Mobile phone or wireless DECT base radiation exposure to mice produces changes in proteome of several parts of the brain.

Journal of Electromagnetic Biological medicine studied brain responses to exposure to a mobile or wireless phone base radiation. Protein changes were found in the brain which may explain human health hazards: headaches, sleep disturbance, memory deficits.

 

First of all, what is proteome?
It's defined as the entire set of proteins expressed by a cell, tissue, or organism. In this research, we know they targeted cell tissue in specific parts of the brain: the cerebellum, hippocampus, and frontal lobe. Proteomes have many different appearances, but the drawing to the right shows and example the interconnection of cells parts and neurofilaments that make up a proteome).

What parts of the brain did they test?
The cerebellum is responsible for many functions in your body including spatial orientation, posture and coordination. It sits at the back of your head, tucked under your cortex, and just above your neck. The hippocampus is involved in the transfer of short-term memory to long-term memory as well as spatial navigation. It is deep in the center of your brain. Your frontal lobes, sitting towards your forehead, are responsible in part, for your motor coordination, planning, reasoning, judgment, impulse control and memory.Obviously, all these parts of the brain allow you to function fully and normally.

The Study
In this research, they split of the mice into 3 groups. The first group was exposed to a typical mobile phone with SAR readings of 0.17-.37. 3 hours a day for 8 months. The second group was exposed to a wirelss DECT (Digital Enchanced Cordless Phone) base telephone at a SAR level range of 0..12-0.028 W/kg for 8 hours a day for 8 months. The 3rd group consisted of the sham animals.

Results and Conclusions: The results showed that the long term exposure to radiation produced changes in the expression of 143 proteins. The observed changes might have affected brain plasticity - a key aspect of a healthy brain. They conjectured this might have been due to cell death, or oxidative stress on the nervous system.

The researchers concluded that these changes may explain the symptoms that many individuals are now experiencing with long term radiation exposure from both mobile phones including headaches, sleep distrubance,

Original Study Electromagn Biol Med. 2012 Jan 20

Researchers: Fragopoulou AF, Samara A, Antonelou MH, Xanthopoulou A, Papadopoulou A, Vougus K, Koutsogiannopoulou E, Anastsiasdou E, Stravopodis DJ, Tsangaris GT, Margaritis HL. Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics, Athens University, Athens, Greece

*SAR stands for specific absorption rate. It is a way of measuring the quantity of RF (radio frequency) energy that is absorbed by the body. The lower the rate, the less electromagnetic radiation you are being exposed to. SAR ratings are important to check when you buy a phone! So far, Motorola often has the hightest SAR ratings; Samsung often has the lowest, and the iPhone is nearly as high as the Motorola phones (sorry, Apple fans....we know it's a fun phone to have!)

 

 

Is Your Health on the Line?

New studies show that some mobile gadgets we use every day might pose serious risks. Here's how to stay safe in a wireless world.

By Sascha de Gersdorff, Women's Health

Unless you've had your cell phone permanently glued to your ear, chances are you've heard the recent health buzz: Mobile devices may cause cancer.

While it's true that the National Cancer Institute has ruled them safe, a growing number of independent researchers disagree.(News in after the printing of this article - World Health Organization Admits in Dramatic Reversal of Opinion, Cell Phones Possibly (probably) Cause Cancer) (If WHO is coming out with this statement, chances are the National Cancer Institute won't be far behind)

Those experts point out that the FCC wireless regulations on cell phone safety are largely based on something called specific absorption rate (SAR) levels, or the rate at which our bodies absorb radiation. Most phones do comply with the federal standards, but SAR monitors only thermal effects. (In other words, if the radiation from your phone isn't cooking your brain, it's regarded as safe.)

But mounting scientific evidence suggests that nonthermal radio frequency radiation (RF)—the invisible energy waves that connect cell phones to cell towers, and power numerous other everyday items—can damage our immune systems and alter our cellular makeup, even at intensities considered safe by the FCC.

"The problem is that RF can transfer energy waves into your body and disrupt its normal functioning," explains Cindy Sage, an environmental consultant in Santa Barbara, California, who has studied radiation for 28 years. "Here's why that's crucial: Overwhelming evidence shows that RF can cause DNA damage, and DNA damage is a necessary precursor to cancer."

The 2010 Interphone study, the largest to date on RF exposure from mobile phones, has spawned a quagmire of controversy, says health researcher and medical writer Kerry Crofton, Ph.D., who spent four years reviewing RF science for her book Wireless Radiation Rescue: Safeguarding Your Family from the Risks of Electro-Pollution. Many groups, including the National Cancer Institute and the telecom industry, read the results of that study as a green light for wireless calling. Others, like Crofton, point out that because it was largely based on lower cellphone usage in the '90s, the research has little bearing on today's world, in which 285 million Americans have mobile phones and 83 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds are "wired" all the time and sleep with their cell phones next to their heads.(Studies show that ten years of cell phone use doubles the risk of cancer...and that was also based on lower usage than what is typical today)

One thing the Interphone study did find? People who chatted via cell for just 30 minutes a day for 10 years saw their risk of glioma (the type of brain tumor that killed Ted Kennedy) rise 40 percent. As a result, many European countries are considering banning cell phones for children under age 6
(RF penetrates little kids' brains more easily), and France has already banned all wireless technology in some schools and many public places, notes physician and epidemiologist Samuel Milham, M.D., a leader in the growing field of electromagnetic research.

All parties agree on this: More studies need to be done. In the meantime, it's best to take easy precautions—and not just with mobile phones.

"Never before in human history have we gone from one radiated environment to another," says Crofton. "We're going to wireless offices and living in wireless homes. Even beaches and parks are going wireless. We're exposed everywhere."

The good news is that you don't need to ditch your gadgets. This advice will let you stay plugged in—and keep you healthy.

You're surrounded by electronics at home and work. But you can avoid this number one health enemy, use the tips below, AND wear a BioElectric Shield EMF Protection Pendant.

Cell Phones

When your phone is on (which it probably is even as you read this) it's constantly sending and receiving RF signals to and from the nearest cell tower to keep you in service. The farther you are from a tower, the harder your phone has to work and the more RF it emits, explains David Carpenter, M.D., director of the Institute for Health and Environment at the University at Albany. The activity really amps up when you're, say, driving through rural areas.
Plus, within the close confines of a car, your entire core is exposed to the radiation.

The safer solution: Keep your phone off when driving until you really need it, says Carpenter. And no matter where you are, avoid holding a cell phone directly to your noggin (the Interphone study showed gliomas were more prevalent on the side of the head people continuously pressed phones to), always keep it at least six inches or more from your body (in your purse, not your pocket), and use either speakerphone or a corded headset (not a wireless headset). Or text up a storm. If you have a smartphone that's loaded with games, music, and movies, turn your wireless settings off while playing or rocking out. Similarly, don't ever use your cell phone as a bedside alarm clock without first disabling the wireless mode.

Cordless Phones

These stealth wireless threats "have become so powerful, they're often as strong as cell phones," says Sage. "The phone base is like a mini cell tower. It radiates 24-7 and can have a range of up to 300 feet." Particularly suspect are digital enhanced cordless telecommunication (DECT) phones. Preliminary blind studies have found that, when sitting beside a DECT phone base, some people experienced arrhythmia, a troubling heartbeat irregularity that could eventually lead to stroke or coronary disease, says Sage.

The safer solution: You might feel somewhat retro, but "just get a corded phone with an extra-long cord so you can still walk around," says Crofton. "They're better, they're cheaper, and they work in a power outage. Every time you replace a DECT with a corded phone, you're cutting the RF levels in your home significantly."(Other EMf protection solutions, hollow tube corded headsets, or the WaveShield3000 for your cordless phone)

Wireless Routers

Your neighborhood coffee shop's wireless Internet access may often seem like a godsend, but the router that's needed to provide the service is continuously emitting high levels of RF (up to 200 feet out), and that constant exposure has been linked to deadly diseases. "If the whole body is radiated by a router's RF emissions, the greatest concern is cancer, especially leukemia," says Carpenter. Also, be aware of your at-home router and any plug-in wireless USB cards you often use.

The safer solution: Ditch your wireless router and plug your computer directly into a cable modem, says Sage. That Ethernet technology doesn't leak RF and is often faster and more secure. If you just can't give up your wireless router (e.g., if you live in a home with a handful of computer users), make sure you sit as far away from it as possible, says Crofton, and turn it off at night and whenever you're not online. Another easy fix: Plug your router into a surge protector with a timer, and set it to go off each night so you don't have to remember to flip the switch. (This isn't normally an option at  your office, using a BioElectric Room Shield provides additional protection for yourself and those around you)

Laptops

"When you hold your laptop on your lap, what you're essentially doing is radiating your pelvis," says Carpenter, "so all the cancers that affect that area are of concern." Indeed, early studies point to a heightened risk of testicular cancer for men who keep RF-emitting devices close to their belts. For women, adds Carpenter, "the studies aren't quite there yet, but I think we can say that anything that might cause cancer almost always causes birth defects, so pregnant women—or those wanting to become pregnant soon—should take extra precautions."(Read article about cell-phone and pregnancy)

The safer solution: Keep your laptop off your lap (if you have to rest it there, buffer it with a sturdy pillow that's at least six inches thick). Try to use a desktop computer at home and treat your laptop as an on-the-go convenience. One thing to keep in mind: Laptops are a high RF radiation risk only while connected to wireless Internet, so when you're watching a DVD, fiddling around with your photos, or writing that dissertation, just disable your connection and you'll be much safer.

Baby Monitors

"Baby monitors release more RF than cell phones do, and putting them next to a crib is very, very unwise," says Carpenter. He points to a recent University of Utah study that shows RF radiation can penetrate almost entirely through a child's brain, which doesn't form completely until nearly 20 years of age. "It's very clear from all the existing research that the younger the child is, the more vulnerable he or she is to the effects of RF radiation."

The safer solution: Consider not using a baby monitor. If you absolutely must use one, place it far from your baby's crib—at least 10 to 15 feet away.

Provided by Women's Health

Republished from MSN Health

http://health.msn.com/healthy-living/is-your-health-on-the-line

Parliamentary Assembly - The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment

Provisional edition

Resolution 1815 (2011) 27 May 2011

1. The Parliamentary Assembly has repeatedly stressed the importance of states’ commitment to preserving the environment and environmental health, as set out in many charters, conventions, declarations and protocols since the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment and the Stockholm Declaration (Stockholm, 1972). The Assembly refers to its past work in this field, namely Recommendation 1863 (2009) on environment and health, Recommendation 1947 (2010) on noise and light pollution, and more generally, Recommendation 1885 (2009) on drafting an additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to a healthy environment and Recommendation 1430 (1999) on access to information, public participation in environmental decision-making and access to justice – implementation of the Aarhus Convention.

2. The potential health effects of the very low frequency of electromagnetic fields surrounding power lines and electrical devices are the subject of ongoing research and a significant amount of public debate. According to the World Health Organisation, electromagnetic fields of all frequencies represent one of the most common and fastest growing environmental influences, about which anxiety and speculation are spreading. All populations are now exposed to varying degrees of to electromagnetic fields, the levels of which will continue to increase as technology advances.

3. Mobile telephony has become commonplace around the world. This wireless technology relies upon an extensive network of fixed antennas, or base stations, relaying information with radio frequency signals. Over 1.4 million base stations exist worldwide and the number is increasing significantly with the introduction of third generation technology. Other wireless networks that allow high-speed internet access and services, such as wireless local area networks, are also increasingly common in homes, offices and many public areas (airports, schools, residential and urban areas). As the number of base stations and local wireless networks increases, so does the radio frequency exposure of the population. Read More about WHO's Report that Cellphones probably are cancer causing.

4. While electrical and electromagnetic fields in certain frequency bands have wholly beneficial effects which are applied in medicine, other non-ionising frequencies, be they sourced from extremely low frequencies, power lines or certain high frequency waves used in the fields of radar, telecommunications and mobile telephony, appear to have more or less potentially harmful, non-thermal, biological effects on plants, insects and animals as well as the human body even when exposed to levels that are below the official threshold values.

