cell phones

5G REMOTE KILL VECTOR: Science paper reveals cell phone signals can activate the release of biological PAYLOADS from graphene oxide injected into the body

Posted by

0


A science paper published in MaterialsToday Chemistry reveals that cell phone signals can be used to release biological or chemical payloads from graphene oxide that’s introduced into the human body. The paper, published in September of 2022, is entitled, “Remotely controlled electro-responsive on-demand nanotherapy based on amine-modified graphene oxide for synergistic dual drug delivery.”

The study abstract reveals how a cell phone can emit signals to activate a low voltage current that interacts with Graphene Oxide (GO) molecules, causing efficient delivery of drug payloads:

This study aims to determine low-voltage-controlled dual drug (aspirin and doxorubicin) release from GO surface. Here, we have demonstrated how to control the drug release rate remotely with a handy mobile phone, with zero passive release at idle time.

Because of its extremely high surface area and complex structure composition, graphene oxide turns out to be the perfect molecule for delivery of biological or drug payloads inside the body. From the study:

These advantages make GO an extremely potential nanocomposite material as a drug carrier in the field of biomedicine and biotechnology, while being combined with a polymer or inorganic matrix.

Importantly, the presence of a specific frequency of a low voltage current is all that’s necessary to cause graphene oxide to release its payload.

5G cell tower signals create micro currents inside the body

We already know that 5G signals can generate electrical currents inside the human body, even from a significant distance. An important article authored by Dr. Joseph Mercola and published in Childrens Health Defense reveals that 5G cell signal radiation results in measurable biological and chemical changes inside the human body. From his article:

  • 5G relies primarily on the bandwidth of the millimeter wave, known to cause a painful burning sensation. It’s also been linked to eye and heart problems, suppressed immune function, genetic damage and fertility problems.
  • The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) admits no 5G safety studies have been conducted or funded by the agency or telecom industry, and that none are planned.
  • The FCC has been captured by the telecom industry, which in turn has perfected the disinformation strategies employed by the tobacco industry before it.
  • Persistent exposures to microwave frequencies like those from cellphones can cause mitochondrial dysfunction and nuclear DNA damage from free radicals produced from peroxynitrite.
  • Excessive exposures to cellphones and Wi-Fi networks have been linked to chronic diseases such as cardiac arrhythmias, anxiety, depression, autism, Alzheimer’s and infertility.

The Cellular Phone Task Force website lists numerous warnings from governments and agencies around the world who have sounded the alarm on cell phone radiation and its harmful effects on human biology.

Radiofrequency microwave radiation causes voltage changes inside the body’s cells, altering calcium channels

Additionally, compelling research led by Martin Pall, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of biochemistry and basic medical sciences at Washington State University, reveals that microwave radiation from mobile devices and wireless routers causes voltage changes inside the body’s cells, activating what are called “Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels” (VGCCs), which are located in the outer membrane of your cells. It is this membrane that determines what passes into and out of the cell.

See the full study by Martin Pall, PhD., entitled: Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. That study explains:

Twenty-three studies have shown that voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) produce these and other EMF effects… Furthermore, the voltage-gated properties of these channels may provide biophysically plausible mechanisms for EMF biological effects.

From Dr. Mercola’s article linked above: (emphasis added)

According to Pall’s research radiofrequency microwave radiation such as that from your cellphone and wireless router activates the voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) located in the outer membrane of your cells.

According to Pall, VGCCs are 7.2 million times more sensitive to microwave radiation than the charged particles inside and outside our cells, which means the safety standards for this exposure are off by a factor of 7.2 million.

Low-frequency microwave radiation opens your VGCCs, thereby allowing an abnormal influx of calcium ions into the cell, which in turn activates nitric oxide and superoxide which react nearly instantaneously to form peroxynitrite that then causes carbonate free radicals, which are one of the most damaging reactive nitrogen species known and thought to be a root cause for many of today’s chronic diseases.

This means that cell phone radiation (and 5G cell tower radiation) does, indeed, induce voltage changes in the human body, and that these voltage changes have very real biochemical effects, some of which may be dangerous to human health (such as the formation of peroxynitrite molecules).

Fighting these potent free radicals can be achieved in part with nutritional approaches, such as through the use of superoxide dismutase enzyme (SOD), which is the foundational nutrient in the Health Ranger Store’s 5G Defense powders. Notably, SOD (which is usually derived from melon fruit) does not block cell tower radiation itself, but it helps the body respond to cellular stresses such as the formation of peroxynitrite molecules.

