Author: emfsol

Killer 5G warning: Expert warns … could cause CANCER in humans

Read below for more info on this subject. But super important FYI’s first!!!!!

Some are still trying to “block” radiation like the new 5G. This is NOT POSSIBLE or practical. We need a better system…and EMF Solutions has it! — www.emfsol.com/shop

Why we CANNOT BLOCK EMF’s:

  • Expensive Paints & Window Tints DO NOT BLOCK 5G.
  • If we could block EMF’s then none of our technology would work anymore, including: Wi-Fi, Cell Phones, Laptops, FM Radio, and so much more.
  • EMF’s have been shown by physicists to NOT DIRECTLY HARM PEOPLE. So we don’t have to block them. EMF’s have been shown to INDIRECTLY HARM PEOPLE. So we do need to address that domino chain of events. (EMF Solutions does that.)

For the Full Article on “KILLER 5G WARNING” and a short less than 2 min video click here or read below…

“KILLER 5G”

SUPERFAST broadband could be a global catastrophe, kill wildlife, give people terminal diseases and cause the Earth’s magnetic field to change, according to shock claims by a technology expert.

Arthur Robert Firstenberg is an American author and activist on electromagnetic radiation and health.

He founded the independent campaign group the Celluar Phone Task Force and since 1996 he has argued in numerous publications that wireless technology is dangerous.

In his 1997 book Microwaving Our Planet: The Environmental Impact of the Wireless Revolution, he claimed: “The telecommunications industry has suppressed damaging evidence about its technology since at least 1927.”

He has recently started an online petition calling on world organisations, such as the UN, World Health Organisation (WHO), and EU to “urgently halt the development of 5G” – which is due to be rolled out this year.

Speaking to the Daily Star Online, he explained: “There is about to be as many as 20,000 satellites in the atmosphere.

“The FCC approved Elon Musk’s project for 12,000 satellites in November 15th and he’s going to launch his in mid-2019.

“I’m getting reports from various parts of the world that 5G antennas are being erected all over and people are already getting sick from what’s there now and the insect population is getting affected.

“This could become a global catastrophe. When the first satellites were launched in the late 1990s for mobile phones, on the day they were launched people sensitive to these things got very sick.

“The mortality rate rose in the US by 5-10% too and there were reports that birds were not flying.

“People who realised this the most were pigeon racers who released their birds who then didn’t return.

“And that was for only 77 satellites, so we are very frightened at the prospect of 20,000.”

According to the Firstenberg, wireless networks are “harmful for humans” and the development of the next generation is “defined as a crime” under international law – he states in the online petition.

The petition adds: “5G will massively increase exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation on top of the 2G, 3G and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place.

“RF radiation has been proven harmful for humans and the environment. The deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.

“Despite widespread denial, the evidence that radio frequency (RF) radiation is harmful to life is already overwhelming. The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilization—cancer, heart disease and diabetes—are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer-reviewed studies.”

But many mainstream scientists dismiss the claims and there is no conclusive proof of cancer-causing radiation from phones.

The WHO said there has been no evidence of detrimental effects caused by mobile phones despite studies conducted over two decades.

Firstenberg received a BA in mathematics from Cornell University in 1971 and then went to medical school from 1978 to 1982.

But he did not complete medical school because of illness, which he claims was due to electromagnetic hypersensitivity cause by getting over 40 diagnostic dental x-rays.

He believes information about and electromagnetic waves has not only been suppressed, but that people don’t pay attention to what’s going on because they don’t want to believe phones are damaging because of “addiction” to electronics.

Firstenberg added: “The whole picture is that everyone on Earth is getting addicted to their mobile phones.

“The more people use their mobiles for different purposes which will require more bandwidth means the previous infrastructure is not sufficient.

“Now they have to build more and more towers and they want to make it so that 5G is accessible anywhere on Earth.

“This is something that very few people are paying attention to, although papers have been written and there was more concern in the past than there is today – the difference being is that people are so addicted to their phones.

“People don’t want to see their phones as harmful anymore, but when they started people gave warnings.”

The most chilling warning he gives is that the development of extremely powerful satellites will result detrimental damage to the structure of the planet.

He claims the satellites could change the electromagnetic field: “We are not independent of our environment.

“Every living organism is an electrical being. We are controlled by energies passing through our bodies.