5. As regards standards or threshold values for emissions of electromagnetic fields of all types and frequencies, the Assembly recommends that the ALARA or “as low as reasonably achievable” principle is applied, covering both the so-called thermal effects and the athermic or biological effects of electromagnetic emissions or radiation. Moreover, the precautionary principle should be applicable when scientific evaluation does not allow the risk to be determined with sufficient certainty, especially given the context of growing exposure of the population, including particularly vulnerable groups such as young people and children, which could lead to extremely high human and economic costs of inaction if early warnings are neglected.

6. The Assembly regrets that, despite calls for the respect of the precautionary principle and despite all the recommendations, declarations and a number of statutory and legislative advances, there is still a lack of reaction to known or emerging environmental and health risks and virtually systematic delays in adopting and implementing effective preventive measures. Waiting for high levels of scientific and clinical proof before taking action to prevent well-known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs, as was the case with asbestos, leaded petrol and tobacco.

7. Moreover, the Assembly notes that the problem of electromagnetic fields or waves and the potential consequences for the environment and health has clear parallels with other current issues, such as the licensing of medication, chemicals, pesticides, heavy metals or genetically modified organisms. It therefore highlights that the issue of independence and credibility of scientific expertise is crucial to accomplish a transparent and balanced assessment of potential negative impacts on the environment and human health.

8. In light of the above considerations, the Assembly recommends that the member states of the Council of Europe:

8.1. in general terms:

8.1.1. take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people who seem to be most at risk from head tumours;

8.1.2. reconsider the scientific basis for the present electromagnetic fields exposure standards set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection, which have serious limitations and apply “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) principles, covering both thermal effects and the athermic or biological effects of electromagnetic emissions or radiation;

8.1.3. put in place information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of potentially harmful long-term biological effects on the environment and on human health, especially targeting children, teenagers and young people of reproductive age;

8.1.4. pay particular attention to “electrosensitive” persons suffering from a syndrome of intolerance to electromagnetic fields and introduce special measures to protect them, including the creation of wave-free areas not covered by the wireless network;

8.1.5. in order to reduce costs, save energy, and protect the environment and human health, step up research on new types of antennas and mobile phone and DECT-type devices, and encourage research to develop telecommunication based on other technologies which are just as efficient but have less negative effects on the environment and health;

8.2. concerning the private use of mobile phones, DECT phones, WiFi, WLAN and WIMAX for computers and other wireless devices such as baby phones:

8.2.1. set preventive thresholds for levels of long-term exposure to microwaves in all indoor areas, in accordance with the precautionary principle, not exceeding 0.6 volts per metre, and in the medium term to reduce it to 0.2 volts per metre;

8.2.2. undertake appropriate risk-assessment procedures for all new types of device prior to licensing;

8.2.3. introduce clear labelling indicating the presence of microwaves or electromagnetic fields, the transmitting power or the specific absorption rate (SAR) of the device and any health risks connected with its use;

8.2.4. raise awareness on potential health risks of DECT-type wireless telephones, baby monitors and other domestic appliances which emit continuous pulse waves, if all electrical equipment is left permanently on standby, and recommend the use of wired, fixed telephones at home or, failing that, models which do not permanently emit pulse waves;

8.3. concerning the protection of children:

8.3.1. develop within different ministries (education, environment and health) targeted information campaigns aimed at teachers, parents and children to alert them to the specific risks of early, ill-considered and prolonged use of mobiles and other devices emitting microwaves;

8.3.2. for children in general, and particularly in schools and classrooms, give preference to wired Internet connections, and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises;

8.4. concerning the planning of electric power lines and relay antenna base stations:

8.4.1. introduce town planning measures to keep high-voltage power lines and other electric installations at a safe distance from dwellings;

8.4.2. apply strict safety standards for sound electric systems in new dwellings;

8.4.3. reduce threshold values for relay antennas in accordance with the ALARA principle and install systems for comprehensive and continuous monitoring of all antennas;

8.4.4. determine the sites of any new GSM, UMTS, WiFi or WIMAX antennas not solely according to the operators’ interests but in consultation with local and regional government officials, local residents and associations of concerned citizens;

8.5. concerning risk assessment and precautions:

8.5.1. make risk assessment more prevention oriented;

8.5.2. improve risk-assessment standards and quality by creating a standard risk scale, making the indication of the risk level mandatory, commissioning several risk hypotheses and considering compatibility with real life conditions;

8.5.3. pay heed to and protect “early warning” scientists;

8.5.4. formulate a human rights oriented definition of the precautionary and ALARA principles;

8.5.5. increase public funding of independent research, inter alia through grants from industry and taxation of products which are the subject of public research studies to evaluate health risks;

8.5.6. create independent commissions for the allocation of public funds;

8.5.7. make the transparency of lobby groups mandatory;

8.5.8. promote pluralist and contradictory debates between all stakeholders, including civil society (Aarhus Convention).

1 Text adopted by the Standing Committee, acting on behalf of the Assembly, on 27 May 2011 (see Doc. 12608, report of the Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs, rapporteur: Mr Huss).

Download PDF

---

We are encouraged that the FCC, Parliamentary Assembly and World Health Organization WHO, are all coming out and cautioning people that cell-phones, wi-fi and all our wireless technologies are potential harmful to our health. Until now we've often been out waving a red flag of alarm only to have people brush it off because the "powers that be" still said it was safe.

World Health Organization - WHO - Recognizes Electromagnetic Sensitivity as an Illness
We are facing very high numbers of people already diagnosed, and also between 12% and 15% of the population has some kind of disturbance in the presence of a chemical substance.  In the EHS, figures of affected people are between 3 and 6% of the population, but these numbers are growing continuously.

World Health Organization – International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS One study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category
of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period).

Our hope is that technology will be brought to save standards, but we all know that simply the economics of that are huge, thus change won't be happening any time soon.

In the meantime you can take steps to protect yourself.

Steps to Staying Safe

• Wear an EMF Protection Pendant - What Level of Protection will fit your lifestyle? Consult our EMF Protection and your Lifestyle Chart
• Put it on speaker. Because your exposure drops exponentially as you move the phone away from your head, you don’t have to keep the phone very far away to reduce your exposure by 1,000 to 10,000 times.
• Go wired. In crowded, noisy areas, use a wired radiation reducing headset instead. If you must use a wireless headset, turn it off when you’re not using it.
• Put Cellular Phone radiation protection directly on your cell phone. This will redirect some of the radiation. If you are wearing a BioElectric Shield AND use the WaveShield you have extremely strong protection from the cellular phone radiation.
• Store it. Unless you’re on it, stow the phone in your purse or bag. If you keep it on your waist, keep it turned off. Studies have shown that keeping a cell phone in your pocket can decrease sperm count.
• Save it for a strong signal. When reception is bad (such as in a rural areas or when you’re driving) use your phone for emergencies only. The weaker the signal, the more the radio frequency has to boost itself to get connected, increasing your exposure.
• Protect the kids. Do not let children use cell phones next to their heads. For older kids, it shouldn’t take much encouragement to get them to text more than they chat. (Children are more sensitive to radiation).

 

 

 

Electromagnetic Sensitivity Is Recognized as a Serious Health Issue by World Health Organization - (WHO)

The World Health Organization has released their findings that between 3 and 6% of the population is ill from electromagnetic sensitivity, but these numbers are growing continuously and upwards of 30% are affected and don't even know it.

This is good news. I know it doesn't sound like it, but our hope is that people will start taking the subject seriously, but also that those who are being impacted will begin to discover the causes of their problems and be able to find healing. EMF sensitivity is a serious issue with symptoms that are so wide ranging it's staggering to think of.

Read more: World Health Organization - WHO - Recognizes Electromagnetic Sensitivity as an Illness

Warning to Public, Smart Meters Endanger Health

 

 

 

 

14 September 2010

Press Release - Warning to the Public

Stratford's Dangerous "Smart Meters"

The huge increase in radiation around Stratford caused by smart meters and city wide Wi Fi is a very serious long term danger to residents. The health of some people is likely to be severely compromised by exposure to the radiation. I have seen several of the meters and taken measurements near homes that have them, and I have found that strong radiation levels from smart meters are penetrating through house walls. They are exposing residents to dangerous electro magnetic pollution inside their homes.

Read more: Smart Meters May Cause Harm

Wi-Fi Makes Trees Sick, Study Says

By René Schoemaker , IDG News

Editorial note: A Dutch agency that looks into the health effects of electromagnetic radiation issued a statement that the results of the research described in this story were unconfirmed. "Based on the information now available [it] can not be concluded that the Wi-Fi radio signals leads to damage to trees or other plants," it said, according to a Google translation.

Radiation from Wi-Fi networks is harmful to trees, causing significant variations in growth, as well as bleeding and fissures in the bark, according to a recent study in the Netherlands.

All deciduous trees in the Western world are affected, according to the study by Wageningen University. The city of Alphen aan den Rijn ordered the study five years ago after officials found unexplained abnormalities on trees that couldn't be ascribed to a virus or bacterial infection.

Additional testing found the disease to occur throughout the Western world. In the Netherlands, about 70 percent of all trees in urban areas show the same symptoms, compared with only 10 percent five years ago. Trees in densely forested areas are hardly affected.

Besides the electromagnetic fields created by mobile-phone networks and wireless LANs, ultrafine particles emitted by cars and trucks may also be to blame. These particles are so small they are able to enter the organisms.

The study exposed 20 ash trees to various radiation sources for a period of three months. Trees placed closest to the Wi-Fi radio demonstrated a "lead-like shine" on their leaves that was caused by the dying of the upper and lower epidermis of the leaves. This would eventually result in the death of parts of the leaves. The study also found that Wi-Fi radiation could inhibit the growth of corn cobs.

The researchers urged that further studies were needed to confirm the current results and determine long-term effects of wireless radiation on trees.

 

---

 

geee.. if this frequency is affecting agricultural tissue in such profound ways.. oops, I guess the non commercially funded
studies on human and mammalian cell line alterations just may have been the proverbial canary.

Once again, a study has shown there may be cause for concern, but until the results pile up the answers aren't conclusive. Haven't we been hearing that a lot? Well, sure, it's true. The effects of toxins and EMF are cummulative. Smoking one cigarette isn't going to cause long-term damage, but do it for 20-30 years and problems begin to be conclusive. Basically this points out that we are in the early stages, we won't have all the answers for decades possibly, but in the interim we're all be exposed to what many feel are potential dangerous, even lethal, levels of electromagnetic radiation. A nuclear reactor accident gets a lot of attention, but the day to day levels of radiation we are subjected to are mostly ignored or poked fun at.

Your choices:

Ignore it all.

Take it seriously and do what you can to prevent exposure and protect your health.

What did you decide? If you want to protect your health - Read these Tips for Cell Phone Safety, put protection on your cell phones and most importantly wear your Bioshield EMF Protection Pendant. Shield wearers report feeling less stressed, more focused and more energized.

 

Chip Implants Linked to Animal Tumors

By TODD LEWAN
The Associated Press
Saturday, September 8, 2007; 2:04 PM

-- When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved implanting microchips in humans, the manufacturer said it would save lives, letting doctors scan the tiny transponders to access patients' medical records almost instantly. The FDA found "reasonable assurance" the device was safe, and a sub-agency even called it one of 2005's top "innovative technologies."

But neither the company nor the regulators publicly mentioned this: A series of veterinary and toxicology studies, dating to the mid-1990s, stated that chip implants had "induced" malignant tumors in some lab mice and rats.

"The transponders were the cause of the tumors," said Keith Johnson, a retired toxicologic pathologist, explaining in a phone interview the findings of a 1996 study he led at the Dow Chemical Co. in Midland, Mich.

Leading cancer specialists reviewed the research for The Associated Press and, while cautioning that animal test results do not necessarily apply to humans, said the findings troubled them. Some said they would not allow family members to receive implants, and all urged further research before the glass-encased transponders are widely implanted in people.

To date, about 2,000 of the so-called radio frequency identification, or RFID, devices have been implanted in humans worldwide, according to VeriChip Corp. The company, which sees a target market of 45 million Americans for its medical monitoring chips, insists the devices are safe, as does its parent company, Applied Digital Solutions, of Delray Beach, Fla.

"We stand by our implantable products which have been approved by the FDA and/or other U.S. regulatory authorities," Scott Silverman, VeriChip Corp. chairman and chief executive officer, said in a written response to AP questions.

The company was "not aware of any studies that have resulted in malignant tumors in laboratory rats, mice and certainly not dogs or cats," but he added that millions of domestic pets have been implanted with microchips, without reports of significant problems.