In related news reported by Reuters, French regulators have issued a warning to Apple to stop selling iPhone 12 phones due to the presence of excessive radiation produced by the devices. Apple’s smartphone exceeds the allowable legal limit of radiation. This phone has been sold since 2020.

5G signals may be used to cause Graphene Oxide to release payloads inside the human body

Connecting the dots on all this, 5G signals can be used to generate low voltage inside the human body, causing Graphene Oxide molecules to release predetermined payloads inside the body. Via the published paper linked above:

Upon application of external stimuli, many materials are able to release drugs. However, most of them need sophisticated instruments except electrical stimulation. Electro-stimulated drug delivery has attracted attention due to the low expense, painless, and portability of the control equipment, making it manageable for customized applications. In this study, we used NGO as an electro-sensitive material to deliver drugs in a controllable manner.

“This is the first time we have used ASP and DOX as a model drug which can be delivered simultaneously by external voltage,” the paper states. The conclusion of the paper adds: (emphasis added)

In conclusion, we have shown here that NGO can be used as a dual drug delivery agent, and the release of drugs can be controlled by an external voltage. To exploit the synergistic effect of ASP and DOX, we modified NGO and attached two drugs to it. Our labmade remote-controlled device efficiently released the anticancer drug. The releasing process can easily be switched on and off with a mobile phone by changing the bias voltage.

Graphene Oxide can carry biological or chemical weapons as payloads

In the scientific paper quoted above, the payload was aspirin plus a common cancer drug. However, payloads can be almost anything of sufficiently small size, including both hydrophilic and hydrophobic molecules. From the study, “We have also demonstrated how hydrophilic (ASP) and hydrophobic drugs (DOX) can be delivered by using a single delivery platform.”

This means that potent chemical weapons — theoretically including nerve agents that are fatal at nanograms of exposure — could be loaded into graphene oxide molecules which are surreptitiously delivered into the body via aggressively propagandized medical interventions such as fake vaccines or covid swabs. Theoretically, such weapons might be able to be delivered to the population via food vectors as well. Once in the body, a small amount of payload leakage may generate some level of nerve damage among inoculated victims, but the real payload delivery won’t happen until a proper 5G signal is broadcast across the inoculated population, using the “release frequency” that generates the required voltage to unleash the payload.

In other words, a 5G broadcast signal at the appropriate frequency could instantly cause graphene oxide molecules to release the payloads into the bodies of those who were previously inoculated with those payloads. This would happen simultaneously, across the entire population that is within range of the broadcast frequencies which generate the necessary voltage in the body.

If the payload were a nerve agent, the real world effect would be the sudden dropping dead of large portions of populations across cities where 5G broadcast are able to saturate them. If payloads were virus-like nanoparticles, payload delivery could cause a large portion of the population to suddenly appear to be “infected” with a pandemic virus that is spreading at unimaginable speed.

This technology, in other words, could be used as a “kill switch” to terminate whatever portion of the population was previously inoculated with payload-carrying GO.

“Black ink” printed on pharmaceutical capsules shown to be magnetic and may contain graphene oxide

Some additional information came to my attention during the writing of this article. The black ink printed on the side of pharmaceutical capsules actually consists of mysterious black specks which are magnetic. A contact sent me a video, represented in the following screen shot, showing pharmaceutical capsules soaked in water for several hours, after which the black “ink” from the capsules turned into black specs that displayed startling magnetic properties. In this still photo, you can see the black specs gather at the common magnet held against the glass:

As this article reveals in LiveScience.com, stunning new research finds that graphene can be made magnetic by assembling layers in a specific rotational orientation. This gives rise to magnetism, even though the underlying atomic elements are nothing but carbon. From the article:

The magnetic field isn’t created by the usual spin of electrons within the individual graphene layers, but instead arises from the collective swirling of electrons in all of the three-layers of the stacked graphene structure, researchers reported Oct. 12 in the journal Nature Physics.

Is graphene being used in the “ink” that’s printed on the side of prescription medications? We don’t know for certain, but the fact that this ink is clearly magnetic is alarming.

Graphene oxide can also transmit gigahertz signals to nearby receivers

Additionally, under certain exotic applications of graphic oxide (GO) materials, those whose bodies are activated by cell tower broadcast could themselves function as electromagnetic “repeaters” due to the ability of GO to function as transmitters.