“Physicists call it the global electrical circuit. There is an electrical current that courses through the ground, through the air, through the ionosphere, back down to the atmosphere to create thunderstorms when the polarity changes.”

“Our environment is what keeps us alive and if you alter that in any way then people and animals will be highly disturbed.”


ConsumerWatch: 5G Cellphone Towers…Concerns Over Impacts on Health

5G CELL TOWERS – CONSUMER WATCH – in San Francisco area.

Full article and 5 Min News Coverage Video can be found here: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/01/25/consumerwatch-5g-cellphone-towers-signal-renewed-concerns-over-impacts-on-health/

by Julie Watts and Abigail Sterling

Wireless carriers are installing millions of them across the country to enable the new, faster 5G cellphone technology. While many are looking forward to faster cell service, many are also asking: Are there legitimate health concerns?

That question is keeping John Hiestand up at night. Outside his bedroom window he can see a new pole where Verizon will soon install a next-generation cell tower.

“This would be a big tower generating lots of RF outside of our bedroom window 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for many years,” he said.

It’s called a “small cell” or “distributed antenna system.” The industry says they’re safe. Many in Piedmont aren’t convinced – including the Hiestands.

“Our daughter is a cancer survivor,” John Hiestand explained.

Thirteen-year-old Sophia Hiestand has been one of many petitioning the city council to deny this cell tower.

“I mostly talked about my cancer and how it affected me, even though you’re not supposed to talk about health issues, I still did,” Hiestand said.

However, according to federal law the city simply can’t consider health concerns. It’s outlined in a small section of the Telecommunications Act, based on science from 1996, back when we were still talking on cellphones that looked like bricks.

“I find it really unfair,” said Hiestand.

If cities do consider health, cell companies can sue them.

So, with few legal arguments to deny a tower, they’re popping up outside bedroom windows and school campuses, despite objections from across the country.

“5G can be a tremendous boom to California but only if it can be put up quickly and easily,” said Hayward Assembly member Bill Quirk. Quirk co-authored legislation that would make it even harder for cities like Piedmont to object to a tower.

“You wouldn’t have to go through the planning commission, through the city council,” Quirk explained.

Quirk, a former NASA scientist, says he may resurrect the bill that was recently vetoed by governor Brown.

“I know scientifically that putting up these cell phone towers is safe,” he said.

But the International Association of Frefighters disagrees. It began opposing cell towers on fire stations, after firefighters complained of health problems.

“These firefighters developed symptoms,” says Dr. Gunnar Heuser who conducted a pilot study on firefighters at a station with cell towers.

“The symptoms included problems with memory, problems with intermittent confusion, problems with weakness,” Heuser said.

Heuser says their brain scans suggest even low-level RF can cause cell damage and he worries about more vulnerable groups like kids.

“We found abnormal brain function in all of the firefighters we examined,” Heuser said.

So, following lobbying by firefighters, assemblyman Quirk and his co-author exempted fire stations from their bill, making them one place cell companies couldn’t put a tower.

“This is the first piece of legislation that anyone is aware of where somebody got an exemption because they were concerned about health. Did they tell you at all about the study?” we asked the assemblyman.

Quirk’s response: “All I know is that when the firefighters ask, I do what they ask me to do.”

“Because they are strong lobbyists?” we asked him. His response: “Yes.”

“So if school teachers and parents had a strong lobby and they ask you to pass something that would prevent these from going up near schools, would you do that?” we asked Quirk.

His response: “If I couldn’t get the votes any other way!”

We next spoke to Tony Stefani, founder of the San Francisco Firefighters Cancer Prevention Foundation.

“It’s not only the firefighters, it’s the people that live within the vicinity of these towers,” Stefani said.

Anthony Stefani started with the San Francisco Fire Department in 1974. The 28-year veteran retired as the captain of Rescue 1 in 2003.

Stefani notes that current regulations don’t take into account continuous low-level exposure from these small cells 24-hours a day. He also says some fellow firefighters reported that their symptoms disappeared when they move to a station without a tower.

“More of these studies have to be done,” he says.

Many international scientists agree. More than 230 scientists from 41 nations — who have published over 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on electromagnetic fields and biology and health — have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal. 

They cite “serious concerns” about “increasing exposure to EMF” based on “numerous recent scientific publications” linking low levels of wireless radiation to health effects.

They’re calling for stronger regulations, disclosure about wireless industry ties to regulatory agencies, and they want publicly funded studies on the health effects of EMF emitting devices/base stations (i.e. cell towers).