"In fact, for more than 15 years we have used our encapsulated glass transponders with FDA approved anti-migration caps and received no complaints regarding malignant tumors caused by our product."

The FDA also stands by its approval of the technology.

Did the agency know of the tumor findings before approving the chip implants? The FDA declined repeated AP requests to specify what studies it reviewed.

The FDA is overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services, which, at the time of VeriChip's approval, was headed by Tommy Thompson. Two weeks after the device's approval took effect on Jan. 10, 2005, Thompson left his Cabinet post, and within five months was a board member of VeriChip Corp. and Applied Digital Solutions. He was compensated in cash and stock options.

Thompson, until recently a candidate for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, says he had no personal relationship with the company as the VeriChip was being evaluated, nor did he play any role in FDA's approval process of the RFID tag.

"I didn't even know VeriChip before I stepped down from the Department of Health and Human Services," he said in a telephone interview.

Also making no mention of the findings on animal tumors was a June report by the ethics committee of the American Medical Association, which touted the benefits of implantable RFID devices.

Had committee members reviewed the literature on cancer in chipped animals?

No, said Dr. Steven Stack, an AMA board member with knowledge of the committee's review.

Was the AMA aware of the studies?

No, he said.

___

Published in veterinary and toxicology journals between 1996 and 2006, the studies found that lab mice and rats injected with microchips sometimes developed subcutaneous "sarcomas" _ malignant tumors, most of them encasing the implants.

_ A 1998 study in Ridgefield, Conn., of 177 mice reported cancer incidence to be slightly higher than 10 percent _ a result the researchers described as "surprising."

_ A 2006 study in France detected tumors in 4.1 percent of 1,260 microchipped mice. This was one of six studies in which the scientists did not set out to find microchip-induced cancer but noticed the growths incidentally. They were testing compounds on behalf of chemical and pharmaceutical companies; but they ruled out the compounds as the tumors' cause. Because researchers only noted the most obvious tumors, the French study said, "These incidences may therefore slightly underestimate the true occurrence" of cancer.

_ In 1997, a study in Germany found cancers in 1 percent of 4,279 chipped mice. The tumors "are clearly due to the implanted microchips," the authors wrote.

Caveats accompanied the findings. "Blind leaps from the detection of tumors to the prediction of human health risk should be avoided," one study cautioned. Also, because none of the studies had a control group of animals that did not get chips, the normal rate of tumors cannot be determined and compared to the rate with chips implanted.

Still, after reviewing the research, specialists at some pre-eminent cancer institutions said the findings raised red flags.

"There's no way in the world, having read this information, that I would have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members," said Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

Before microchips are implanted on a large scale in humans, he said, testing should be done on larger animals, such as dogs or monkeys. "I mean, these are bad diseases. They are life-threatening. And given the preliminary animal data, it looks to me that there's definitely cause for concern."

Dr. George Demetri, director of the Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, agreed. Even though the tumor incidences were "reasonably small," in his view, the research underscored "certainly real risks" in RFID implants.

In humans, sarcomas, which strike connective tissues, can range from the highly curable to "tumors that are incredibly aggressive and can kill people in three to six months," he said.

At the Jackson Laboratory in Maine, a leader in mouse genetics research and the initiation of cancer, Dr. Oded Foreman, a forensic pathologist, also reviewed the studies at the AP's request.

At first he was skeptical, suggesting that chemicals administered in some of the studies could have caused the cancers and skewed the results. But he took a different view after seeing that control mice, which received no chemicals, also developed the cancers. "That might be a little hint that something real is happening here," he said. He, too, recommended further study, using mice, dogs or non-human primates.

Dr. Cheryl London, a veterinarian oncologist at Ohio State University, noted: "It's much easier to cause cancer in mice than it is in people. So it may be that what you're seeing in mice represents an exaggerated phenomenon of what may occur in people."

Tens of thousands of dogs have been chipped, she said, and veterinary pathologists haven't reported outbreaks of related sarcomas in the area of the neck, where canine implants are often done. (Published reports detailing malignant tumors in two chipped dogs turned up in AP's four-month examination of research on chips and health. In one dog, the researchers said cancer appeared linked to the presence of the embedded chip; in the other, the cancer's cause was uncertain.)

Nonetheless, London saw a need for a 20-year study of chipped canines "to see if you have a biological effect." Dr. Chand Khanna, a veterinary oncologist at the National Cancer Institute, also backed such a study, saying current evidence "does suggest some reason to be concerned about tumor formations."

Meanwhile, the animal study findings should be disclosed to anyone considering a chip implant, the cancer specialists agreed.

To date, however, that hasn't happened.

___

The product that VeriChip Corp. won approval for use in humans is an electronic capsule the size of two grains of rice. Generally, it is implanted with a syringe into an anesthetized portion of the upper arm.

When prompted by an electromagnetic scanner, the chip transmits a unique code. With the code, hospital staff can go on the Internet and access a patient's medical profile that is maintained in a database by VeriChip Corp. for an annual fee.

VeriChip Corp., whose parent company has been marketing radio tags for animals for more than a decade, sees an initial market of diabetics and people with heart conditions or Alzheimer's disease, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

The company is spending millions to assemble a national network of hospitals equipped to scan chipped patients.

But in its SEC filings, product labels and press releases, VeriChip Corp. has not mentioned the existence of research linking embedded transponders to tumors in test animals.

When the FDA approved the device, it noted some Verichip risks: The capsules could migrate around the body, making them difficult to extract; they might interfere with defibrillators, or be incompatible with MRI scans, causing burns. While also warning that the chips could cause "adverse tissue reaction," FDA made no reference to malignant growths in animal studies.

Did the agency review literature on microchip implants and animal cancer?

Dr. Katherine Albrecht, a privacy advocate and RFID expert, asked shortly after VeriChip's approval what evidence the agency had reviewed. When FDA declined to provide information, she filed a Freedom of Information Act request. More than a year later, she received a letter stating there were no documents matching her request.

"The public relies on the FDA to evaluate all the data and make sure the devices it approves are safe," she says, "but if they're not doing that, who's covering our backs?"

Late last year, Albrecht unearthed at the Harvard medical library three studies noting cancerous tumors in some chipped mice and rats, plus a reference in another study to a chipped dog with a tumor. She forwarded them to the AP, which subsequently found three additional mice studies with similar findings, plus another report of a chipped dog with a tumor.

Asked if it had taken these studies into account, the FDA said VeriChip documents were being kept confidential to protect trade secrets. After AP filed a FOIA request, the FDA made available for a phone interview Anthony Watson, who was in charge of the VeriChip approval process.

"At the time we reviewed this, I don't remember seeing anything like that," he said of animal studies linking microchips to cancer. A literature search "didn't turn up anything that would be of concern."

In general, Watson said, companies are expected to provide safety-and-effectiveness data during the approval process, "even if it's adverse information."

Watson added: "The few articles from the literature that did discuss adverse tissue reactions similar to those in the articles you provided, describe the responses as foreign body reactions that are typical of other implantable devices. The balance of the data provided in the submission supported approval of the device."

Another implantable device could be a pacemaker, and indeed, tumors have in some cases attached to foreign bodies inside humans. But Dr. Neil Lipman, director of the Research Animal Resource Center at Memorial Sloan-Kettering, said it's not the same. The microchip isn't like a pacemaker that's vital to keeping someone alive, he added, "so at this stage, the payoff doesn't justify the risks."

Silverman, VeriChip Corp.'s chief executive, disagreed. "Each month pet microchips reunite over 8,000 dogs and cats with their owners," he said. "We believe the VeriMed Patient Identification System will provide similar positive benefits for at-risk patients who are unable to communicate for themselves in an emergency."

___

And what of former HHS secretary Thompson?

When asked what role, if any, he played in VeriChip's approval, Thompson replied: "I had nothing to do with it. And if you look back at my record, you will find that there has never been any improprieties whatsoever."

FDA's Watson said: "I have no recollection of him being involved in it at all." VeriChip Corp. declined comment.

Thompson vigorously campaigned for electronic medical records and healthcare technology both as governor of Wisconsin and at HHS. While in President Bush's Cabinet, he formed a "medical innovation" task force that worked to partner FDA with companies developing medical information technologies.

At a "Medical Innovation Summit" on Oct. 20, 2004, Lester Crawford, the FDA's acting commissioner, thanked the secretary for getting the agency "deeply involved in the use of new information technology to help prevent medication error." One notable example he cited: "the implantable chips and scanners of the VeriChip system our agency approved last week."

After leaving the Cabinet and joining the company board, Thompson received options on 166,667 shares of VeriChip Corp. stock, and options on an additional 100,000 shares of stock from its parent company, Applied Digital Solutions, according to SEC records. He also received $40,000 in cash in 2005 and again in 2006, the filings show.

The Project on Government Oversight called Thompson's actions "unacceptable" even though they did not violate what the independent watchdog group calls weak conflict-of-interest laws.

"A decade ago, people would be embarrassed to cash in on their government connections. But now it's like the Wild West," said the group's executive director, Danielle Brian.

Thompson is a partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, a Washington law firm that was paid $1.2 million for legal services it provided the chip maker in 2005 and 2006, according to SEC filings.

He stepped down as a VeriChip Corp. director in March to seek the GOP presidential nomination, and records show that the company gave his campaign $7,400 before he bowed out of the race in August.

In a TV interview while still on the board, Thompson was explaining the benefits _ and the ease _ of being chipped when an interviewer interrupted:

"I'm sorry, sir. Did you just say you would get one implanted in your arm?"

"Absolutely," Thompson replied. "Without a doubt."

"No concerns at all?"

"No."

But to date, Thompson has yet to be chipped himself.

___

On the Web:

http://www.verichipcorp.com

http://www.antichips.com

http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/

Lawsuit Against Merck and Homeagain over Pet Chip Cancer

By Dr. Katherine Albrecht
October 16, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

I have big news! A lawsuit has been filed against pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. and implant maker Digital Angel over a cancerous tumor that formed around a HomeAgain pet ID microchip.

The victim was a cat named Bulkin, who miraculously survived the ordeal after surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. We are breaking the news on ChipMeNot.com website, featuring Bulkin's story, along with a copy of the lawsuit. Our press release, which has already gone out to thousands of media outlets and personal press contacts. The Boston Globe has already picked up our story. As has Bruce Sterling of Wired.

Steven Wise, the attorney who filed the suit, will be a guest on my radio show tomorrow (Thursday 10/14) at 5:00 PM Eastern to discuss the case. (See: KatherineAlbrecht.com for details on how to stream the show live online, or catch the archives afterwards.) Our new website, ChipMeNot.com, is an adverse reaction registry where pet owners can report harm caused by implanted microchips. It features Bulkin's story and the stories of other other cats, dogs, mice, rats, and small animals that have been injured -- and even killed -- by implanted chips. Our inspiration for the website came from Seamus and Scotty, the two brave dogs that died from microchip-induced tumors earlier this year, Charlie Brown, the adorable chihuahua who bled to death in his owners' arms last year, and Leon the bulldog whose owner first alerted us to the cancer problem.

We pay tribute to their memory through this new website, and pray that by telling their stories we can help protect other pets from their fate. As you can imagine, it has taken months of hard work to put the website together. I want to thank our unflappable graduate intern Lidiya Prorochuk, tenacious pet owners Howard Gillis and Linda Hawkins, our steadfast volunteer Brian Wiegand, our fountain of knowledge Jeanne, and our cheerful webmaster Robin Abbate for a job extraordinarily well done. I also want to thank each of you -- the CASPIAN members, supporters, and radio show listeners who regularly send prayers, encouragement, and financial support to keep us going. You guys are what makes it possible for us to work on important issues like this. In freedom, Katherine Albrecht, Ed.D.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 13, 2010 MERCK SUED: HomeAgain® PET CHIP IMPLICATED IN CANCER New website, ChipMeNot.com, features details on cancer case and other adverse reactions.

Nashua, NH -- Pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. has been served with a lawsuit over claims its HomeAgain® pet microchip induced cancer in a cat. Animal rights attorney Steven Wise seeks "reasonable compensatory damages" for a malignant tumor "likely" induced by a HomeAgain® ID chip implanted in his client's cat, Bulkin. The complaint, "Andrea Rutherford v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. and Digital Angel, Inc." (case # 1052CV1147) was filed last week in Cambridge (MA) District Court.