This capability is well documented in a study entitled, “Radio-frequency characteristics of graphene oxide,” published in Applied Physics Letters in 2010. (https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3506468) That study explains: (emphasis added)

We confirm graphene oxide, a two-dimensional carbon structure at the nanoscale level can be a strong candidate for high-efficient interconnector

in radio-frequency range. In this paper, we investigate high frequency characteristics of graphene oxide in range of 0.5–40 GHz. Radiofrequency transmission properties were extracted as S-parameters to determine the intrinsic ac transmission of graphene sheets, such as the impedance variation dependence on frequency. The impedance and resistance of graphene sheets drastically decrease as frequency increases. This result confirms graphene oxide has high potential for transmitting signals at gigahertz ranges.

Graphene oxide materials, in other words, can both carry payloads which are delivered via remote cell phone signaling, as well as transmit signals to other nearby receivers.

This could theoretically be used to start a “chain reaction” of 5G cell tower signals being re-broadcast from one person to another. In theory, this could extend a “kill switch” signal broadcast far beyond the initial range of 5G cell towers themselves.

From the conclusion of that published paper:

…[W]e expect that GO could be used for transmission lines in next-stage electronics and could be very strong candidate for nanocarbon electronics.

Conclusions

  1. Graphene oxide can carry chemical or biological payloads.
  2. Graphene oxide carrying payloads can be introduced into the body through vaccines or swabs.
  3. The release of those payloads can be controlled by external cell tower signals which cause specific voltage changes in human cells.
  4. Some voltage changes are already known to occur with exposure to cell tower radiation, especially with 5G.
  5. Graphene oxide payloads can include “kill switch” payloads such as nerve agents or infectious agents.
  6. The 5G tower system can therefore function as a chemical weapons payload release infrastructure system to achieve a “mass kill” of populations which were previously inoculated with payload-carrying GO.
  7. Covid vaccines — which are now widely known to have had nothing to do with halting any pandemic (since even the White House and CDC both admit they do not halt transmission or infections) — could have theoretically been used to inoculate people with graphene oxide payloads which have not yet been activated.

Thus, it is plausible — but not proven — that vaccines + 5G cell towers could be exploited as a depopulation weapon system to achieve near-simultaneous mass extermination of a large percentage of the human population, simply by activating GO payload release with a specific broadcast energy intensity and frequency.

Given that the western governments of the world are clearly attempting to exterminate their own populations right now, this conclusion should be concerning to all those who wish to survive the global depopulation agenda.

Cell Phones Could Be a Source of Flame Retardant Exposure

Posted by

0


Levels of organophosphate esters (OPEs) — compounds widely used as flame retardants and plasticizers to increase durability — found on cell phones and other handheld devices could be significantly associated with the amount of OPE metabolites in the urine, warn Canadian researchers.

OPEs have been linked to adverse health outcomes, such as reduced cognitive abilities in children and papillary thyroid cancer in adults, as well as worse in vitro fertilization outcomes.

Congqiao Yang, PhD, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and colleagues looked at OPE exposure through air and dust on home and electronic devices in more than 50 women.

The research, which was published online December 4 in Environment International, revealed that the women were exposed to several OPEs, with a significant correlation between the compounds found on their hands and the presence of metabolites in the urine.

In a press release, senior author Miriam L. Diamond, PhD, also of the University of Toronto, said: “What we don’t know for certain though is whether electronic devices are the source of the chemicals or an indicator of total exposure from other sources, or both.”

She continued, “Earlier this year the US Consumer Product Safety Commission granted a petition to ban the use of certain harmful flame retardant chemicals in electronics and other products.”

“The OPEs identified in this new study are often used as replacements for the banned chemicals, and increasing evidence indicates that these replacement chemicals are harmful as well.”

Children Especially Vulnerable: Wash Devices and Hands

The new findings come amidst calls for increased focus on the environmental and human health impacts of electronics. Existing electronics industry standards cover thermal, electrical, optical, and even acoustic product safety, but do not specify how materials should be screened for possible toxicological impacts.

Diamond told Medscape Medical News that exposure to chemicals such as those tracked in this study is of particular concern among children. She explained this is not only because of cumulative lifetime exposure, “but it’s also because kids are more vulnerable.”

