
Sibal said the government had recently set up an inter-ministerial committee which concluded that emissions from base transceiver stations (BTSs) are one-hundredth of prescribed limits, and hence safe for human beings. “We will soon be conducting online checks on BTS stations to ensure that there is no danger emitting from BTS towers.“
Dr Vijaylaxmi, professor at the department of radiation oncology at University of Texas Health Science Center, said there is no scientific evidence worldwide to prove that electromagnetic radio frequency signals emitted by mobile phones and towers cause brain cancer and tumor.
T.V. Ramachandran, chairman of Assocham committee on communications convergence, said the explosive growth of telephony in India has led to 900 million subscribers and five lakh cell phone towers.
The industry believes in an effective system on health information and communication designed in consensus by scientists, government, industry and public to raise the level of general understanding about the mobile communications industry, and reduce any mistrust and perceived fears, he said.
B.K. Rao, chairman of Assocham committee on health and hospitals, said mobile phones are equipment of toy`s needs and the medical community has not yet documented any major risks on human health.
Assocham secretary general D.S. Rawat said various studies show that electro-magnetic fields produced from mobile handsets and BTS are found at a relatively low end of spectrum and are non-ionising radiation that is the energy carried by them are unable to break chemical bonds in molecules.
Paolo Vecchia, chairman of the International Commission for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection, and C.K. Chou, chairman of the US-based Institute of Electricals and Electronics Engineers, called for harmonization and evolving a common framework of standards to be followed globally.
Costa Rica San Jose
Virginia Beach Virginia USA
Cell phone radiations might cause cancer, according to world health organization, which until now they said that there were no known health risk associated with cell phone or tablet use. The WHO’s international agency for Research on Cancer has now tied mobile phone radiation to an increased risk for brain tumor.
The advent of smart phones had caused the world to move forward into the future. From simple text or calls, mobile phones are capable of almost everything, from taking pictures and videos, listening to music, to surfing the internet. Smart phone today has become more like a mobile computer; light wait more than laptop, rather than a mobile phone.
Other than smart phones, tablets such as the popular iPad by apple Inc, as well as other brands like Samsung Galaxy, LG, and Sony Ericsson has also gained a lot of popularity today.
According to latest technology Philippine news, smart phone and tablets has been useful for many, it has also caused a number of health problems for those who spend too much time in front their tablets and smart phones.
According to experts, many users of smart phones and tablets alike had started to experience a number of pains in their thumbs wrist, as well as in their necks. Expert has warned that the strain injuries stemming from long period spent starting at small screens and typing at tiny keys can be debilitating. And the injuries are becoming more common as high-tech gadgets grow ever more popular.
As well as hand injuries, experts point to problems among smart phone and tablet users arising from hour spent leaning over tiny screens.
Affects in social life: Other than effect in health of smart phones and tablets may also risk a number of ailments in terms of social relationship. The biggest at-risk group is children and teenagers who are heavy users of latest phones and gadgets. I know families were people communicate from one room to another via text messages.
Durham, North Carolina
Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou
As Sur, United Arab Emirates, As Sur, UAE
I am sure you have already found that risks and dangers stand behind every corner. Here is the next one called cell phones radiation. When I got familiar with this issue, I suddenly remembered how many times I have let my toddler playing with my mobile or “speaking” with his grandmas. I know you will not throw away your phone when you read this, but hope that it will at least make you smarter when using a cell phone, buying a new one and especially when your kids are nearby such a device.
What is Cell Phones Radiation?
I won’t give you a lesson on cell phones radiation. I will just say that mobile phones emit energy in waves (electromagnetic radiation or EMR) that penetrates the human head and body. And what’s the big deal with this? Television, computers, coffee blenders, hair dryers, and even the vacuum cleaners, they all emit EMR…
In order to sell mobile phones in the USA the manufacturer has to receive an approval from the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). To get that approval there should be SAR (specific absorption rate) tests done. In other words, the manufacturer should prove that the radiation emitted by his phones are within the FCC standards of acceptable radiation absorbed by a cell phone user’s brain and body.