The complaint named implant maker Digital Angel Corporation as a co-defendant. "Based on the alarming number of microchip-linked cancers we're discovering, I predict this lawsuit will be just the tip of the iceberg," said Dr. Katherine Albrecht, a consumer advocate and expert on adverse reactions associated with implantable microchips. Bulkin's case is featured at ChipMeNot.com, a new website launched by Albrecht's consumer group CASPIAN to bring attention to the plight of animals who have developed cancer and other adverse reactions from ID microchips. Albrecht documents several of these cases in "Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990¬2006," a peeer-reviewed academic paper she presented at a June conference of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers devoted to concerns about implantable microchips.

Albrecht's paper and a copy of the complaint are also posted at ChipMeNot.com. The site, co-developed with graduate intern Lidiya Prorochuk, spotlights a growing number of adverse reactions to microchips, including the chip-related cancer deaths of two dogs within the past year.

The site also features a form where pet owners can report adverse microchip reactions, since there is currently no official registry in the US to collect such data. "Merck and organizations that advocate pet chipping should take this lawsuit seriously and start warning pet owners of the risk of microchip-induced cancer," Albrecht advised. "As Andrea Rutherford and other pet owners can tell you, it's not a statistic when it's your pet."

© 2010 Dr. Katherine Albrecht - All Rights Reserved

Read more in Katherine Albrecht's Paper "Microship Induced Tumors in Labratory Rodents and Dogs. A Review of Literature 1990-2006"

---

Dr. Katherine Albrecht is a privacy expert and an outspoken opponent of RFID, implantable microchips, search engine data collection, and retail customer surveillance. Katherine has authored pro-privacy legislation, testified before lawmakers around the globe, written for numerous publications including Scientific American, and granted over 2,000 media interviews. She was appointed by New Hampshire Governor John Lynch to serve as an expert member of that state's two-year RFID study commission.

Katherine is also a syndicated radio host, bestselling author, and the U.S. spokesperson for www.Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine. Katherine holds a doctorate in Consumer Education from Harvard University.

Website: www.spychips.com

E-Mail: kma@spychips.com

---

NOTE: These are the same chips designed for YOU! Just say No.

Morality Can be Affected by Electromagnetic Pulse?

by David Gutierrez, staff writer

The ability to evaluate other people's actions as right or wrong can be disrupted with an electromagnetic pulse to the brain, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

"You think of morality as being a really high-level behavior," lead researcher Dr Liane Young said. "To be able to apply a magnetic field to a specific brain region and change people's moral judgments is really astonishing."

Researchers had 20 volunteers listen to several scenarios, then assess the ethics of the people involved. In one experiment, some of the participants received a 25-minute burst of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to the nerve cluster known as the right temporo-parietal junction (RTPJ) before hearing the stories. In another experiment, some participants received the TMS burst for only 500 milliseconds after the stories, while being asked to make a judgment.

A TMS burst induces currents in the brain, causing nerve cells to malfunction.

The researchers found that in both cases, a TMS burst to the RTPJ made participants incapable of differentiating between morality and outcome. For example, participants were asked if a man acted ethically in allowing his girlfriend to cross a bridge he knew to be unsafe. When told that she made it safely across, participants whose RTPJ had been interfered with said the man had acted ethically, if she did not make it across, they said he had acted unethically.

Previous studies have found that the RTPJ becomes especially active when people think about others' behavior or thoughts. The new research suggests it plays an important role in moral judgments that involve understanding other people's intentions. Read the original abstract on the research

"What is interesting is that this is a region that is very late developing - into adolescence and beyond right into the 20s," said Sarah-Jayne Blakemore of University College London "The next step would be to look at how or whether moral development changes through childhood into adulthood."

Read more about the research on EMF Pulse and Moral Judgement

---

This article gives me chills. How much of the increasing violence and seeming lack of moral judgment could be attributed by disruptions in brain waves from our wi-fi, cell phones, and constantly increasing technology? Obviously we can't know the answer to that question any time soon.

In the meantime, we believe that wearing the BioElectric Shield for EMF Protection is going to help your brain be less affected by potential harm from the electromagnetic radiation. (Yes I realize the study was about a specific post, but since our news is continually filled with articles about people who seem to have a seriously impaired view of right and wrong, just maybe the Electromagnetic radiation that's bombarding us is having some effect).

Read our article about Fear and the increasing impact on our lives and how we feel the Shield can help.

Invasion of the Body Scanners: Airport Security May Not Work, But It Does Cause Cancer

On the eve of some of the busiest travel days of the year, airport scanners are causing hysteria – and with good reason. Never mind the puerile TSA screeners giggling at your naked body. It turns out that the things may pose serious health concerns. In a letter to John Pistole, administrator of TSA, New Jersey Congressman Rush Holt, a scientist and the Chairman of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, raised the possibility that the machines might be carcinogenic.

In March, the Congressional Biomedical Caucus (of which I am a co-chair) hosted a presentation on this technology by TSA, as well as a briefing by Dr. David Brenner of Columbia University on the potential health effects of “back scatter” x-ray devices. As Dr. Brenner noted in his presentation and in subsequent media interviews, the devices currently in use and proposed for wider deployment this year currently deliver to the scalp “20 times the average dose that is typically quoted by TSA and throughout the industry.”

Dr. Brenner has pointed out that the majority of the radiation from X-ray backscatter machines strikes the top of the head, which is where 85 percent of the 800,000 cases of basal cell carcinoma diagnosed in the United States each year develop. According to Dr. Brenner, excessive x-ray exposure can act as a cancer rate multiplier, which is why our government should investigate thoroughly the potential health risks associated with this technology.

Various experts have questioned whether older people and children ought to be subjected to scanners, and whether people susceptible to or having melanoma and cataracts should undergo the scan.

Holt also questioned the efficacy of the body scanners, which would come as no surprise to critics who’ve been lambasting them for years. Last January, when the government’s appetite for body scanners got a big boost from the underwear bomber, there was skepticism about their ability to detect the types of explosives favored by would-be airline bombers. As I wrote at the time:

Known by their opponents as “digital strip search” machines, the full-body scanners use one of two technologies – millimeter wave sensors or backscatter x-rays – to see through clothing, producing ghostly images of naked passengers. Yet critics say that these, too, are highly fallible, and are incapable of revealing explosives hidden in body cavities – an age-old method for smuggling contraband. If that’s the case, a terrorist could hide the entire bomb works within his or her body, and breeze through the virtual strip search undetected. Yesterday, the London /Independent/ reported on “authoritative claims that officials at the [UK] Department for Transport and the Home Office have already tested the scanners and were not persuaded that they would work comprehensively against terrorist threats to aviation.” A British defense-research firm reportedly found the machines unreliable in detecting “low-density” materials like plastics, chemicals, and liquids – precisely what the underwear bomber had stuffed in his briefs.

Just to be sure I am not going off the deep end on this subject, I emailed Steve Elson, the intrepid former Navy Seal who worked on the federal government’s Red Team, which was deployed in the years before 9/11 to test airport security by infiltrating through check points. This they did with ease; but noone ever paid any attention to their reports. Since 9/11 Elson has worked on and off with television crews, continuing to penetrate airport security carrying with him all manner of guns and IEDs, and for the most part avoiding detection. In a CBC program last year at this time, the Canadians reviewed the air security situation and found it to be wanting. The reporters also got hold of a redacted report from the Canadian transport people which raised questions about the effectiveness of full body scanners, especially when they are used in combination with metal detectors: A person passing through one machine after another would have to place their arms in different positions and the Canadians found the body scanners would fail to detect objects like rings or bracelets on extended arms because the mechanism could not reach high enough to take them in.

A few days ago, the /Washington Post/ carried a list of people exempt from body scanning, including cops and military in uniform. I asked Elson about this, and he replied:

When I was traveling through Chicago last January on my way to Toronto to do an interview, I had some time between planes. Got a sandwich. No place to sit down so I literally walked into the back of a checkpoint that was enclosed by glass so everyone could see what was going on, sat down on a bench and ate my sandwich, and watched. No one touched the pilots. Ergo, all I needed was a pilot’s uniform, bought or stolen, and a photoshop badge. Put explosives on my body, no metal, walk through, pick up my stuff and off to the plane. Likewise, I could do something similar on the ramp. Best time is in cold weather and snow storms. Do it as night approaches. People don’t care about security, just getting the job done and getting out of the weather. Steal a bag tag, make an unauthorized entry (no problem), walk up to a plane and throw it in with 50 lbs explosive.

Elson has always contended that the body scanner couldn’t detect explosives in body cavities. In his email he added this: “The machine can see through a thin layer of clothing and probably detect explosives strapped to the body.” But he pointed out that Leslie Stahl on “60 Minutes” worried about exposing private parts, but noted she could see a woman’s bra. “If she could see the bra, that means she could not see through the bra. A bra bomb or explosives molded to the breast wouldn’t be seen,” he continues. “And a woman, because of her anatomical construction, could easily… bring a several pound IED fully assembled with timer, detonator, power sources right through the checkpoint. If scanned or patted down it would make no difference. Once on the plane she has the option to leave it in the plane…and get off.” Ellison warns that a well planned Al Qaeda operation, “if they did it right, could knock down 50 planes in 30 minutes. Think about what that would do to US air operations.”

In my opinion, the best answer to airport security is the mass deployment of dogs. Give me a friendly German Shepherd, and I’ll gladly submit to being sniffed, rather than patted, wanded, or scanned. But unlike the scanner companies, dogs have no powerful lobbyists, like former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, to advocate on their behalf.
/Reprinted with permission from Unsilent Generation <http://unsilentgeneration.com

 

---

Read More about the dangers of the scanners.

Are Airport Scanners Tearing Apart Your DNA?

Great things are expected of terahertz waves, the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and the infrared. Terahertz waves pass through non-conducting materials such as clothes , paper, wood and brick and so cameras sensitive to them can peer inside envelopes, into living rooms and "frisk" people at distance.

The way terahertz waves are absorbed and emitted can also be used to determine the chemical composition of a material. And even though they don't travel far inside the body, there is great hope that the waves can be used to spot tumours near the surface of the skin.

With all that potential, it's no wonder that research on terahertz waves has exploded in the last ten years or so.

But what of the health effects of terahertz waves? At first glance, it's easy to dismiss any notion that they can be damaging. Terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionise atoms or molecules, the chief reasons why higher energy photons such as x-rays and UV rays are so bad for us. But could there be another mechanism at work?

The evidence that terahertz radiation damages biological systems is mixed. "Some studies reported significant genetic damage while others, although similar, showed none," say Boian Alexandrov at the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and a few buddies. Now these guys think they know why.

Alexandrov and co have created a model to investigate how THz fields interact with double-stranded DNA and what they've found is remarkable. They say that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication. That's a jaw dropping conclusion.

And it also explains why the evidence has been so hard to garner. Ordinary resonant effects are not powerful enough to do do this kind of damage but nonlinear resonances can. These nonlinear instabilities are much less likely to form which explains why the character of THz genotoxic effects are probabilistic rather than deterministic, say the team.

This should set the cat among the pigeons. Of course, terahertz waves are a natural part of environment, just like visible and infrared light. But a new generation of cameras are set to appear that not only record terahertz waves but also bombard us with them. And if our exposure is set to increase, the question that urgently needs answering is what level of terahertz exposure is safe.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0910.5294: DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field

Title: DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field

Abstract: We consider the influence of a terahertz field on the breathing dynamics of double-stranded DNA. We model the spontaneous formation of spatially localized openings of a damped and driven DNA chain, and find that linear instabilities lead to dynamic dimerization, while true local strand separations require a threshold amplitude mechanism. Based on our results we argue that a specific terahertz radiation exposure may significantly affect the natural dynamics of DNA, and thereby influence intricate molecular processes involved in gene expression and DNA replication.

Submission history

From: Boian Alexandrov S [view email]
[v1] Wed, 28 Oct 2009 05:20:33 GMT (183kb,D)

 

---

NOTE: Airport scanners use terahertz - so should we be concerned?

It seems more important than ever to protect yourself with a BioElectric Shield.