“They’re vulnerable because their organ systems are still developing, so we want to be particularly cautious about kids’ exposures to toxic chemicals.”

In any case, she recommends that all phone and handheld device users be conscious about the amount of time they spend using their devices and to clean them from time to time. “Washing your hands is a good idea,” she said, “and washing your phone periodically is a good idea.”

“Very few people actually wash their phones,” Diamond pointed out, adding: “Your phone picks up the signal of all the things that your hands have been touching plus what’s in the phone itself.”

Diamond added that, for their next study, she and her colleagues would “like to look at children’s exposure through electronic devices, particularly because kids are given electronic devices at younger and younger ages.”

She continued, “You have really small kids being looked after by a cell phone now rather than by a human, so you wonder what the implications are.”

“Kids have a lot of hand to mouth contact, kids are always putting their hands in their mouths, so we’re very keen to look at what happens with little kids and electronic devices.”

Are Cellphones the Chicken or the Egg of OPE Exposure?

To investigate the sources of exposure to OPEs, Yang and her team recruited 51 participants in a population-based, case-control study of women with and without breast cancer.

The median age of the women was 41 years, and 78% had breast cancer. The women were predominantly white, highly educated homeowners, with 54% reporting an average household income of over $100,000.

The women completed a questionnaire about home characteristics, including thermal insulation type; personal demographic and lifestyle data, including use of personal care products and hand washing frequency; and presence and usage of major electronic devices and upholstered furniture.

The team also performed two in-home assessments, separated by approximately 3 weeks, to record particle levels in respirable air and floor dust in bedrooms (n = 51) and the most commonly used rooms (n = 26).

The palms and backs of hands of participants were wiped. Surface wipes of electronic products that operated at elevated temperatures or were in frequent contact with hands were also taken.

Forty-four participants also provided urine samples an average of 2 months before the first home visit. Overall, 23 OPEs were analyzed in the air, dust, and wipe samples, and eight OPE metabolites were assessed in the urine samples.

Six of the 23 OPEs tested were detected in over 80% of air samples, and seven had detection frequencies over 70% in dust samples, with no significant differences between the bedroom and most-used room.

Palms had higher concentrations of OPEs than the backs of the hands.

For all nine OPEs detected on electronic devices, concentrations on handheld devices (for example, cell phones, home phones, and tablets) were significantly higher than those seen for non-handheld devices, such as TVs (P ≤ .001).

Statistical analysis using hand wipes, cell phone wipes, and dust explained 8% of 33% of the variation in creatinine-adjusted urinary metabolites; air concentration did not have explanatory power.

The team writes, “Our results showed that exposure of some OPEs in these women can be explained by levels found on their cell phones.”

“The results do not allow us to distinguish between whether the cell phone is acting as a source of OPEs or rather a time- and space-integrated indicator of OPE exposure; likely both explanations are reasonable.”

They add, “Cell phone wipes could provide an integrated indicator of exposure to flame retardants and plasticizers accumulated from multiple microenvironments, particularly since most people are in frequent contact with their cell phones that are infrequently washed.”

THIS IS WHAT WIFI, CELL PHONES, IPADS & MORE ARE DOING TO YOUR CHILD’S BRAIN – 100 + SCIENTISTS ARE NOW PETITIONING THE UN

Posted by

1


*This article only represents a very small fraction of the research regarding the dangers associated with these devices. We encourage you to further your own research, and just wanted to provide a base to let you know that it’s something more of us need to pay attention to.

 Did you know that a child’s brain absorbs much more radiation than that of an adult?

Dr. Martin Blank, Ph.D., from the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at Colombia University, has joined a group of scientists from around the world who are making an international appeal to the United Nations regarding the dangers associated with the use of various electromagnetic emitting devices, like cells phones and WiFi.

Below is a video of him outlining the various dangers associated with these devices.

Multiple studies have revealed that cell phone radiation can cause cancer. Did you know that The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radio frequency fields (including those from cell phones) as a possible carcinogen in 2011? (source)  The dangers of cell phone use gained a lot of mainstream credibility in 2011 when the World Health Organization (WHO) admitted that cell phone radiation may cause cancer. The statement was based off of a cumulative decision made by a team of 31 scientists, from 14 different countries, after reviewing evidence that suggested this to be the case. You can read more about that HERE. It’s pretty startling news, especially given the fact that a child’s brain absorbs much more radiation than that of an adult.