You will ask what the problem is? Actually, there are a few:
– usually cell phones radiation tests are done by the manufacturer himself or by Telecommunications Certification Bodies. The latter take active part in determining the compliance of cell phones together with FCC;
– current SAR measurement is based on animal studies done in the late 70s and early 80s;
– FCC standards give adults only a thin margin of safety over radiation levels that harm animals;
– the cell phones radiation standards ignore children.
Cell phones radiation effects & Why kids are at greater risk?
The World Health Organization classifies cell phones radiation on the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) scale in Group 2B, which means possibly carcinogenic. Long-term (over 10 years) cell phone users can get
– glioma: brain tumor,
– acoustic neuroma: tumor of the nerve that connects the year to the brain,
– parotid gland tumors.
Cell phones are around for 2 decades only. I imagine that you are old enough to have had a childhood without cell phones. What about our kids? Approximately at 15 years of age they will be already considered long-term users. Moreover, research shows that kids have thinner and softer skull, which means that their heads absorb more radiation that adults. A recent study of Danish kids that use cell phones and whose mothers have also used cell phones during pregnancy reveals that they are 80% more likely to have hyperactivity and emotional problems. What would these same kids suffer when they reach our age?
How to reduce kids’ exposure to cell phones radiation?
1. Don’t let kids to use cell phones. If this is necessary, it is better for them to send text messages or use a headset or speaker rather than speaking on the phone.
2. Buy them a low-radiation phone. Check the EWG Guide to choose a cell phone with the lowest possible radiation.
3. Don’t let your kids use any antenna caps or keypad covers. This forces the cell phone to use more power and consequently to emit more radiation.
4. Don’t let your baby or toddler play with cell phones.
Next time when you plan to buy a cell phone, apart from the look and features, consider also the radiation level. Be informed and take the best decisions to protect your family and yourself.
Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur,
El Monte, California
Costa Rica, San Jose,
Sri Jayawardenepura Kotte,
Dominican Republic, Santo Domingo
POSSIBLE CARCINOGEN. To date, health studies that are related to cellphone use have focused on how much individuals use their cellphone, where they hold it in relation to their head, and the shape, size and thickness of the individual’s skull. Researchers also have studied potential health effects through epidemiological studies that track health effects, such as incidences of brain cancer, in people.
So far, the largest epidemiological study is IARC’s 2010 Interphone study of 14,000 longtime cellphone users who are from 13 countries. The study compared the results with a group of people who didn’t use cellphones regularly. Those who talked on their phones at least 30 minutes per day experienced a 40 percent increase in the incidence of glioma, which is a tumor that occurs in brain tissue; and a 15 percent increase in meningioma, which occurs in the tissue that lines the brain. Moreover, the study found that the tumors in heavy users tended to be on the same side of the head as where the people customarily held their phone.
Interphone was criticized by a variety of scientists. They noted that its findings could be taken with limited confidence, because the daily cellphone usage of study participants was based on their personal estimations rather than on actual billing records. Still, IARC found the study persuasive enough to designate cellphone emissions as “possibly carcinogenic.”
The designation places cellphones in the middle of the agency’s classifications for cancer risk—below “probably carcinogenic” but above two other classifications that indicate an inadequate amount of evidence of carcinogens. (For comparison, IARC also considers diesel fuel and engine exhaust as “possibly carcinogenic.”)
Samet, who led the IARC panel of 31 scientists from 14 nations, wants to see more-rigorous research on cellphones. He also wants inquiries into how RF EMF emissions might lead DNA to mutate or cause other health problems, as he suspects based on the Interphone results.
INDUSTRY STATIC. While IARC awaits more research, the cellphone industry is busy spinning the science in the opposite direction.
John Boice, who is a scientist for International Epidemiology Institute, which has performed contract research for the telecommunications industry, believes that cellphone research has proven so inconclusive that it’s time to focus research money on other priorities. He cites a July study that was released in Europe that shows no association between cellphone use and brain cancer in children. (Critics point out that the study covered only 5 years of use, although the latency period for cancer runs at least a decade.)
Instead of further study, Boice suggests that researchers watch what happens to brain-cancer rates. National Cancer Institute (NCI) data show that the incidence of brain cancer has fallen 0.3 percent in the United States since 1987.