Read more about some of the dangers of our technology

6 Modern Gadgets That Affect Your Health

Friday, October 22, 2010 8:06 AM

By Sylvia Booth Hubbard

You may not be able to live without your cell phone or laptop, but evidence is mounting that the fun, useful gadgets of modern life, such as cell phones and computers, may be affecting your health — raising the risk of headache, infertility, and even brain cancer.

1. Laptops

Holding your laptop too close to the skin for long periods of time can result in “toasted skin syndrome,” a permanent, mottled-look that is caused by long-term heat exposure. In rare cases, the laptops can lead to the type of damage that causes skin cancers, according to Swiss researchers. Be safe, they suggest, by placing the computer in a carrying case or using a heat shield if you hold it in your lap.

Another report found elevated scrotum temperatures in men who rested laptops on their laps. Prolonged heat can lead to reduced sperm production and affect fertility.

Check out our new Laptop Protection Pad

2. iPods and headphones

A new study found that nearly 1 in 5 American teens have hearing loss, and the problem is increasing. Experts blame using earbud headphones on personal music players, such as iPods and MP3 players. Hearing loss can occur in as short as an hour and 15 minutes. A study conducted at Northwestern University found hearing loss in young people who used headphones that was similar to that found in the aging adults. Experts advise using larger headphones that cover the ear opening instead of going inside it.

3. Cell phones

Can cell phones cause cancer? The jury is still out, but researchers at the University of Washington discovered that two hours of exposure to the levels of radiation emitted by cell phones splintered the DNA of brain cells in rats, making them similar to cells found in cancerous tumors. A Russian study found that children who used cell phones had poorer memories than those children who didn’t.

The effect of cell phone radiation on male fertility is especially troubling. Research in seven countries found that young men who are heavy users of cell phones drastically lower their sperm count.

“All the research shows the same thing,” award-winning scientist Devra Davis told the Daily Mail. “If you take young men who are trying to become fathers, those who use mobile phones at least four hours a day have about half the sperm count of others. Sperm exposed to mobile phone radiation in the lab is sicker, thinner, and less capable of swimming.” Experts advise limiting cell phone use.

4. Video sports games

They may make you get up off the couch and move, but sports games like the Nintendo Wii may put you at risk for shoulder and elbow injuries.

“You are playing an activity that you normally would not do in real life,” Dr. Mark Klion who is associated with the Mount Sinai School of Medicine told blisstree.com. It’s a repetitive activity that really has zero limitations to it.

“When you play the tennis game, you can hit just so many tennis balls,” he said. “But when you were playing outside, half the time you’d be chasing balls. You’re able to do a lot more in a shorter limited period of time. That adds up to an overuse type of injury. And we’ve seen a bunch of injuries from the Wii. Most of them are related to the upper extremities — to the shoulder, elbow, and wrist.” Klion recommends that new Wii users start slow, and limit their playing to 30 minutes. And like in every sport, everyone should do warm-up exercises.

5. Computer screens

Even though staring at a computer screen for hours won’t cause permanent damage, it can strain eyes or make existing eye problems worse. And sitting at a computer can be a major cause of headaches. Britain’s College of Optometrists found that two of every five office workers complained of headaches. A quarter admitted they had difficulty focusing and half said their eyes were tired. Take frequent breaks from the computer and rest your eyes by looking at distant objects.

6. Television

Slumping in a chair or on a couch to watch television can lead to numerous problems with your back and neck. “I’m seeing an increase in children with back problems relating to them being more sedentary and the perils are the same for adults,” British chiropractor Carl Irwin told the Daily Mail. “Over time the joints in the spine stiffen, which can cause early onset degeneration, straining, and weakening of the abdominal and core muscles.”


And, of course, sitting in front of the television for hours can also add to the risk of obesity, a contributing factor in cardiovascular disease.

© 2010 Newsmax. All rights reserved

 

---

Note: All these products are producing EMFs - electromagnetic radiation. We would go further in adding additional risk factors to most of these gadgets. Read more about electromagnetic sensitivity and the risk of electromagnetic pollution.

Most family rooms are hotbeds of electromagnetic radiation, TV, wi-fi, video games, computers, cell phones. Protect your entire family by hanging a BioElectric room Shield in this popular, but risk filled, gathering place.

Read more about the dangers of cell phones, in Devra Davis' new book "Disconnect"

Here are two new products that will help eliminate the EMF from your Laptop.

The first is an EMf Protection Blanket that was originally designed to protect pregnant women and their babies. But it's also excellent for anyone who uses a laptop on their lap. (Men you have reason to be concerned as well)

The Second is an EMF Laptop Protection Pad

Microwave oven

The Hidden Hazards

Technology holds great promise when developed, promoted and used by ethical individuals and institutions. Harmful or immorally utilized technologies should spur us to take action to set things right. To that end, we share the information below.

Radiation Ovens
The Proven Dangers of Microwaves

Is it possible that millions of people are ignorantly sacrificing their health in exchange for the convenience of microwave ovens? Why did the Soviet Union ban the use of microwave ovens in 1976? Who invented microwave ovens, and why? The answers to these questions may shock you into throwing your microwave oven in the trash.

Over 90% of American homes have microwave ovens used for meal preparation. Because microwave ovens are so convenient and energy efficient, as compared to conventional ovens, very few homes or restaurants are without them. In general, people believe that whatever a microwave oven does to foods cooked in it doesn't have any negative effect on either the food or them. Of course, if microwave ovens were really harmful, our government would never allow them on the market, would they? Would they? Regardless of what has been "officially" released concerning microwave ovens, we have personally stopped using ours based on the research facts outlined in this article.

The purpose of this report is to show proof - evidence - that microwave cooking is not natural, nor healthy, and is far more dangerous to the human body than anyone could imagine. However, the microwave oven manufacturers, Washington City politics, and plain old human nature are suppressing the facts and evidence. Because of this, people are continuing to microwave their food - in blissful ignorance - without knowing the effects and danger of doing so.

How do microwave ovens work?

Microwaves are a form of electromagnetic energy, like light waves or radio waves, and occupy a part of the electromagnetic spectrum of power, or energy. Microwaves are very short waves of electromagnetic energy that travel at the speed of light (186,282 miles per second). In our modern technological age, microwaves are used to relay long distance telephone signals, television programs, and computer information across the earth or to a satellite in space. But the microwave is most familiar to us as an energy source for cooking food.

Every microwave oven contains a magnetron, a tube in which electrons are affected by magnetic and electric fields in such a way as to produce micro wavelength radiation at about 2450 Mega Hertz (MHz) or 2.45 Giga Hertz (GHz). This microwave radiation interacts with the molecules in food. All wave energy changes polarity from positive to negative with each cycle of the wave. In microwaves, these polarity changes happen millions of times every second. Food molecules - especially the molecules of water - have a positive and negative end in the same way a magnet has a north and a south polarity.

In commercial models, the oven has a power input of about 1000 watts of alternating current. As these microwaves generated from the magnetron bombard the food, they cause the polar molecules to rotate at the same frequency millions of times a second. All this agitation creates molecular friction, which heats up the food. The friction also causes substantial damage to the surrounding molecules, often tearing them apart or forcefully deforming them. The scientific name for this deformation is "structural isomerism".

By comparison, microwaves from the sun are based on principles of pulsed direct current (DC) that don't create frictional heat; microwave ovens use alternating current (AC) creating frictional heat. A microwave oven produces a spiked wavelength of energy with all the power going into only one narrow frequency of the energy spectrum. Energy from the sun operates in a wide frequency spectrum.

Many terms are used in describing electromagnetic waves, such as wavelength, amplitude, cycle and frequency:

Wavelength determines the type of radiation, i.e. radio, X-ray, ultraviolet, visible, infrared, etc.

Amplitude determines the extent of movement measured from the starting point.

Cycle determines the unit of frequency, such as cycles per second, Hertz, Hz, or cycles/second.

Frequency determines the number of occurrences within a given time period (usually 1 second); The number of occurrences of a recurring process per unit of time, i.e. the number of repetitions of cycles per second.

Radiation = spreading energy with electromagnetic waves

Radiation, as defined by physics terminology, is "the electromagnetic waves emitted by the atoms and molecules of a radioactive substance as a result of nuclear decay." Radiation causes ionization, which is what occurs when a neutral atom gains or loses electrons. In simpler terms, a microwave oven decays and changes the molecular structure of the food by the process of radiation. Had the manufacturers accurately called them "radiation ovens", it's doubtful they would have ever sold one, but that's exactly what a microwave oven is.

We've all been told that microwaving food is not the same as irradiating it (radiation "treatment"). The two processes are supposed to use completely different waves of energy and at different intensities. No FDA or officially released government studies have proven current microwaving usage to be harmful, but we all know that the validity of studies can be - and are sometimes deliberately - limiting. Many of these studies are later proven to be inaccurate. As consumers, we're supposed to have a certain degree of common sense to use in judgment.

Take the example of eggs and how they were "proven" to be so harmful to our health in the late 1960's. This brought about imitation egg products and big profits for the manufacturers, while egg farms went broke. Now, recent government sponsored studies are saying that eggs are not bad for us after all. So, whom should we believe and what criteria should we use to decide matters concerning our health? Since it's currently published that microwaves - purportedly - don't leak into the environment, when properly used and with approved design, the decision lies with each consumer as to whether or not you choose to eat food heated by a microwave oven or even purchase one in the first place.

Motherly instincts are right

On a more humorous side, the "sixth sense" every mother has is impossible to argue with. Have you ever tried it? Children will never win against a mother's intuition. It's like trying to argue with the arm - appearing out of nowhere - that pinned you to the back of the seat when your mother slammed on the brakes.

Many of us come from a generation where mothers and grandmothers have distrusted the modern "inside out" cooking they claimed was "not suitable" for most foods. My mother refused to even try baking anything in a microwave. She also didn't like the way a cup of coffee tasted when heated in a microwave oven. I have to fully agree and can't argue either fact. Her own common sense and instincts told her that there was no way microwave cooking could be natural nor make foods "taste they way they're supposed to". Reluctantly, even my mother succumbed to re-heating leftovers in a microwave due to her work schedule before she retired.

Many others feel the same way, but they're considered an "old fashioned" minority dating back to before the 1970's when microwaves first overwhelmed the market. Like most young adults at the time, as microwave ovens became commonplace, I chose to ignore my mother's intuitive wisdom and joined the majority who believed microwave cooking was far too convenient to ever believe anything could be wrong with it. Chalk one up for mom's perception, because even though she didn't know the scientific, technical, or health reasons why, she just knew that microwave ovens were not good based on how foods tasted when they were cooked in them. She didn't like the way the texture of the microwaved food changed either.

Microwaves unsafe for baby's milk

A number of warnings have been made public, but have been barely noticed. For example, Young Families, the Minnesota Extension Service of the University of Minnesota, published the following in 1989:

"Although microwaves heat food quickly, they are not recommended for heating a baby's bottle. The bottle may seem cool to the touch, but the liquid inside may become extremely hot and could burn the baby's mouth and throat. Also, the buildup of steam in a closed container, such as a baby bottle, could cause it to explode. Heating the bottle in a microwave can cause slight changes in the milk. In infant formulas, there may be a loss of some vitamins. In expressed breast milk, some protective properties may be destroyed. Warming a bottle by holding it under tap water, or by setting it in a bowl of warm water, then testing it on your wrist before feeding may take a few minutes longer, but it is much safer."

Dr. Lita Lee of Hawaii reported in the December 9, 1989 Lancet:

"Microwaving baby formulas converted certain trans-amino acids into their synthetic cis-isomers. Synthetic isomers, whether cis-amino acids or trans-fatty acids, are not biologically active. Further, one of the amino acids, L-proline, was converted to its d-isomer, which is known to be neurotoxic (poisonous to the nervous system) and nephrotoxic (poisonous to the kidneys). It's bad enough that many babies are not nursed, but now they are given fake milk (baby formula) made even more toxic via microwaving."

Microwaved blood kills patient

In 1991, there was a lawsuit in Oklahoma concerning the hospital use of a microwave oven to warm blood needed in a transfusion. The case involved a hip surgery patient, Norma Levitt, who died from a simple blood transfusion. It seems the nurse had warmed the blood in a microwave oven. This tragedy makes it very apparent that there's much more to "heating" with microwaves than we've been led to believe. Blood for transfusions is routinely warmed, but not in microwave ovens. In the case of Mrs. Levitt, the microwaving altered the blood and it killed her.