“I do not believe that there is any health impact on firefighters or anyone else, from cells, period!” Assemblyman Quirk asserted. However he added, “I think doing more studies is always a good thing.”

Considering the  the circumstances, we asked Quirk: “Do you think that maybe you should consider putting a pause on legislation that speeds up these towers until there is definitive evidence that there is no harm?”

His’s response: “We can do a lot of studies and there are people right now believe it or not who are sure the world is flat.”

In a statement the CTIA says it defers to the experts when it comes to the safety of cellular telephones and antennas:

“According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, the World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society and numerous other international and U.S. organizations and health experts, the scientific evidence shows no known health risk due to the RF energy emitted by cellphones.

Likewise, the FCC monitors scientific research on a regular basis and its standards for RF exposure are based on recommended guidelines adopted by U.S. and international standard-setting bodies. That’s why the FCC has determined that all wireless phones legally sold in the United States are “safe.” This scientific consensus has stayed the same even after the NTP’s release in 2016 of its partial findings in a study involving cellphones and lab animals.

The FCC also sets exposure limits for cell site antennas that transmit signals to phones. Those limits, like the limits for cell phones, are even more conservative than standards adopted by leading international standards bodies such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

The FCC states that typical ground exposures to base station antennas are “hundreds to thousands of times less than the FCC’s limits for safe exposure” and “there is no reason to believe that such [antennas] could constitute a potential health hazard” to nearby residents.”

The World Heath Organization’s  International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified RF radiation as possibly carcinogenic to humans. Though the cell phone industry stresses there are “no known health risks.”

What about the unknown? Well, back in Piedmont the Hiestands don’t want to wait around to find out.

“We are going to get some meters. We’re going to measure the micro-radiation today and then when the cell towers go up, we can measure it and see how dangerous it really is,” said John Hiestand. He says if he has to they’ll move.

“For my daughter’s health, definitely,” he said.

Piedmont was able to temporarily block permits for some small cell towers but now the company installing them for Verizon, Crown Castle, is suing the city.

Meanwhile new research set to be published next month could radically alter the debate. For the first time it establishes a scientific link between RF radiation and cancer in lab rats:

National Toxicology Program

In response, the Chief Medical Director of the American Cancer Society said this first-of-its-kind government study “marks a paradigm shift in our understanding of radiation and cancer risk.”


“Radio Frequency Radiation (from Cell Phones) is a Category 1 Carcinogen”

According to an Advisor to the World Health Organization, Cell phone radiation “is a Category 1 Carcinogen” based on tons of evidence including a recent $25 Million study.

 

“Clear Evidence of Cancer” from Cell Phone Radiation: U.S. National Toxicology Program Releases Final Report on Animal Study

The final peer reviewed NIH reports confirm evidence of an association between cell phone radiation and both heart and brain cancers in large-scale animal study.

U.S. National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program (NTP) concludes that there is “clear evidence” that male rats developed cancerous heart tumors from exposure to cell phone radio frequency radiation according to final reports on Rats and Mice released today. In addition, they conclude the increased tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats were “some evidence” of cancer from the cell phone radiation exposure. According to NIH, the final reports on rats and mice represent “the consensus of NTP” and a panel of external scientific experts who reviewed the study data in March and voted to strengthen the conclusion that cell phone radiation caused health effects. Scientists are now calling for federal action – a quantitative risk assessment and protective policies to reduce wireless exposure.

John Bucher, PhD, NTP senior scientist, stated in the NIH press release, “We believe that the link between radio frequency radiation and tumors in male rats is real, and the external experts agreed.”

The NIH/NTP Website has released final reports from the rat and mouse studies, a press release and new  fact sheet.

“This animal evidence, together with the extensive human evidence, coupled with the rising incidence of brain cancers in young people in the U.S., conclusively confirms that radio frequency radiation is a Category 1 human carcinogen,” explains Anthony Miller MD, University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health Professor Emeritus, author of 600 scientific publications medical advisor to Environmental Health Trust (EHT), who has served as an advisor to the World Health Organization and co-authored a review paper of the scientific evidence in the journal Environmental Research presenting these conclusions.

EHT has launched a public awareness campaign to raise awareness about how to reduce exposure to cell phone and wireless radiation. The campaign includes printable posters, postcards and shareable videos.