But Dr. David Carpenter, who is a public-health physician at University at Albany (N.Y.) and specializes in the study of RF EMF, cautions that because of the long latency period for brain cancer, it’s too soon to draw conclusions from NCI’s data. He predicts that cases of brain cancer will increase between 2020 and 2030.
Boice isn’t alone in his assertions. He and other scientists maintain that RF EMF doesn’t carry enough energy to damage DNA, unlike the radiation that’s emitted from radioactive materials, such as uranium.
Several scientists have found otherwise, including Henry Lai, who is a professor of bioengineering at University of Washington. Lai has conducted studies in which cells are exposed to cellphone signals and examined for DNA damage. His research dates to 1994, and the results show that there was DNA damage.
Lai tells Consumers Digest that a cellphone-industry-funded consortium that backed his studies in the 1990s—Wireless Technology Research—tried to fire him when it learned of the results of his studies.
The consortium’s director, George Carlo, denies to us that his group requested that Lai be fired. Instead, Carlo says, he asked the university to refund the money that it was paid for the research, because Lai violated the terms of the contract by failing to follow proper procedure.
Strong-arm tactics are common, according to cellphone-safety advocates. Jerry Phillips, who is a biochemistry professor at University of Colorado, conducted research for Motorola in the 1990s. He tells us that he found that RF EMF affects DNA. Motorola offered to fund additional research if he wouldn’t publish his results, he says, but he published his data anyway in 1997 in the journal Bioelectromagnetics. The company terminated his contract and hired another team that wound up disputing Phillips’ findings.
Motorola referred our calls seeking clarification to CTIA. CTIA general counsel Michael Altschul only confirms that his association funded a $25 million research program in the 1990s that Carlo led. Altschul characterizes the research controversies as disagreements among scientists.
“Our goal is to follow the science,” says K. Dane Snowden, who is the vice president of CTIA. “When FDA says there’s no evidence of cellphones causing brain cancer, we follow that. When FCC says cellphones are safe, we follow that.”
But as we noted above, three of the four ruling members of FCC are from the telecommunications industry. Despite Snowden’s assertions, we believe that the safety of cellphones remains suspect.
REGULATORY INACTION. Until it ordered the GAO study, Congress held just two hearings over the past decade—in 2008 and 2009—on cellphone safety, says Olga Naidenko, who is a scientist at Environmental Working Group. To date, no member of Congress has introduced legislation to direct any federal regulatory initiative.
We believe that that’s because money speaks. Telecommunications companies gave almost $9 million in federal campaign contributions in 2010, according to OpenSecrets.org, which tracks corporate spending in politics. That year, the industry also spent more than $40 million lobbying in Washington. So it’s no surprise to us that when telecommunications companies call, Washington listens.
European Parliament displays more independence. In 2009, it adopted a report that called for nations to develop stricter regulatory standards to reduce the potentially harmful characteristics of RF EMF emissions. The report also advocated the development of education campaigns on how to cut radiation exposure from cellphones by talking less. In 2010, San Francisco Department of the Environment found that the average U.S. cellphone customer uses his/her phone 848 minutes per month, compared with 104 minutes per month in Germany and 249 minutes per month in France.
Maine is the only state that has come close to enacting any regulation. Cobb joined doctors and scientists in lobbying for a 2010 Maine State Legislature bill that sought to require cellphone labels that warned consumers about potential health risks. But the cellphone industry applied unusually heavy pressure, says bill author Andrea Boland, who is a Democratic representative. Lobbyists lined up at the door of the chamber and pressured senators as they entered for a vote, she says. Industry representatives threatened to sue the state if the bill passed, and the bill ultimately died in the Senate.
San Francisco is the only municipality that has adopted any ordinance. Scientists and health experts at the city’s Environment department helped the city’s board of supervisors to adopt a law in 2010 that requires cellphone marketers to warn consumers about potential health risks.
CTIA sued. In response, the board amended the ordinance last June to require marketers to give consumers guidelines on the safe usage of cellphones. A federal judge was expected to review the case this October. Snowden says it’s strictly up to the federal government—not states and local governments—to determine safety standards for cellphones.