It's very obvious that this form of microwave radiation "heating" does something to the substances it heats. It's also becoming quite apparent that people who process food in a microwave oven are also ingesting these "unknowns".

Because the body is electrochemical in nature, any force that disrupts or changes human electrochemical events will affect the physiology of the body. This is further described in Robert O. Becker's book, The Body Electric, and in Ellen Sugarman's book, Warning, the Electricity Around You May Be Hazardous to Your Health.

Scientific evidence and facts

In Comparative Study of Food Prepared Conventionally and in the Microwave Oven, published by Raum & Zelt in 1992, at 3(2): 43, it states

"A basic hypothesis of natural medicine states that the introduction into the human body of molecules and energies, to which it is not accustomed, is much more likely to cause harm than good. Microwaved food contains both molecules and energies not present in food cooked in the way humans have been cooking food since the discovery of fire. Microwave energy from the sun and other stars is direct current based. Artificially produced microwaves, including those in ovens, are produced from alternating current and force a billion or more polarity reversals per second in every food molecule they hit. Production of unnatural molecules is inevitable. Naturally occurring amino acids have been observed to undergo isomeric changes (changes in shape morphing) as well as transformation into toxic forms, under the impact of microwaves produced in ovens.

One short-term study found significant and disturbing changes in the blood of individuals consuming microwaved milk and vegetables. Eight volunteers ate various combinations of the same foods cooked different ways. All foods that were processed through the microwave ovens caused changes in the blood of the volunteers. Hemoglobin levels decreased and over all white cell levels and cholesterol levels increased. Lymphocytes decreased.

Luminescent (light-emitting) bacteria were employed to detect energetic changes in the blood. Significant increases were found in the luminescence of these bacteria when exposed to blood serum obtained after the consumption of microwaved food."

The Swiss clinical study

Dr. Hans Ulrich Hertel, who is now retired, worked as a food scientist for many years with one of the major Swiss food companies that do business on a global scale. A few years ago, he was fired from his job for questioning certain processing procedures that denatured the food.

In 1991, he and a Lausanne University professor published a research paper indicating that food cooked in microwave ovens could pose a greater risk to health than food cooked by conventional means. An article also appeared in issue 19 of the Journal Franz Weber in which it was stated that the consumption of food cooked in microwave ovens had cancerous effects on the blood. The research paper itself followed the article. On the cover of the magazine there was a picture of the Grim Reaper holding a microwave oven in one of his hands.

Dr. Hertel was the first scientist to conceive and carry out a quality clinical study on the effects microwaved nutrients have on the blood and physiology of the human body. His small but well controlled study showed the degenerative force produced in microwave ovens and the food processed in them. The scientific conclusion showed that microwave cooking changed the nutrients in the food; and, changes took place in the participants' blood that could cause deterioration in the human system. Hertel's scientific study was done along with Dr. Bernard H. Blanc of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and the University Institute for Biochemistry.

In intervals of two to five days, the volunteers in the study received one of the following food variants on an empty stomach: (1) raw milk; (2) the same milk conventionally cooked; (3) pasteurized milk; (4) the same raw milks cooked in a microwave oven; (5) raw vegetables from an organic farm; (6) the same vegetables cooked conventionally; (7) the same vegetables frozen and defrosted in a microwave oven; and (8) the same vegetables cooked in the microwave oven. Once the volunteers were isolated, blood samples were taken from every volunteer immediately before eating. Then, blood samples were taken at defined intervals after eating from the above milk or vegetable preparations.

Significant changes were discovered in the blood samples from the intervals following the foods cooked in the microwave oven. These changes included a decrease in all hemoglobin and cholesterol values, especially the ratio of HDL (good cholesterol) and LDL (bad cholesterol) values. Lymphocytes (white blood cells) showed a more distinct short-term decrease following the intake of microwaved food than after the intake of all the other variants. Each of these indicators pointed to degeneration. Additionally, there was a highly significant association between the amount of microwave energy in the test foods and the luminous power of luminescent bacteria exposed to serum from test persons who ate that food. This led Dr. Hertel to the conclusion that such technically derived energies may, indeed, be passed along to man inductively via eating microwaved food.

According to Dr. Hertel,

"Leukocytosis, which cannot be accounted for by normal daily deviations, is taken very seriously by hemotologists. Leukocytes are often signs of pathogenic effects on the living system, such as poisoning and cell damage. The increase of leukocytes with the microwaved foods were more pronounced than with all the other variants. It appears that these marked increases were caused entirely by ingesting the microwaved substances.

This process is based on physical principles and has already been confirmed in the literature. The apparent additional energy exhibited by the luminescent bacteria was merely an extra confirmation. There is extensive scientific literature concerning the hazardous effects of direct microwave radiation on living systems. It is astonishing, therefore, to realize how little effort has been taken to replace this detrimental technique of microwaves with technology more in accordance with nature. Technically produced microwaves are based on the principle of alternating current. Atoms, molecules, and cells hit by this hard electromagnetic radiation are forced to reverse polarity 1-100 billion times a second. There are no atoms, molecules or cells of any organic system able to withstand such a violent, destructive power for any extended period of time, not even in the low energy range of milliwatts.

Of all the natural substances - which are polar - the oxygen of water molecules reacts most sensitively. This is how microwave cooking heat is generated - friction from this violence in water molecules. Structures of molecules are torn apart, molecules are forcefully deformed, called structural isomerism, and thus become impaired in quality. This is contrary to conventional heating of food where heat transfers convectionally from without to within. Cooking by microwaves begins within the cells and molecules where water is present and where the energy is transformed into frictional heat.

In addition to the violent frictional heat effects, called thermic effects, there are also athermic effects which have hardly ever been taken into account. These athermic effects are not presently measurable, but they can also deform the structures of molecules and have qualitative consequences. For example the weakening of cell membranes by microwaves is used in the field of gene altering technology. Because of the force involved, the cells are actually broken, thereby neutralizing the electrical potentials, the very life of the cells, between the outer and inner side of the cell membranes. Impaired cells become easy prey for viruses, fungi and other microorganisms. The natural repair mechanisms are suppressed and cells are forced to adapt to a state of energy emergency - they switch from aerobic to anaerobic respiration. Instead of water and carbon dioxide, the cell poisons hydrogen peroxide and carbon monoxide are produced."

The same violent deformations that occur in our bodies, when we are directly exposed to radar or microwaves, also occur in the molecules of foods cooked in a microwave oven. This radiation results in the destruction and deformation of food molecules. Microwaving also creates new compounds, called radiolytic compounds, which are unknown fusions not found in nature. Radiolytic compounds are created by molecular decomposition - decay - as a direct result of radiation.

Microwave oven manufacturers insist that microwaved and irradiated foods do not have any significantly higher radiolytic compounds than do broiled, baked or other conventionally cooked foods. The scientific clinical evidence presented here has shown that this is simply a lie. In America, neither universities nor the federal government have conducted any tests concerning the effects on our bodies from eating microwaved foods. Isn't that a bit odd? They're more concerned with studies on what happens if the door on a microwave oven doesn't close properly. Once again, common sense tells us that their attention should be centered on what happens to food cooked inside a microwave oven. Since people ingest this altered food, shouldn't there be concern for how the same decayed molecules will affect our own human biological cell structure?

Industry's action to hide the truth

As soon as Doctors Hertel and Blanc published their results, the authorities reacted. A powerful trade organization, the Swiss Association of Dealers for Electro-apparatuses for Households and Industry, known as FEA, struck swiftly in 1992. They forced the President of the Court of Seftigen, Canton of Bern, to issue a "gag order" against Drs. Hertel and Blanc. In March 1993, Dr. Hertel was convicted for "interfering with commerce" and prohibited from further publishing his results. However, Dr. Hertel stood his ground and fought this decision over the years.

Not long ago, this decision was reversed in a judgment delivered in Strasbourg, Austria, on August 25, 1998. The European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Hertel's rights in the 1993 decision. The European Court of Human Rights also ruled that the "gag order" issued by the Swiss court in 1992 against Dr. Hertel, prohibiting him from declaring that microwave ovens are dangerous to human health, was contrary to the right to freedom of expression. In addition, Switzerland was ordered to pay Dr. Hertel compensation.

Who invented microwave ovens?

The Nazis, for use in their mobile support operations, originally developed microwave "radiomissor" cooking ovens to be used for the invasion of Russia. By being able to utilize electronic equipment for preparation of meals on a mass scale, the logistical problem of cooking fuels would have been eliminated, as well as the convenience of producing edible products in a greatly reduced time-factor.

After the war, the Allies discovered medical research done by the Germans on microwave ovens. These documents, along with some working microwave ovens, were transferred to the United States War Department and classified for reference and "further scientific investigation." The Russians had also retrieved some microwave ovens and now have thorough research on their biological effects. As a result, their use was outlawed in the Soviet Union. The Soviets issued an international warning on the health hazards, both biological and environmental, of microwave ovens and similar frequency electronic devices.

Other Eastern European scientists also reported the harmful effects of microwave radiation and set up strict environmental limits for their usage. The United States has not accepted the European reports of harmful effects, even though the EPA estimates that radio frequency and microwave radiation sources in America are increasing at 15% per year.

Carcinogens in microwaved food

In Dr. Lita Lee's book, Health Effects of Microwave Radiation - Microwave Ovens, and in the March and September 1991 issues of Earthletter, she stated that every microwave oven leaks electro-magnetic radiation, harms food, and converts substances cooked in it to dangerous organ-toxic and carcinogenic products. Further research summarized in this article reveal that microwave ovens are far more harmful than previously imagined.

The following is a summary of the Russian investigations published by the Atlantis Raising Educational Center in Portland, Oregon. Carcinogens were formed in virtually all foods tested. No test food was subjected to more microwaving than necessary to accomplish the purpose, i.e., cooking, thawing, or heating to insure sanitary ingestion. Here's a summary of some of the results:

• Microwaving prepared meats sufficiently to insure sanitary ingestion caused formation of d-Nitrosodienthanolamines, a well-known carcinogen.
• Microwaving milk and cereal grains converted some of their amino acids into carcinogens.
• Thawing frozen fruits converted their glucoside and galactoside containing fractions into carcinogenic substances.
• Extremely short exposure of raw, cooked or frozen vegetables converted their plant alkaloids into carcinogens.
• Carcinogenic free radicals were formed in microwaved plants, especially root vegetables.
• Decrease in nutritional value

Russian researchers also reported a marked acceleration of structural degradation leading to a decreased food value of 60 to 90% in all foods tested. Among the changes observed were:

Deceased bio-availability of vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropics factors in all food tested.
Various kinds of damaged to many plant substances, such as alkaloids, glucosides, galactosides and nitrilosides.
The degradation of nucleo-proteins in meats.

Microwave sickness is discovered

The Russians did research on thousands of workers who had been exposed to microwaves during the development of radar in the 1950's. Their research showed health problems so serious that the Russians set strict limits of 10 microwatts exposure for workers and one microwatt for civilians.

In Robert O. Becker's book, The Body Electric, he described Russian research on the health effects of microwave radiation, which they called "microwave sickness." On page 314, Becker states:

"It's [Microwave sickness] first signs are low blood pressure and slow pulse. The later and most common manifestations are chronic excitation of the sympathetic nervous system [stress syndrome] and high blood pressure. This phase also often includes headache, dizziness, eye pain, sleeplessness, irritability, anxiety, stomach pain, nervous tension, inability to concentrate, hair loss, plus an increased incidence of appendicitis, cataracts, reproductive problems, and cancer. The chronic symptoms are eventually succeeded by crisis of adrenal exhaustion and ischemic heart disease [the blockage of coronary arteries and heart attacks]."

According to Dr. Lee, changes are observed in the blood chemistries and the rates of certain diseases among consumers of microwaved foods. The symptoms above can easily be caused by the observations shown below. The following is a sample of these changes:

• Lymphatic disorders were observed, leading to decreased ability to prevent certain types of cancers.
• An increased rate of cancer cell formation was observed in the blood.
• Increased rates of stomach and intestinal cancers were observed.
• Higher rates of digestive disorders and a gradual breakdown of the systems of elimination were observed.