“More than a decade since it was first proposed, and after unprecedented reviews, the NTP has finally released a report confirming what hundreds of other studies have shown—namely that cell phone radiation levels we all encounter every day significantly increase malignant rare tumors of the brain and nerves as well as cause damage to the heart and DNA. Were this any other modern agent, the appropriate regulatory agencies would be taking immediate action to reduce exposures. It is unconscionable that we continue to give millions (of children) the capacity to keep these cancer-increasing devices on their bodies all day or night. People have a right to know that phones are two-way, microwave-radiating radios that should be used with caution. United States owes its citizens better,“ stated Devra Davis, PhD, MPH, Visiting Professor of Medicine at Hebrew University and President of Environmental Health Trust. “We would not give children cigarettes and alcohol. Why are we giving them devices that increase their risk of cancer years later?”

“Cell phones expose us to levels 2 to 10 times higher than FCC according to cell phone radiation tests conducted by the French National Frequencies Agency on hundreds of cell phones. This is because cell phones are not tested in the way they are used—touching the body. When phones are radiation tested at body contact, they exceed limits,“ stated Davis, referring to the Phonegate Scandal that resulted in phones being removed from the market in Europe.

“An important lesson that should be learned from this is we can no longer assume any current or future wireless technology is safe.” Ronald Melnick, PhD, who led the design of the NTP study in his 28-year career as a scientist at the National Toxicology Program and is currently senior advisor to Environmental Health Trust (EHT), stated, “The NTP studies in experimental animals were designed to test the long held assumption that radio frequency radiation at seemingly ‘low’ non-thermal exposure intensities could not cause harmful health effects. It failed the test. Cell phone radiation clearly caused cancer in these animals.” Read Dr. Melnick’s full statement here.

“What should happen now is the FDA should be immediately working on developing a quantitative risk assessment from this data and in the meantime the FDA, FCC and other agencies should promote cautionary measures for the population—especially for children,” said Melnick who recently published an article in the journal Environmental Research debunking widely circulated criticisms of the NTP study.

“Based on these and other peer-reviewed findings, if radiofrequency radiation were a drug, it would have been pulled off the market. Peer-reviewed studies have found effects on brain development, memory, sleep and fertility and other biologically important endpoints from oxidative stress to headaches to hearing and vision problems, especially in children,” Davis added.”Over 236 scientists from 41 nations who have published peer-reviewed research on this issue are appealing to the United Nations for stronger regulations to reduce public exposure.”

“Considering the widespread exposure among our children and the proliferation of cell towers to prepare for 5G, these findings should not be minimized. Effects were found at non-thermal levels, which means that FCC limits are not protective. Until research tells us otherwise, we can no longer assume wireless devices are safe,” said Theodora Scarato, Executive Director of EHT. “The rollout of 5G small cells must be halted. Schools need to install wired Internet networks and use cords to connect devices. Landlines should be maintained throughout communities. Practical solutions exist such as ethernet and fiber optic networks. Let’s use them.

“It is time for the National Cancer Institute, the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control to update their websites with concise recommendations that the public should reduce exposure. Public Health Departments need to launch ongoing public awareness campaigns to educate the public about how to reduce emissions and exposures. Everyone needs to understand just how easy it is to use safe wired technologies, especially at home. Employers need to prioritize this issue and make changes in the workplace to limit and minimize emissions and exposures in the workplace. So far, they have been given no choice. We have a responsibility to living and future generations to take action on this issue now.”

Environmental Health Trust Recommendations

In light of the NTP study EHT recommends:

  • The FDA prioritize and perform a quantitative risk assessment to determine the levels of risk to humans.
  • The private sector launch a research and development program that will ensure consumers have safe technology choices available in the marketplace—meaning devices that have wired connection capability with the ability to quick-disconnect all wireless/bluetooth functions.
  • The EPA along with relevant health agencies launch a full systematic and independent review of all scientific evidence.
  • The CDC, NCI and FDA issue clear comprehensive public health recommendations to the public about how to reduce personal firsthand and secondhand exposures to radiation emitted by cell phones, tablets and all wireless devices, accessories and appliances via well-funded ongoing public awareness campaigns.
  • Policy that will eliminate and reduce exposure from cell towers, indoor and outdoor base stations and Wi-Fi in neighborhoods, community centers, healthcare facilities, places of worship and schools.
  • Informational labeling on all cell phones and wireless devices that are capable of emitting radio frequency radiation.
  • An immediate full halt to 5G and small cell deployment.