Similar legislation in Oregon failed to make it out of a legislative committee this year. But many hope that in 2012, California will become the first state to enact a cellphone-labeling measure. The labels would warn consumers that if they hold cellphones directly against their bodies, they might be exposed to radiation levels that exceed FCC’s SAR limit. California State Sen. Mark Leno decided to hold the bill until 2012, when it became apparent that six Democratic senators accepted tens of thousands of dollars from the cellphone industry for their campaigns, according to MapLight.org, which tracks money in politics. Those six senators are enough to prevent a majority vote in California, where Republicans unanimously oppose almost any bill that seeks to regulate business. However, Leno believes that after lawmakers learn more about the IARC designation, which came late in the legislative season, they will change their minds in 2012.
For the record, the cellphone industry claims that the bill would violate the U.S. Constitution by compelling the industry to engage in false and misleading speech—that cellphones might be unsafe. We believe that this claim is absurd.
“The message from the industry is there should be no more discussion about this issue at all,” Leno says. “This is not a topic that’s going away.”
CLARITY AHEAD? As legislation stalls and scientific uncertainty continues, a few positive developments are taking place. Samet notes that research shows that cellphone emissions have been decreasing. (See “Know Your Limits: The Differences in Modulation.”) New models now operate at lower power levels because of modulation technologies that pack more information into their signals.
Furthermore, in 2014, the results of NTP’s study should provide some of the best data yet on the effects of cellphones. Beginning late this year, NTP will dose rats with cellphone RF EMF and examine their bodies for tumors, Wyde says. Scientists will examine whether any difference exists between the two frequency bands that are used for cellphones in the United States and the two predominant modulation systems for cellphones.
Unlike past studies that focused on brain cancer, NTP’s study will scrutinize whether cellphones affect other organs, such as the kidneys, liver or reproductive organs. Those risks never have been examined, even though people often keep their phones at waist level.
But more must be done. We would like to see an independent epidemiological study of whether heavy users of cellphones present any increased incidence of cancer or other health effects that’s based on the actual cellphone usage records of study subjects, rather than the recollections of study subjects, as in the Interphone study.
These records now date back more than 10 years for large numbers of people. And the government should mandate that researchers have access to the phone-use records of any cellphone user who wants to take part in the study. We also would like to see the cellphone industry pay for such a study, as was done in Europe.
We also believe that FCC should run an information campaign (and, if it doesn’t have sufficient legal authority or the budget for such a campaign, FCC should seek it) to instruct consumers on the best ways to limit exposure to RF EMF. Federal Trade Commission also should develop guidelines for cellphone advertising that’s aimed at children under its children’s advertising program, which covers privacy and age-appropriate content access.
Finally, FCC, FDA and the cellphone industry should launch a cooperative program to design cellphone networks that decrease exposure to RF EMF and any of its harmful characteristics.
Because the scientific verdict on cellphones is unlikely to be rendered for years, these measures would help to eliminate unnecessary exposure and decrease potential health risks in the meantime. It’s better to be safe than sorry.
St. Paul, Minnesota
Dhadna, United Arab Emirates, Dhadna, UAE
Stuart Cobb, 36, was a prosperous plumber in Portland, Maine, until a brain tumor disabled him 2 years ago. Luckily, Cobb’s tumor was benign, and doctors successfully removed most of it.
Cobb had no significant exposure to toxic chemicals or radiation, which are two of the things that come to mind quickly when physicians diagnose the cause of tumors. However, Cobb was a frequent cellphone user, and the tumor grew on the side of his head where he typically held his phone.
“I’m almost 100 percent positive [the tumor] was from cellphone use,” Cobb says.
Unfortunately, Cobb might never know whether that’s the case. Although plenty of studies associate cellphones with brain tumors, the scientific jury remains undecided on whether cellphones cause cancer or any other adverse health effects, such as low sperm count or brain-chemistry changes.
Still, circumstantial evidence is mounting. This year, World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified cellphones’ radiation emissions as “possibly carcinogenic.” IARC’s declaration prompted three members of Congress in June to order Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study cellphone emissions. And states are starting to get more concerned about the health risks. Lawmakers in California, Maine, Oregon and Pennsylvania have considered bills that would require warning labels for cellphones. A handful of municipalities—including Los Angeles, Portland, Ore., and Santa Fe, N.M.—asked the federal government to conduct more studies and allow the cities to exercise control over where cellphone transmitting towers are placed due to concern about radiation exposure.