Microwave research conclusions

The following were the most significant German and Russian research operations facilities concerning the biological effects of microwaves:

The initial research conducted by the Germans during the Barbarossa military campaign, at the Humbolt-Universitat zu Berlin (1942-1943); and,

From 1957 and up to the present [until the end of the cold war], the Russian research operations were conducted at: the Institute of Radio Technology at Kinsk, Byelorussian Autonomous Region; and, at the Institute of Radio Technology at Rajasthan in the Rossiskaja Autonomous Region, both in the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics.

In most cases, the foods used for research analysis were exposed to microwave propagation at an energy potential of 100 kilowatts/cm3/second, to the point considered acceptable for sanitary, normal ingestion. The effects noted by both German and Russian researchers is presented in three categories:

• Category I, Cancer-Causing Effects
• Category II, Nutritive Destruction of Foods
• Category III, Biological Effects of Exposure

CATEGORY I

CANCER-CAUSING EFFECTS

[The first two points of Category I are not readable from our report copy. The remainder of the report is intact.]

3. Creation of a "binding effect" to radioactivity in the atmosphere, thus causing a marked increase in the amount of alpha and beta particle saturation in foods;

4. Creation of cancer causing agents within protein hydrolysate compounds* in milk and cereal grains [*these are natural proteins that are split into unnatural fragments by the addition of water];

5. Alteration of elemental food-substances, causing disorders in the digestive system by unstable catabolism* of foods subjected to microwaves [*the metabolic breakdown process];

6. Due to chemical alterations within food substances, malfunctions were observed within the lymphatic systems [absorbent vessels], causing a degeneration of the immune potentials of the body to protect against certain forms of neoplastics [abnormal growths of tissue];

7. Ingestion of microwaved foods caused a higher percentage of cancerous cells within the blood serum [cytomas - cell tumors such as sarcoma];

8. Microwave emissions caused alteration in the catabolic [metabolic breakdown] behavior of glucoside [hydrolyzed dextrose] and galactoside [oxidized alcohol] elements within frozen fruits when thawed in this manner;

9. Microwave emission caused alteration of the catabolic [metabolic breakdown] behavior of plant alkaloids [organic nitrogen based elements] when raw, cooked, or frozen vegetables were exposed for even extremely short durations;

10. Cancer causing free radicals [highly reactive incomplete molecules] were formed within certain trace mineral molecular formations in plant substances, and in particular, raw root-vegetables; and,

11. In a statistically high percentage of persons, microwaved foods caused stomach and intestinal cancerous growths, as well as a general degeneration of peripheral cellular tissues, with a gradual breakdown of the function of the digestive and excretive systems.

CATEGORY II

DECREASE IN FOOD VALUE

Microwave exposure caused significant decreases in the nutritive value of all foods researched. The following are the most important findings:

1. A decrease in the bioavailability [capability of the body to utilize the nutriment] of B-complex vitamins, Vitamin C, Vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropics in all foods;

2. A loss of 60-90% of the vital energy field content of all tested foods;

3. A reduction in the metabolic behavior and integration process capability of alkaloids [organic nitrogen based elements], glucosides and galactosides, and nitrilosides;

4. A destruction of the nutritive value of nucleoproteins in meats;

5. A marked acceleration of structural disintegration in all foods.

CATEGORY III

BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF EXPOSURE

Exposure to microwave emissions also had an unpredictably negative effect upon the general biological welfare of humans. This was not discovered until the Russians experimented with highly sophisticated equipment and discovered that a human did not even need to ingest the material substance of the microwaved food substances: that even exposure to the energy-field itself was sufficient to cause such adverse side effects that the use of any such microwave apparatus was forbidden in 1976 by Soviet state law.

The following are the enumerated effects:

1. A breakdown of the human "life-energy field" in those who were exposed to microwave ovens while in operation, with side-effects to the human energy field of increasingly longer duration;

2. A degeneration of the cellular voltage parallels during the process of using the apparatus, especially in the blood and lymphatic areas;

3. A degeneration and destabilization of the external energy activated potentials of food utilization within the processes of human metabolism;

4. A degeneration and destabilization of internal cellular membrane potentials while transferring catabolic [metabolic breakdown] processes into the blood serum from the digestive process;

5. Degeneration and circuit breakdowns of electrical nerve impulses within the junction potentials of the cerebrum [the front portion of the brain where thought and higher functions reside];

6. A degeneration and breakdown of nerve electrical circuits and loss of energy field symmetry in the neuroplexuses [nerve centers] both in the front and the rear of the central and autonomic nervous systems;

7. Loss of balance and circuiting of the bioelectric strengths within the ascending reticular activating system [the system which controls the function of consciousness];

8. A long term cumulative loss of vital energies within humans, animals and plants that were located within a 500-meter radius of the operational equipment;

9. Long lasting residual effects of magnetic "deposits" were located throughout the nervous system and lymphatic system;

10. A destabilization and interruption in the production of hormones and maintenance of hormonal balance in males and females;

11. Markedly higher levels of brainwave disturbance in the alpha, theta, and delta wave signal patterns of persons exposed to microwave emission fields, and;

12. Because of this brainwave disturbance, negative psychological effects were noted, including loss of memory, loss of ability to concentrate, suppressed emotional threshold, deceleration of intellective processes, and interruptive sleep episodes in a statistically higher percentage of individuals subjected to continual range emissive field effects of microwave apparatus, either in cooking apparatus or in transmission stations.

Forensic Research Conclusions

From the twenty-eight above enumerated indications, the use of microwave apparatus is definitely not advisable; and, with the decision of the Soviet government in 1976, present scientific opinion in many countries concerning the use of such apparatus is clearly in evidence.

Due to the problem of random magnetic residulation and binding within the biological systems of the body (Category III:9), which can ultimately effect the neurological systems, primarily the brain and neuroplexuses (nerve centers), long term depolarization of tissue neuroelectric circuits can result. Because these effects can cause virtually irreversible damage to the neuroelectrical integrity of the various components of the nervous system (I. R. Luria, Novosibirsk 1975a), ingestion of microwaved foods is clearly contraindicated in all respects. Their magnetic residual effect can render the pyschoneural receptor components of the brain more subject to influence psychologically by artificially induced microwave radio frequency fields from transmission stations and TV relay-networks.

The theoretical possibility of psycho telemetric influence (the capability of affecting human behavior by transmitted radio signals at controlled frequencies) has been suggested by Soviet neuropsychological investigations at Uralyera and Novosibirsk (Luria and Perov, 1974a, 1975c, 1976a), which can cause involuntary subliminal psychological energy field compliance to operative microwave apparatus.

FORENSIC RESEARCH DOCUMENT
Prepared By: William P. Kopp
A. R. E. C. Research Operations
TO61-7R10/10-77F05
RELEASE PRIORITY: CLASS I ROO1a

Ten Reasons to Throw out your Microwave Oven

From the conclusions of the Swiss, Russian and German scientific clinical studies, we can no longer ignore the microwave oven sitting in our kitchens. Based on this research, we will conclude this article with the following:

1). Continually eating food processed from a microwave oven causes long term - permanent - brain damage by "shorting out" electrical impulses in the brain [de-polarizing or de-magnetizing the brain tissue].

2). The human body cannot metabolize [break down] the unknown by-products created in microwaved food.

3). Male and female hormone production is shut down and/or altered by continually eating microwaved foods.

4). The effects of microwaved food by-products are residual [long term, permanent] within the human body.

5). Minerals, vitamins, and nutrients of all microwaved food is reduced or altered so that the human body gets little or no benefit, or the human body absorbs altered compounds that cannot be broken down.

6). The minerals in vegetables are altered into cancerous free radicals when cooked in microwave ovens.

7). Microwaved foods cause stomach and intestinal cancerous growths [tumors]. This may explain the rapidly increased rate of colon cancer in America.

8). The prolonged eating of microwaved foods causes cancerous cells to increase in human blood.

9). Continual ingestion of microwaved food causes immune system deficiencies through lymph gland and blood serum alterations.

10). Eating microwaved food causes loss of memory, concentration, emotional instability, and a decrease of intelligence.

Have you tossed out your microwave oven yet?

The use of artificial microwave transmissions for subliminal psychological control, a.k.a. "brainwashing", has also been proven. We're attempting to obtain copies of the 1970's Russian research documents and results written by Drs. Luria and Perov specifying their clinical experiments in this area.

Written by Anthony Wayne and Lawrence Newell

International common Law Copyright 2000 by The Christian Law Institute & Fellowship Assembly

This excellent article was written by Anthony Wayne and Lawrence Newell. Reprinted with permission of The Christian Law Institute. http://lawgiver.org

---

Although wearing a BioElectric Shield can't protect you from the negative effect the microwave has on your food, it can at least protect you from the dangers of EMF. If you aren't already wearing a Shield, order one today and protect yourself from all the forms of electropullution bombarding you.

Int J Oncol. 1999 Jul;15(1):113-6.

Use of cellular telephones and the risk for brain tumours: A case-control study.

Hardell L, Näsman A, Påhlson A, Hallquist A, Hansson Mild K.

Orebro Medical Centre, SE-701 85 Orebro, Sweden.

Comment in:

• Int J Oncol. 1999 Nov;15(5):1045-7.

PMID: 10375602 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Germany warns citizens to avoid using Wi-Fi

Environment Ministry's verdict on the health risks from wireless technology puts the British government to shame.

By Geoffrey Lean

Sunday, 9 September 2007

People should avoid using Wi-Fi wherever possible because of the risks it may pose to health, the German government has said.

Its surprise ruling – the most damning made by any government on the fast-growing technology – will shake the industry and British ministers, and vindicates the questions that The Independent on Sunday has been raising over the past four months.

And Germany's official radiation protection body also advises its citizens to use landlines instead of mobile phones, and warns of "electrosmog" from a wide range of other everyday products, from baby monitors to electric blankets.

The German government's ruling – which contrasts sharply with the unquestioning promotion of the technology by British officials – was made in response to a series of questions by Green members of the Bundestag, Germany's parliament.

The Environment Ministry recommended that people should keep their exposure to radiation from Wi-Fi "as low as possible" by choosing "conventional wired connections". It added that it is "actively informing people about possibilities for reducing personal exposure".

Its actions will provide vital support for Sir William Stewart, Britain's official health protection watchdog, who has produced two reports calling for caution in using mobile phones and who has also called for a review of the use of Wi-Fi in schools. His warnings have so far been ignored by ministers and even played down by the Health Protection Agency, which he chairs.

By contrast the agency's German equivalent – the Federal Office for Radiation Protection – is leading the calls for caution.

Florian Emrich, for the office, says Wi-Fi should be avoided "because people receive exposures from many sources and because it is a new technology and all the research into its health effects has not yet been carried out".

 

EU watchdog calls for urgent action on Wi-Fi radiation

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor

Sunday, 16 September 2007

Europe's top environmental watchdog is calling for immediate action to reduce exposure to radiation from Wi-Fi, mobile phones and their masts. It suggests that delay could lead to a health crisis similar to those caused by asbestos, smoking and lead in petrol.

The warning, from the EU's European Environment Agency (EEA) follows an international scientific review which concluded that safety limits set for the radiation are "thousands of times too lenient", and an official British report last week which concluded that it could not rule out the development of cancers from using mobile phones.

Professor Jacqueline McGlade, the EEA's executive director, said yesterday: "Recent research and reviews on the long-term effects of radiations from mobile telecommunications suggest that it would be prudent for health authorities to recommend actions to reduce exposures, especially to vulnerable groups, such as children."

The EEA's initiative will increase pressure on governments and public health bodies to take precautionary action over the electromagnetic radiation from rapidly expanding new technologies. The German government is already advising its citizens to use wired internet connections instead of Wi-Fi and landlines instead of mobile phones.

The scientific review, produced by the international BioInitiative Working Group of leading scientists and public health and policy experts, says the "explosion of new sources has created unprecedented levels of artificial electromagnetic fields that now cover all but remote areas of the habitable space on Earth", causing "long-term and cumulative exposure" to "massively increased" radiation that "has no precedent in human history".

It says "corrections are needed in the way we accept, test and deploy" the technologies "in order to avert public health problems of a global nature".

---

Protect yourself and your family with a BioElectric Shield EMF Reducing Pendant.