 Below is a video of Dr. Devra Davis, who is one of the most well-respected and credentialed researchers on the dangers of cellphones, among a number of other things.

 … [A] cellphone is a two-way microwave radio,’ Dr. Davis pointed out.“Industry has fought successfully to use the phrase ‘radiofrequency energy’ instead of microwave radiation. Because they know radiofrequency energy sounds fine.

We listen to music with radios. Everybody needs more energy. What could be better than that?

But radiofrequency energy is another word for microwave radiation. If people understood that they were holding a two-way microwave-radiating device next to their brain or next to their reproductive organs, they might think differently about it. (source)

The first cell phone generation is now  growing up, so if you are a parent, hopefully this gives you something to think about. HERE is a great interview she did with Dr. Mercola that is worth checking out as well.

Worrying is pointless, and solves nothing. That being said, coming across such information can be scary, and that’s the last reaction you should have; after all, our thoughts feelings and emotions alone have shown to have a significant effect on our biology, and letting go of fear could possibly be the first step in helping you limit the effect that EMFs could be having on your body.  That being said, here are some others measures you can take:

As Dr. Mercola points out, until the industry starts taking this matter seriously, the responsibility to keep children safe falls on the parents. To minimize the risk to your brain, and that of your child, pay heed to the following advice:

    • Don’t let your child use a cell phone. Barring a life-threatening emergency, children should not use a cell phone, or a wireless device of any type. Children are far more vulnerable to cell phone radiation than adults, because of their thinner skull bones.
    • Keep your cell phone use to a minimum. Turn your cell phone off more often. Reserve it for emergencies or important matters. As long as your cell phone is on, it emits radiation intermittently, even when you are not actually making a call. Use a land line at home and at work.
    • Reduce or eliminate your use of other wireless devices. Just as with cell phones, it is important to ask yourself whether or not you really need to use them every single time. If you must use a portable home phone, use the older kind that operates at 900 MHz. They are no safer during calls, but at least some of them do not broadcast constantly even when no call is being made.

You can measure your exposure from your cordless phone is to measure with an electrosmog meter, and it must be one that goes up to the frequency of your portable phone. As many portable phones are 5.8 Gigahertz, we recommend you look for RF meters that go up to 8 Gigahertz.

You can find RF meters at EMFSafetyStore.com. Even without an RF meter, you can be fairly certain your portable phone is problematic if the technology is labeled DECT, or digitally enhanced cordless technology. Alternatively, you can be very careful with the base station placement as that causes the bulk of the problem since it transmits signals 24/7, even when you aren’t talking.

“If you can keep the base station at least three rooms away from where you spend most of your time, and especially your bedroom, they may not be as damaging to your health. Ideally it would be helpful to turn off or disconnect your base station every night before you go to bed.” – Dr Mercola

    • Limit cell phone use to areas with excellent reception. The weaker the reception, the more power your phone must use to transmit, and the more power it uses, the more radiation it emits, and the deeper the dangerous radio waves penetrate into your body. Ideally, you should only use your phone with full bars and good reception.
    • Avoid carrying your cell phone on your body, and do not sleep with it under your pillow or near your head.Ideally, put it in your purse or carrying bag. Placing a cell phone in your bra or in a shirt pocket over your heart is asking for trouble, as is placing it in a man’s pocket if he seeks to preserve his fertility.

The most dangerous place to be, in terms of radiation exposure, is within about six inches of the emitting antenna. You do not want any part of your body within that area while the phone is on.

    • Don’t assume one cell phone is safer than another. There’s no such thing as a “safe” cell phone.
    • Respect others; many are highly sensitive to EMF. Some people who have become sensitive can feel the effects of others’ cell phones in the same room, even when it is on but not being used.

If you are in a meeting, on public transportation, in a courtroom or other public places, such as a doctor’s office, keep your cell phone turned off out of consideration for the “secondhand radiation” effects. Children are also more vulnerable, so please avoid using your cell phone near children.

    • Use a well-shielded wired headset: Wired headsets will certainly allow you to keep the cell phone farther away from your body. However, if a wired headset is not well-shielded — and most of them are not — the wire itself can act as an antenna attracting and transmitting radiation directly to your brain.

So make sure the wire used to transmit the signal to your ear is shielded. One of the best kinds of headsets use a combination of shielded wire and air-tube. These operate like a stethoscope, transmitting the sound to your head as an actual sound wave; although there are wires that still must be shielded, there is no wire that goes all the way up to your head.