But federal authorities haven’t set any standards or issued any precautions. Food and Drug Administration is charged with monitoring whether Americans are at risk of health problems. (Americans have a total of 303 million cellphone accounts for business and personal use, according to industry trade group CTIA-The Wireless Association.) The balance of health studies indicates that cellphones don’t cause cancer or any other health problems, says Abiy Desta, who is a health scientist for FDA.
Federal Communications Commission also says cellphones pose no health threat. The only safety standard that FCC administers is to make sure that the radio-frequency electromagnetic-field (RF EMF) emissions that come from cellphones don’t literally burn the skin of cellphone users.
But three of the four ruling members of FCC hail from the telecommunications industry. And cellphone-safety advocates claim that the industry is worried intensely about potential liability and the loss of $160 billion per year in sales if cellphones are proven to cause cancer or if the federal government even hints that consumers should take precautions.
“The lawyers are running the show” at FCC, says epidemiologist Devra Davis, who is a former professor of public health at University of Pittsburgh and the author of Disconnect, which is about cellphones and health.
We interviewed 34 doctors, industry representatives, lawyers, scientists and cellphone-safety advocates and reviewed hundreds of pages of documents and studies to help consumers to sort out the latest health information about cellphones. We found that too many industry-sponsored groups are spinning the safety debate. And in light of all of the scientific uncertainty, we believe that consumers should exercise caution when they use a cellphone. We agree with National Academy of Sciences, which in 2008 called for more research into the safety of the technology.
Although no link has been made between cellphone use and cancer, it can take decades for cancer to develop in a person after he/she is exposed to a potential carcinogen. Cellphones have been around since 1983, but their usage has become commonplace only in the past decade. Five billion people now use cellphones worldwide, so if cellphones pose even a small cancer risk, it would constitute a significant public-health problem, says Michael Wyde, who is project manager for a cellphone health study that’s being conducted by National Institute of Environmental Health Science’s National Toxicology Program (NTP).
Other nations, which include Canada, England, Finland and France, urge consumers to minimize their exposure to cellphone radiation and require telecommunications businesses to pay for independent research to address health concerns. In contrast, the approach in the United States has been to see whether bodies pile up before officials urge any change at all.
INVISIBLE WAVES. The health concerns about cellphones revolve around their RF EMF emissions. All experts acknowledge that these fields penetrate into human tissue, just like microwaves penetrate into food. The question: How much RF EMF penetration is unhealthy?
To protect cellphone users, FCC in 1996 adopted a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram (w/kg) of tissue. SAR measures the amount of energy that’s emitted by cellphones and is similar to the wattage rating for a light bulb. But SAR isn’t a measure of cumulative RF EMF exposure, which is what scientists believe might cause cancer. Cellphone manufacturers must have their phones tested by FCC-approved laboratories to certify that the devices emit less than 1.6 w/kg of energy.
FCC considers SAR to be a good guideline to prevent tissue burns, but it’s irrelevant to the larger issue of cancer and other health issues. Unfortunately, no standard exists for measuring cumulative exposure to RF EMF. FCC spokesperson David Fiske says other agencies, not FCC, should set such a health standard for cellphone use.
In cellphone manuals, most manufacturers tell consumers to keep the devices some distance from the head to reduce exposure to RF EMF. For instance, Motorola recommends keeping its Backflip model 1 inch from the head, and Samsung recommends keeping its Alias 2 model 0.59 inches from the head. Of course, you won’t know how far your phone is from your head unless you use a ruler and look in a mirror.
Still, FCC says this is better than trying to purchase a phone based on its SAR, which is why it doesn’t publish those ratings. According to FCC, cellphone-emissions exposure also is influenced by how much time that people spend talking on their cellphone and where they use it. That’s because the power level of a cellphone automatically adjusts to the strength of its connection. In enclosures, such as on a train, a signal can be weak, and a cellphone will power up and thus increase the user’s exposure to RF EMF.
A cellphone’s power level also depends on where you live, according to a 2010 study in Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology. Cellphones boost their power in rural areas, because cellphone towers that send and receive signals in rural areas often are more distant from users than are those that function in urban areas. Thus, rural consumers are exposed to more RF EMF while they use their cellphone.