Background Summary

In 1999, the FDA nominated cell phone radiation to the NTP for large-scale animal studies, stating, “the existing exposure guidelines are based on protection from acute injury from thermal effects of RFR exposure, and may not be protective against any non-thermal effects of chronic exposures.”

On November 1, 2018 the National Toxicology Program (NTP) released their final reports on rats and mice exposed to long term radiofrequency radiation.

The final reports concurred with the March peer review panel that the malignant schwannoma tumors found in the heart of male rats be scientifically categorized as “clear evidence of carcinogenicity” and that the malignant gliomas found in the brain of male rats be categorized as “some evidence of carcinogenicity.” In addition, the increased tumors of the adrenal medulla in male rats exposed to the GSM type of cell phone radiation were categorized as “some evidence of carcinogenicity,” adding a new type of tumor thought to be caused by the exposure. Thus, NIH accepted all of the expert peer reviewer recommendations to strengthen the conclusions regarding several effects from the exposure. The report also documents statistically significant increases in an unusual pattern of cardiomyopathy, or damage to heart tissue, in exposed male and female rats.

In addition to the heart and brain cancers, statistically significant increased numbers of tumors were found in other organs at one or more of the exposure levels studied, including the prostate gland, pituitary gland, adrenal gland, liver and pancreas.

Environmental Health Recommends Reducing Cell Phone and Wireless Radiation Exposure by

  • Used a corded phone whenever possible to minimize cell phone use.
  • Keep the cell phone away from your head and body.
  • When talking on the cell phone, use speakerphone or wired airtube headset to reduce exposure to your brain.
  • Avoid carrying your phone against the body like in a pocket, sock, bra or spandex pants.
  • Laptops and tablets should always be placed on a table, not on your lap.
  • Be aware of how close children are to you when you are using a cell phone or wireless device and minimize their exposure. For example do not rest a cell phone on your baby or hold a transmitting device near their bodies.
  • Choose wired Internet (ethernet cable modems) at home/office instead of wireless systems. Use ethernet wired (not wireless) computers to do as much of your internet connection and social media and streaming videos.
  • Choose non-wireless options instead of wireless for tech and accessories such as computers, laptops, printers, gaming consoles and handsets, security, mouse, keyboard, video cameras, HVAC, speakers, headphones, microphones and other accessories.
  • Avoid sleeping next to your cell phone or wireless device. Cell phones should be powered off at night. If you use your cell phone as an alarm clock, turn the phone to airplane mode.
  • Do not charge cell phones or electronics near your bed at night.
  • Turn your phone off or on airplane mode with Wi-Fi/Bluetooth OFF more. Even in standby mode, your phone emits RF energy because it is constantly searching for service or new messages. If you do not need your cell phone, simply turn it off. This also applies to all other wireless devices whereby the Wi-Fi antennas can be powered off. Wifi laptops tablets and other devices such as gaming devices are always transmitting even if you are not using them so remember to power them off.

For full article see below…

 “Clear Evidence of Cancer” from Cell Phone Radiation: U.S. National Toxicology Program Releases Final Report on Animal Study

 

California becomes first state to mandate solar panels on new homes

Here is some horrible news for California residents (except for those who remediate their homes).  New MAJOR health stresses mandated by the the State Gov’t:

Most people don’t know that Solar Panels tend to add a TON more EMF’s to a home, especially in the “Dirty Electricity” range or about 4,000 to 100,000 Hz range.  These EMF’s are said to seriously damage DNA and to cause many other detrimental effects. (1)  Solar Panel homes take twice the products to remediate properly.

IMPORTANT FYI – If you have Solar on your home you’ll need TWICE the protection so you’ll need to get 2 Commander Boxes (vs one for the average home).

 

See article below from today!!!

California becomes first state to mandate solar panels on new homes

California has become the first state in the nation to mandate solar panels for all new homes, in a move to cut greenhouse gas emissions that critics say will end up raising home prices in the already expensive market.

In a unanimous 5-0 vote Wednesday, the California Energy Commission approved the policy.

The regulation will require all homes and apartments built after 2020 to have solar panels, adding an average of roughly $10,000 to construction costs for a single-family home. On the flip side, the commission says, the panels could yield much more in energy savings.