Improve Your Health by Reducing Electromagnetic Frequency Exposure

Wednesday, April 02, 2008 by: Julie Genser, citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) In September 2007, the EU's European Environment Agency (EEA)¹ and the country of Germany² both issued warnings to their citizens advising them to avoid the use of WiFi and cell phones until further long term studies are conducted, citing fears that the ubiquitous use of wireless technology has the potential to become the next public health disaster on the level of tobacco smoking, asbestos, and lead in automobile gas (as reported by The BioInitiative Working Group³). Israel's Knesset recently banned the placement of cellular antennas on residential buildings⁴. According to Canadian Underwriter, Lloyd's of London is already "preparing for the next big liability action — for personal injury damages based on the use of cell phone technology."⁵

Referred to as "electro-smog" by some, the danger of magnetic, electric, radio (microwave), ground current, and high frequency radiation is that it is mostly invisible until great damage is done - like the increased risk of some brain tumors in long term cell phone users.⁶ Added to the worry are the unknown effects of electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) on the more vulnerable: children, infants, the elderly, and the infirm; all of whom are equally blanketed by the invisible electro-storm of today's Blackberrys, cell phones, Game Boys, cordless phones, and WiFis (not to mention refrigerators, air conditioners, electric heaters, dishwashers, microwaves, and other large appliances found in almost every home). There are currently over 210,000 cell towers, providing 81% wireless penetration in America alone,⁷ and one would be hard-pressed to find an inhabitable place on Earth that is not within range of cell frequency transmissions.

Ask those who have become "electrically sensitive" (ES), people who now experience a wide range of symptoms upon exposure to even low levels of EMF radiation and have a most difficult time finding a place to live safely in our wireless age. Symptoms can range from the uncomfortable (headaches, burning sensations, tingling) and debilitating (severe "brain fog," heart arrhythmias, migraines, severe depression, chronic insomnia) to even life threatening (seizures, heart attacks). Many of today's ES started out as healthy working citizens and through chronic and acute exposures to electric radiation (some worked directly with electronics and computers, others worked in standard school and business/office settings), they became electrically sensitive with little warning. Their message: it could be you next.

Hayley Robinson*, a 41-year-old "type A personality" who spent 15 years of her working life in New York City offices warns "Keep cell and cordless phone use to a bare minimum and take care of your general health: eat organic, sleep 8 hours a day, drink lots of purified water, exercise regularly and spend time in nature regularly. We are exposed to an increasing amount of invisible toxins in our lives - from chemicals and heavy metals to electro-smog. We've become unwilling, and unwitting, guinea pigs in the biggest experiment of all time. Take notice before it's too late for you and your family." Hayley spent many years in front of a computer and is now so electrically sensitive she cannot be around microwaves, air conditioners, cell phones, or airports without experiencing distressful cardiac and neurological symptoms. *pseudonym

Not only do EMFs impact your own health and that of your children and pets, but also the Earth as a whole, as our overuse of electricity contributes greatly to pollution from coal-fired electricity plants. Those who are wise will heed the warnings of the electrically sensitive and reduce the EMF radiation in their homes through good design and reduction of dependence on electric appliances. Below is an excellent start: an abbreviated list of construction and lifestyle tips based on a survey I took of those with severe electrical sensitivity.⁸

15 Ways to Reduce EMF Radiation in Your Home and Life Right Now

1. Rise with the sun and go to bed early to make maximum use of daylight and avoid using artificial lighting whenever possible.

2. Do things manually if there's a way - don't use electricity as a matter of convenience or to save time. For example, use a manual juicer, a "bike blender," or a broom/mop instead of a vacuum cleaner - all great ways to incorporate exercise into your lifestyle and stay fit, without needing a gym membership or having to leave your home!

3. Keep your immune system strengthened with a nutrient-rich organic diet, 8 hours of sleep, moderate exercise, and plenty of fresh air and sun.

4. Practice a chemical-free lifestyle to reduce your total body burden of toxins: replace all personal care and home-cleaning products with chemical free versions, wear organic clothing, use organic bedding, etc.

5. Wear shoes with a sole made from natural materials (like undyed leather), walk barefoot on the beach or earth, or hug a tree - these all may help you release excess EMFs into the earth and ground your body.

6. Unplug electrical appliances when not in use.

7. Keep your bedroom free of electrical appliances, especially near your head while you sleep - use a battery-operated alarm clock rather than electric; unplug lamps.

8. Remember that walls, floors, and ceilings do not block EMFs when arranging your furniture.

9. Replace dimmer switches with regular switches to eliminate high-frequency radiation, or "dirty electricity," that can be hidden in your home's electrical wiring.

10. Avoid low-voltage halogen and fluorescent lighting (including the currently popular energy-efficient compact fluorescent lighting). Fluorescent lighting has been shown to cause migraines¹⁰ and contains mercury, which is a hazardous material that can create huge health and environmental problems.

11. Avoid the use of appliances with variable speed drives, such as fans, heaters, front-loading washing machines and some furnaces.

12. Avoid the use of microwave ovens, hair dryers, electric toothbrushes, electric blankets, heating pads, baby monitors, and other electric products.

13. Do not buy cordless DECT phones, which emit a constant electromagnetic signal even when not in use. Save cell phones for emergencies and use land lines whenever possible. Make sure cell phones are turned off when not in use, and avoid using them inside a car. When you do use cell phones, use appropriate air tubes and shielding devices.

14. Use LCD computers and TV screens and avoid plasma TVs. Keep computer use to a minimum; keep unplugged when not in use.

15. Avoid areas with wireless networking (WiFi) - internet cafes, airports, etc.

sources: ^{8, 9}

If you are currently buying or building your own home, make sure you choose a home at least 5 miles from the nearest microwave or cell phone tower, high tension power line, or other radio and TV transmitters. Check for future cell tower sites as well as existing ones. Design with as much natural lighting as possible so that you are less dependent on artificial lighting. For added protection against radio and cell phone waves, use low-e coatings on windows.⁸

Locate the electrical power panel, solar inverters (if you are using active solar), clothes dryer, hot water heater, and any other large electric appliance at least 20 feet from living/sleeping areas. The routing of any dedicated circuits for computer and other electronics should be kept away from critical areas like the bedroom. Provide a dedicated circuit for the refrigerator so that you can turn off other breakers at night if desired, except for the fridge.⁸

Sources:

¹ Geoffrey Lean, "EU watchdog calls for urgent action on Wi-Fi radiation," The Independent, September 16, 2007, (http://environment.independent.co.u...) .

² Geoffrey Lean, "Germany warns citizens to avoid using Wi-Fi," The Independent, September 09, 2007, (http://environment.independent.co.u...) .

³ The BioInitiative Working Group, "BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)," BioInitiative, August 31, 2007, http://www.bioelectricshield.com/in-the-media/news-research-risks-emf/121-bioinitiative-report-on-emf-radiation-effects-and-recommendations-

⁴ Zafrir Rinat, "Knesset bans placing cellular antennas on residential buildings," Haaretz, October 24, 2007, (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages...) .

⁵ "Lloyd's preparing for personal injury related to cell phone use," Canadian Underwriter, October 22, 2007, (http://www.canadianunderwriter.ca/i...) .

⁶ Lennart Hardell, Michael Carlberg, Fredrik Söderqvist, Kjell Hansson Mild, L. Lloyd Morgan, "Long-term use of cellular phones and brain tumours: increased risk associated with use for >=10 years," Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2007;64:626-632 (http://oem.bmj.com/cgi/content/full...) .

⁷ "Wireless Quick Facts," CTIA, The Wireless Association, June 2007, (http://www.ctia.org/media/industry_...) .

⁸ Julie Genser with Melinda Honn and Greg Conrad, "Safer Construction Tips for the Environmentally Sensitive," September 2007,

⁹ Maria Tzavaras, "Tips to have less EMFs in your home," Toronto Community News, November 27, 2007, (Article no longer available).

¹⁰ "Low-energy bulbs 'cause migraine'," BBC News, January 2, 2008, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7...) .

Julie Genser is a graduate of the Institute for Integrative Nutrition (IIN) in NYC and is certified in permaculture and ecovillage design. She has a Bachelor's degree in Design and Environmental Analysis from Cornell University. Julie is also the founder and director of www.PlanetThrive.com , a grassroots community for personal wellness that aims to empower those healing from environmental illnesses with the information, resources, and support necessary to create change in their world.

 

---

Because you can never completely leave the world of electronics and all it's bombardment, your best line of defense is to wear a BioElectric Shield.

Ministry to keep close watch on cellular antennas' radiation

By EHUD ZION WALDOKS

26/04/2010

New blue-and-white technology is set to make Israel a world leader in the field The Environmental Protection Ministry will flip the switch on a new system in the coming days that will enable continuous, real-time monitoring of radiation from cellular antennas all over the country, the ministry announced Sunday.

The new Guardian Government program from Wave Guard Technologies, an Israeli firm, will monitor radio frequencies and non-ionizing radiation in real time, enabling a complete picture of radiation from antennas for the first time. If a specific site goes above the radiation level on its permit, the system will notify ministry employees.

The company claims on its Web site that its products are groundbreaking and can revolutionize the way governments monitor and regulate non-ionizing radiation.

Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan praised the system's capabilities. "The ability to continuously monitor radiation from cellular antennas transforms Israel into a global leader in the field of radiation monitoring," he said in a statement.

"The new system enables us to inform the public in real time and enables complete transparency in the field of radiation between the cellular companies, the ministry and the public," he added.
Until now, inspectors carried out manual inspections once a year. Those inspections even came under fire by the state comptroller because the inspectors were paid by the cellphone companies and there was reason to doubt the impartiality of the readings.

While the inspections will continue even with the new automated system, Erdan has ordered that ministry employees conduct them instead of outside contractors

Over half a million Cell Phone users to be Studied for Long-term Effects

(Reuters) - The biggest study to date into the effects of mobile-phone usage on long-term health was launched on Thursday, aiming to track at least a quarter of a million of people in five European countries for up to 30 years.

 

The Cohort Study on Mobile Communications (COSMOS) differs from previous attempts to examine links between cellphone use and diseases such as cancer and neurological disorders in that it will follow users' behavior in real time.

Most other large-scale studies have centered around asking people already suffering from cancer or other diseases about their previous mobile-phone use. They have also been shorter, since cellphones have only been widely used for about a decade.

"One of the limitations of research to date is that when you ask people about their mobile phone use say five years ago there's a lot of error," said Jack Rowley, director of research and sustainability at industry body the GSM Association.

About 5 billion mobile phones are in use worldwide. To date, groups such as the World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society and the National Institutes of Health have found no evidence that cellphone use harms health.

"Research to date has necessarily mainly focused on use in the short term, less than 10 years," principal investigator Professor Paul Elliott of the School of Public Health at London's Imperial College told a news conference.

"The COSMOS study will be looking at long-term use, 10, 20 or 30 years. And with long-term monitoring there will be time for diseases to develop," he said.

The COSMOS study forms part of the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Program (MTHR), a UK body funded by a variety of government and industry sources and run by independent experts, mostly university academics.

Professor Lawrie Challis from MTHR said: "Many cancers take 10, 15 years for the symptoms to appear. So we've got to address the question: Could there be something out there that we need to look at?"

TRILLION-DOLLAR INDUSTRY

The GSMA's Rowley estimated that more than $100 million had been spent so far around the world on research into health risks from mobile phone usage.

Global spending on wireless equipment and services provided by companies such as Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei surpassed $1 trillion for the first time in 2009, according to technology research firm iSuppli.

The COSMOS study is recruiting participants aged 18-69 in Britain, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark through mobile carriers. It will use data from volunteers' phone bills and health records as well as questionnaires.

Rowley, while welcoming the planned study, said organizers might have trouble finding enough volunteers, citing a previous attempt to carry out a similar study on a smaller scale in Germany in 2004, which foundered on privacy concerns.

In Britain, COSMOS is inviting 2.4 million mobile phone users to take part, through the country's four top carriers: Vodafone, O2, T-Mobile and Orange. It hopes 90,000-100,000 will agree.

By late Thursday afternoon, 232 had signed up.

The study will examine all health developments and look for links to neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's as well as cancer.

It will also take account of how users carry their phone -- for example in a trouser or chest pocket or in a bag -- and whether they use hand-free kits.

A spokesman for Britain's Health Protection Agency, an independent public body, said the study had the potential to give very reliable results.

"The Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at Imperial College is one of the best research centers in the world for this type of study," he said.

COSMOS will announce its findings as it progresses.

(Editing by Jon Loades-Carter)