Whatever the power level, children—because of their thin skulls—warrant special protection, says Jonathan Samet, who is a professor of medicine at University of Southern California and a member of IARC. He cautions parents “to make sure your child has the lowest exposure.” That means that parents should encourage text messaging instead of phone calls and limits on the duration of cellphone conversations, although Samet says nobody agrees on a specific time limit.
Little Rock, Arkansas
Egypt, Cairo: city limits,
Sierra Leone, Freetown,
The Netherlands, Amsterdam
Although the FDA takes a neutral position on cell phone radiation our government has known of its problems for some time. During the Cold War the American Embassy in Moscow was “micro-waved” by the Russian Embassy. The American ambassador became ill and was soon diagnosed with leukemia. His replacement also became ill and was diagnosed with leukemia. Embassy staff members became ill. After an investigation it was learned that low level frequencies, like cell phone radiation, were responsible. Furthermore, after extensive study the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency warned all of its personnel of risks from low-level radiation. (Just FYI, microwave radiation and cell phone radiation is basically the same.)
Dr. George Carlo, the lead scientist for the largest research study ever conducted on cell phone radiation, recently made the following statement:
“When you put all the science together, we come to the irrefutable conclusion that there’s a major health crisis coming, probably already underway. Not just cancer, but also learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, autism, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and psychological and behavioral problems–all mediated by the same mechanism. That’s why we’re so worried. Time is running out. When you put the pieces of the puzzle together, it’s such a wide-ranging problem. It’s unlike anything we’ve ever seen before.”
Consider a few facts about cell phone radiation:
* Talking on a cell phone 500 to 1000 minutes a month increases the probability of brain cancer by 300%
* Cell phone radiation has been shown to damage or break DNA
* Cell phone radiation causes the blood-brain barrier to leak
* Teenagers talk on cell phones an average of 2600 minutes a month
* Cell phone radiation is responsible for a 30% reduction in sperm count in men who carry cell phones on belts
Cell phone radiation is everywhere. In fact, the exposure to our children today is one hundred million times worse than the exposure of their grandparents. That’s not a good thing because the damage done by cell phone radiation can be more damaging to kids than adults. Children have softer bones allowing the radiation to penetrate deeper.
Just recently Europe’s top environmental watchdog group called for immediate action to reduce exposure to cell phone radiation. The German government is also advising its people to avoid cell phone radiation by using wired connections instead of WiFi and to use landline phones instead of cell phones. Understanding that cell phone radiation is a problem for kids, the British government advised parents to restrict cell phone use to children over 12 years of age. The U.S. government remains silent. Sometimes money and politics are strong adversaries of truth.
Cell phones were the only radiation-emitting devices ever sold to the public without ANY pre-market safety testing. Does that trouble you? And get this. So many people today are using these devices that you don’t have to personally own one to be exposed to cell phone radiation. It’s like second-hand smoke. And since wireless information is now being beamed from satellites in space (how do you think a GPS device works?) there is no escaping its exposure anywhere on our planet.
For many years we were told that tobacco, lead and asbestos were safe. Many found out otherwise after it was too late. It’s time to understand what’s going on here. Cell phone radiation just might be the biggest toxin of this century. Let’s not be fooled again. Radiation roulette is not a game we want to play.
Al ‘Awdah, United Arab Emirates, Al ‘Awdah, UAE
If use your cell from dusk to dawn like so many of us then you are sending direct dosages of radiation to your brain. If you use your blue tooth plastered to your ear guess what… Now you might say well it hasn’t killed me yet! Well you might want to read this:
EMF (Electro Magnetic Fields) have been widely researched and questions about cell phone radiation safety are considered unsettled. Several research teams from various countries report a higher risk of developing brain and salivary gland cancer among high-volume, long-term cell phone users compared to people who use cell phones less often. Other research teams have found that cell phone radiation may cause serious problems in children, spur neurological changes in adults, and damage sperm.
Here are some of the great benefits of the EMF Chip and Safety Tips:
Using the speaker phone reduces radiation to the head as do headsets which emit significantly less radiation than cell phones.