Spokeswoman for the Energy Commission Amber Beck told Fox News that under the new standards, new homes would be expected to reduce energy use by more than 50 percent. She argued that the change will lead to savings in the long run.

“For residential homeowners, based on a 30-year mortgage, the Energy Commission estimates that the standards will add about $40 to an average monthly payment, but save consumers $80 on monthly heating, cooling, and lighting bills,” Beck said in a statement. “On average the 2019 standards will increase the cost of constructing a new home by about $9,500 but will save $19,000 in energy and maintenance costs over 30 years.”

Few industry groups outwardly oppose the plan after working for years with the commission to shape the regulations. But Republican legislative leaders said Californians can’t afford to pay any more for housing in the state’s already expensive market.

“That’s just going to drive the cost up and make California, once again, not affordable to live,” said Assemblyman Brian Dahle, the chamber’s Republican leader.

The solar panel decision is just the latest example of what critics see as the state’s ever-evolving nanny-state policies. California often is at the leading edge of government mandates and bans, having recently prohibited everything from plastic bags to foie gras – and even flirting with phasing out internal combustion engines.

Bill Watt, a homebuilder and design consultant, told The Orange County Register the added solar panel costs, in addition to other building mandates, will make homeownership out of reach for many buyers.

“We’re not building enough housing already,” Watt, former president of the Orange County Building Industry Association, told The OCR. “Why not just pause for a little while, focus on the affordability and housing issues, then circle back?”

Despite the increase in construction costs, the California Building Industry Association generally supports the plan, but expressed a preference to delay the launch.

“[W]e would prefer that this had been put off for a few more years, but the fact is that the California Energy Commission has been working on this, with us, for the past 10 years,” the association’s technical director, Robert Raymer, said in a statement, noting that the group worked with the state’s energy commission to alter the policy. “We know this is coming, we did everything we could to push down compliance costs and increase design flexibility.”

The mandate is the latest win for the solar industry, despite past controversies tied to companies’ use of taxpayer funds.

The most notorious example was California company Solyndra, which filed for bankruptcy in 2011. An Energy Department inspector general report in 2015 said the company misrepresented facts in order to secure a $535 million loan guarantee from the federal government. Taxpayer lost most of that money in the deal.

The new California measure would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 700,000 metric tons over three years, according to the commission. The Energy Commission said this would be equivalent to taking 115,000 cars off the road.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

FOR FULL ARTICLE GO TO –>

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/09/california-becomes-first-state-to-mandate-solar-panels-on-new-homes.html

 

 

(1) www.BioInitiative.org

Damaging Effects of EMF’s: Dr Mercola and Martin Pall PhD

Damaging Effects of EMF’s: Dr Mercola and Martin Pall PhD

Martin Pall, Ph.D. has identified and published research describing the likely molecular mechanisms by which electromagnetic fields (EMF’s) can cause damage.

 

See 3 min video…click below or for Dr Mercola’s page click here –>  EMF Damage Interview

 

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/09/03/electromagnetic-fields-harmful-effects.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20170903Z1&et_cid=DM157353&et_rid=38707723

Mold Produces 600 Times More Bio-Toxins with EMF

Mold Produces 600 Times More Bio-Toxins with EMF

“Dietrich Klinghardt, MD, PhD, is known for his successful treatment of neurological illness and chronic pain with Integrative Medicine. In this video, he explains how electromagnetic fields (EMF) interfere with your biology, and how EMF contributes to the creation of autism. ” ~Dr. Mercola

Electromagnetic Fields (EMF):

I have several friends who are sick from mold, lyme, electromagnetic radiation and more who have hearing challenges and/or seizure disorders and therefore cannot listen to or benefit from the video.

For all of you, I made a transcription of this video
[Dr. Klinghardt is speaking]:

“Now I’m going to make this link and then we get into the solutions. Now I am going to make the link to the elecromagnetic fields.

An acquainted physician in Switzerland who is a main mold researcher in Europe made a beautiful experiment. He grew mold cultures under a farraday cage. Simply a silver cloth… it looks like a mosquito net made out of silver coated cloth draped over the mold culture.

Then he measured how much mycotoxins how much toxins are these molds producing on a daily basis, very easy to do.

Then he lifted the mosquito net and exposed the mold culture to the ambient electromagnetic radiation in his laboratory that was caused by the lights that were on, the computer in the corner and especially he found out later the ambient cell phone radiation. You know, from the nearby cellphone tower that was broadcasting cell phone radiation.

He found out that the production of biotoxins in this culture went up more than 600 times. Not only that the mold suddenly put out significantly more mycotoxins to protect themselves but also much more virulent, much more viscous, more poisonous mycotoxins

And I took that experiment as it was for me a big light bulb went on. And that is, when you have a mom, I bring it back to the mom… who has maybe low-grade Lyme Disease you know clinically, not relevant Lyme disease… she has an infection, there is a few microbes in there that shouldn’t be there… but mom is doing well.

Now, you expose this mom to significant amounts of elecromagnetic fields of the same nature as in this laboratory in Switzerland.

The molds inside us and the Lyme spirochetes inside this mom suddenly believe they’re being attacked or they feel they are being attacked and they respond to that attack with the only mechanism they have and that is to produce more potent biotoxins.

More biotoxins and more potent biotoxins and with that suddenly mom’s system is overwhelmed with the biotoxins. And also the molds, the spirochetes and the mycoplasmas start to multiply. They are thinking they are being attacked. They are threatened to be extinguished so their response is to make more babies so there is more of them so chances of their genes to survive is higher.

The simple, pure, biological response can be seen anywhere in nature.

And so, what we have now. And to give you some numbers… Joe, I know you are familiar with this. We know that in the last 20 years if you measured the density of electromagnetic fields that we are exposed to. If you measure the amount of cell phone radiation in a cubic inch of air, it is now several million times higher than it was just 10 years ago.

Millions of times higher than it was 10 years ago. These are unbelievable exposures. As you are familiar with, the research, the true research done on cell phone radiation shows it is not safe. There is significant biological effects inside the cell.

Cell phone radiation disrupts the communication inside the cell membrane. The mechanisms that we have to transport signals from the cell wall to the DNA and backwards. It has been shown that cell phone radiation exposure to a fetus tweaks a number of genes. Exactly what we find in autistic kids and so forth.

So, I am postulating and I can back it up with my clinical results that the combination of mom having low grade infections, it may just be viral or mold, yeast or it may be Lyme Disease.

This mom that is pregnant today, is exposed to millions of times more electromagnetic radiation then she was just 10 years ago. And the increase in electromagnetic field exposure in combination with the growth driving effect it has on the microbiome in us explains the incredible avalanche of children with neurodevelopmental disorders, not just autism, that we are seeing right now.

And so, this puts the point of intervention much earlier. Before mom gets pregnant, I want to establish, does she has Lyme Disease? Does she not have Lyme Disease? If the answer is yes, she needs to be treated during the entire pregnancy.

Then, secondly, during the pregnancy, I can do wonderful things by decreasing the electromagnetic field exposure…”

More info at:
Dr. Mercola’s website
Dr. Klinghardt’s Website

 

 

http://agoodhealthadvocate.com/health/mold-produces-600-times-more-bio-toxins-with-emf/

2013 Discovery of HOW EMF’s damage DNA

RECENT BREAKTHROUGH SHOWING HOW EMF’s ARE DAMAGING OUR DNA

 

Many studies have shown how an EMF at 60 Hertz (waves per second) like electricity, or a wave at 5 Billion Hertz like WiFi, both can result in damage to our DNA!  Tons of studies show this (see for instance www.bioinitiative.org and their over 4,000 studies on EMF’s).

 

But it wasn’t till a breakthrough study in 2013 at Washington State University until we start to understand HOW this is happening.  See a great section of an article below summarizing this amazing discovery!!!

 

A Mechanism for DNA Damage

In 2013, Dr. Martin Pall made a key discovery that helps us to understand this new paradigm. 22 Through a review of the scientific literature and his own meta-study, the professor emeritus from Washington State University found that one of the primary non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields is the activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) in the plasma membrane of cells. When electromagnetic fields activate these channels, large amounts of intracellular calcium (Ca2+) are produced. This excess calcium within the cells produces a chain of chemical reactions leading to the production of free radicals and oxidative stress. The free radicals then culminate in DNA damage. 23

The diagram below shows the basic outline of this mechanism. In short, the excess calcium directly increases nitric oxide (NO) within cells. The increase of nitric oxide can result in therapeutic effects, which is one reason why non-thermal electromagnetic fields are increasingly used in medical therapies. However, nitric oxide can also interact with superoxide (OO-) to create peroxynitrite (ONOO-). It has been found that when peroxynitrite breaks down, it creates reactive free radicals and oxidative stress within cells. 24 It is these free radicals and oxidative stress from peroxynitrite that are thought to be the main culprit in causing disease and DNA damage.