Use the CieAura EMF Chip and replace it every 4 to 8 weeks. The EMF Chip counteracts your cell phone’s emissions and fortifies the body’s natural resistance to EMFs which occur from cell phones, especially in concentrated areas of the body, such as your ears and brains.
When possible, text instead of talk; it takes less power to send a text message than to send a voice message (talk) which means less radiation. Also, texting keeps radiation away from your head.
Fewer signal bars on your phone means that it omits more radiation trying to get the signal to the tower. Take or make calls when your phone has a strong signal. If you have a poor signal, STAY OFF THE PHONE.
Researchers in the U.S., France and Japan have reported that children’s brains absorb twice as much radiation compared to adults because of children’s thinner skulls and because of their brains higher water and ion (charged particle) content, all factors which enhance radiation penetration. We recommend limiting your child’s phone use.
Radiation shields such as antenna caps or keypad covers reduce the connection quality and force the phone to transmit at a higher power with higher radiation. At the moment, public health agencies in the U.S. and other countries unanimously recommend against the use of such devices since they are untested and don’t undergo government review.
Elizabeth, New Jersey
Luxembourg, Luxembourg City
Andorra, Andorra la Vella,
Solomon Islands, Honiara,
Microwave – and other forms of electromagnetic – radiation are major (but conveniently disregarded, ignored, and overlooked) factors in many modern unexplained disease states. Insomnia, anxiety, vision problems, swollen lymph, headaches, extreme thirst, night sweats, fatigue, memory and concentration problems, muscle pain, weakened immunity, allergies, heart problems, and intestinal disturbances are all symptoms found in a disease process originally described in the 1970s as Microwave Sickness.
MobileWise’s report Mobile phone health risks: the case for action to protect children details evidence from more than 200 scientific studies linking children’s mobile phone use with serious health problems.
The report warns that children’s health is being put at risk by the failure of Government and phone companies to respond to the growing body of evidence linking mobile phone use with health hazards. Medical experts and MobileWise are calling on Government and industry to provide warnings and advice on ways to reduce the risk of health damage when using mobiles.
The possible health risks identified include brain tumours and damage to fertility, genes, the blood-brain barrier and melatonin production, as well as other biological effects thought to have a role in the development of cancer. Endorsed by a number of eminent doctors and scientists, the report highlights the growing and substantial body of evidence that has been obscured in the debate over these risks.
Research highlighted in the new report shows that children’s brains are more susceptible to the effects of mobile phone radiation because of their smaller heads, thinner skulls and greater tissue conductivity.
The report calls for children to be informed about how to limit their exposure – including keeping calls to a minimum, using headsets and keeping phones away from the groin.
Dr Lennart Hardell, Professor of Oncology and Cancer Epidemiology at Orebro University Hospital in Sweden, who has led several studies on the link between phones and cancer, says: “This timely report draws attention to the large body of evidence which links prolonged phone use to health hazards such as brain tumours.”
British neurosurgeon Kevin O’Neill says: “This report does much to elucidate the scientific evidence and policy issues. We know that children are much more vulnerable to phone radiation and that there are simple measures available to help them cut their exposure ”
St. Louis, Missouri
Mauritius, Port Louis
Hervey Bay, Queensland
Providence, Rhode Island
Al Fara’, United Arab Emirates, Al Fara’, UAE
What is Ostrich Anti-Radiation Patch?
The Anti-Radiation Patch is breakthrough in technology which can successfully reduce the harmful effects of Electromagnetic Frequency (EMF) radiation up to 99.9%. Scientifically proven by Hong kong research centre and there is a Test Certificate issued. The key ingredients used are Bio ceramics embedded in six layers on water proof polyester base scalar energy infused patch is a product of advanced Japanese technology.
Effects of Radiation to Human
These radiation is also called “”invisible killer””, because it can cause the function obstacles of central nervous system which can cause many symptoms, such as headache, dizziness, insomnia, hair loss, etc., and for severe case may cause cancer.
Benefits of using Anti-Radiation Patch
The ultra thin patch can effectively shield man-made electromagnetic frequency (EMF) radiation from range of 30 to 1000MHz. It protects you against possible human brain injury while enjoying using your cellular phone.