I encourage you to read Dr. Pall’s research papers showing how this knowledge could be used to create technologies that reduce the activation of VGCCs 25 and also to watch his recent presentation at the University of Oslo in Norway. 26 In addition, the IEEE Power Electronics Magazine recently published an article summarizing a similar mechanism for biological effects from weak electromagnetic fields. 27

Editor’s Note: This article was written before the preliminary results of the landmark $25 million National Toxicology Program study were released earlier this year. The results showed cancer and DNA damage in rats at non-thermal microwave radiation exposures. This study is so important that even the American Cancer Society said it marked “a paradigm shift in our understanding of radiation and cancer risk.” When combined with the multiple high-quality studies that show increased cancer risk and reproductive harm for long-term cell phone users, those who continue to state that wireless technology is harmless are now on the wrong side of science.

 

 

References:

23.) https://www.emfanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/EMF-Effects-via-Voltage-Gated-Calcium-Channels-Dr-Martin-Pall.pdf

24.) https://www.emfanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Nitric-Oxide-and-Peroxynitrite-in-Health-and-Disease.pdf

25.) https://www.emfanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/VGCC-Non-Thermal-Mechanism-and-Potential-Solutions.pdf

26.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Up8bqiJN2k

27.) http://ecee.colorado.edu/~ecen4341/supplement/Barnes%20Greenebaum%20IEEE%20article%20March%202016.pdf

 

Above taken from Article “Wireless Wake-Up Call:  A New Paradigm in EMF Science” found at https://www.tbp.org/pubs/Features/Su16Johnson.pdf

 

 

California Dept of Public Health finally releases Cell Phone safety documents .

Cellphone Radiation Exposure Fact Sheet Draft Released By California Health Officials

 

Cellphone Radiation Exposure Fact Sheet Draft Released By California Health Officials

Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., who is the director of the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health, sued the state in 2016 under the California Public Records Act to get the document released.

The document is dated April 2014, but Moskowitz says the document was originally prepared seven years ago and updated several times, but never released to the public.

He previously told KPIX 5 why he decided to sue the state.

“I would like this document to see the light of day because it will inform the public that there is concern within the California Department of Public Health that cellphone radiation is a risk, and it will provide them with some information about how to reduce those risks,” Moskowitz.

The two-page document, which the Department of Public Health first emailed to the San Francisco Chronicle on Thursday afternoon, looks like any other fact sheet released by the state, except that this one has, in big bold letters “Draft and Not for Public Release” stamped across the pages.

Among the information in the document, which is titled simply, Cell Phones and Health, are summaries of scientific studies that suggest long-term cellphone use may increase the risk of brain cancer, among other health problems.

The draft fact sheet states that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs), a type of radiation, are emitted from cellphones and that because they are “used frequently and kept close to the head and body, cellphone EMFs can affect nearby cells and tissues.”

In the draft fact sheet, state health officials list their recommendations for members of the public who wish to reduce their exposure to the radiation emitted from cellphones, but state that as more studies are done the recommendations on the fact sheet may change.

Health officials’ overall recommendation is to “increase the distance between you and your phone” by using a headset, the speaker phone function and text messaging. Health officials recommend not sleeping near your phone and not carry it in your pocket or directly on your body, unless it is off.

The fact sheet also states that “EMFs can pass deeper into a child’s brain than and adult’s” so suggests parents limit their child’s cellphone use to texting, important call and emergencies.

But there are also some in Silicon Valley who say the science doesn’t support the fact sheet. David Witkowski leads Joint Venture Silicon Valley’s Wireless Communications Initiative and says “it’s very weak on details, references to existing peer-reviewed journals and studies…”

Moskowitz, however, is not yet satisfied.

He said with the release of the document, the CDPH has violated the Public Records Act, saying it “stamped new lettering in huge dark letters across the face of the document,” essentially creating a new document rather than producing the document as-is.

Moskowitz says, “that lettering states that the document is ‘draft and not for public release’ when the judge’s tentative ruling stated exactly the opposite — that the document was not a draft, and must be publicly released.”

 

For full article: CBS SF Bay Area Article – Cellphone Radiation Exposure Fact Sheet Draft Released by Health Officials