It protects your family, your friends and the people you know from the world of radiation.
Application of the Anti-Radiation Sticker
1. Remove the patch from the package.
2. Peel-off the under layer adhesive.
3. Position the patch to your desire location then remove the top adhesive.
4. Suggested location are near the battery and the origin supply of the electricity.
5. You are suggested to apply more patches to those high electricity consumed electronics.
What are the electronics that need to apply the Anti Radiation Sticker?
All electronics that require electricity and battery generate radiation, like cell phone, laptop, computer, monitor, TV, mp3/4 player, aircon, fridge, microwave, etc.
El Monte, California
The Netherlands, Amsterdam,
Equatorial Guinea, Malabo,
Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou,”
Today, almost every individual uses a mobile phone without being aware of it’s harmful side effects. Like trendy clothes, all want to use trendy mobiles to look fashionable.
Flashing costly mobiles is the order of the day. Many carry two mobiles to flaunt at public places.
Just Think for yourself. Do You really need to use a mobile all the time? Can you not do your work by communicating on a land line number? Must you converse in trains, buses , malls and other public places? Will your work really suffer, if you wait to get to a land line number?
Well, if you sincerely analyze the real necessity of a mobile phone in your work/business, you will probably feel that you are unnecessarily using the mobile most of the times, under the garb of business.
Have you ever pondered over the harmful/ adverse effects of mobile usage on your body/brain.
Mobile phones and their link with cancer has been an ongoing debate for decades. Reports received after various studies are inconclusive. Some reports point towards brain tumor while some fail to substantiate the same.
With proper planning and usage, one can safeguard oneself from the adverse effects of mobiles on our body/brain.
Harmful Effects Of Mobiles
Mobile phones and personal communications systems are low-power radio devices that transmit and receive signals in the radio frequency (RF) range 900 and/or 1800 megahertz through a network of base stations. Most countries have brought in regulations to limit public exposure to RF radiation.
Exposure to RF radiation can occur from the base station, and mobile phones.The intensity of radiation decreases a few meters from the antenna. Most of the base stations are located in populated areas therefore, those people living in the path of the beam are more prone to exposure to radiations.
Every mobile has a transmitter and an antenna. RF energy generated by transmitter (one to two watts) is radiated through Antenna. Most of the energy is absorbed by brain since, mobile is held close to the head. Due to absorption of RF energy (expressed as specific absorption rate- SAR) by human body, the tissue temperature of body increases. SAR is measured in units of watts per kg (W/Kg ) of tissue.
However ,If the heat generated is small, the body’s thermoregulatory mechanism can dissipate it without causing adverse effects. If the temperature exceeds this capacity, (about 1 to 2 degree celsius), tissue damage may occur.
Based on the experiments carried out on some animals and human beings (volunteers), some of the adverse affects called as “Thermal Effects” are listed below:-
Penetration of the blood-brain barrier.
Disturbed neuro muscular functions.
Reduced sperm production.
Other possible effects are as follows:-
Spending a lot of time on cell phone disturbs sleep.
Studies show that use of cell phones for more than 10 years increase the risk of Glioma
Radio waves from mobile phones do harm body cells and damage DNA.
High blood pressure.
Headaches, Fatigue, Stress
Because of their smaller heads, thinner skulls and higher tissue conductivity, children may absorb more energy from a given phone than adults.
The ICNIRP ( International Commission for Non-ionizing Radiation Protection) has recommended RF exposure levels for general public, in terms of power densities, as 4.5 W/m2 and 9.0 W/m2 respectively for the 900 and 1800 MHZ frequency radiations. Exposures below these levels are harmless.
Surveys have shown that RF exposure from base stations in areas accessible to public are normally much lower than these guidelines. However, the actual levels depend upon the number of channels, total power radiated, multiplicity of the towers in the neighborhood etc.
No surveys have been conducted in India.
The onus for demonstrating safety of base stations now lies with service providers.
The Indian government recently decided to adopt the guidelines issued by ICNIRP, an international science body,
It is in the interest of every individual to use mobiles sparingly to avoid any possible chance of harmful effects of RF radiations on human body.
Next time you use a mobile, please think twice-Can you do without a mobile?
Cary, North Carolina
Darwin, Northern Territory