Tips for Avoiding Dirty Electricity Risks

Additional options to minimize your risks from dirty electricity, compiled by Paula Owens, M.S. for the Ahwatukee Foothill News, include:13

  • “Avoid using laptop computers on your lap.
  • Switch out compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs for incandescent light bulbs.
  • Consider replacing Wi-Fi routers with Ethernet cables.
  • Avoid electric water beds, blankets and heating pads.
  • Remove electrical devices from your sleeping area. If you must use an electric alarm clock, keep it at least five inches from your body when sleeping. Or, opt for a battery-operated clock.
  • Move power strips at least three inches away from your feet.
  • Switch to flat-screen TVs and computer monitors as these emit less EMFs than the older styles.
  • If you live in close vicinity to or underneath electrical wires, power lines or cell phone towers, you may want to consider moving.
  • Stand three to four feet away from microwave ovens when in use [or stop using them altogether].
  • Consider shielding devices to reduce EMFs from cell phones, cordless phones and landline speaker phones.
  • Ask your electric utility provider to remove wireless smart meters and replace them with a wired smart meter.
  • Walk barefoot on the sand, grass or dirt. This common practice known as earthing or grounding allows the healing negative ions from the ground to flow into our body and have been shown to reduce stress hormones and inflammation.
  • Use 100 percent beeswax candles and Himalayan salt lamps in your home and office to absorb EMFs from the air. Salt lamps serve as natural room ionizers, emitting negative ions into the environment that effectively bind with all the excess positive ions, reducing EMFs, killing bacteria and purifying the air.”

Neurosurgeon Reveals Radiation from Wi-Fi, Smart Meters and Cell Phones Cause the Blood-Brain Barrier to Leak

Posted by

0


Dr. Leif Salford is a Neurosurgeon at Sweden’s Lund University Hospital, and a Professor and Chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery at Lund University. Since 1988 Dr. Salford and his colleagues have conducted many studies on radio frequency radiation and its effects on the brain, exposing over 1,600 experimental animals to ‘low-level’ radiation.

neurosurgeon-shows-how-low-levels-of-radiation-such-as-wi-fi-smart-meters-and-cell-phones-cause-the-blood-brain-barrier-to-leak

Their results over time have been both consistent and worrisome: Exposure to radiation, including that from cell phones and wi-fi, causes leakage in the blood-brain barrier — the brain’s first line of defense against infections and toxic chemicals. Some of the most concerning conclusions result from the fact that even the weakest exposure levels to wireless radiation caused the greatest effect in causing the blood brain barrier to leak.

Researchers in 13 other laboratories in 6 different countries had reported the same effect, but no one had proven whether it would lead to any damage in the long term. Then, in a study published June 2003 in Environmental Health Perspectives, Salford’s team repeated the experiment on 32 additional animals, but this time waited eight weeks before examining their brains. In those animals that had been exposed to a cell phone, up to two percent of the neurons in all areas of the brain were shrunken and degenerated.

 Dr. Salford called the potential implications of this research “terrifying. We have good reason to believe that what happens in rats’ brains also happens in humans.” Referring to today’s children and teenagers, the study’s authors wrote that “a whole generation of users may suffer negative effects, perhaps as early as middle age.”

An argument is sometimes posed to those who express concern about radiation from “smart” meters, Wi Fi etc., that the radiation emitted from these devices is at such low levels that the public needn’t worry about it. However this is not necessarily accurately. Dr. Salford’s studies showed opening up of the blood brain barrier from even very low levels of radiation exposure. In fact, Cindy Sage and Dr. David Carpenter explained in a 2008 paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Pathophysiology, entitled Public Health Implications of Wireless Technologies, that it is actually “the weakest exposure level [which] showed the greatest effect in opening up the BBB [blood brain barrier].”

Dr. Devra Davis, Ph.D, MPH, author of “Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation” explains the science of cell phone radiation in a very comprehensive way. For example she shows photos of two cells, one whose DNA has been damaged by “gamma” radiation (which is what was emitted by the atomic bombing of Hiroshima) and another cell damaged by low level pulsing non ionizing radiation (from a cell phone). Both cells are very damaged compared to a normal cell; but the problem extends beyond physical cell damage. Dr. Davis explains that the DNA from the cell exposed to the cell phone radiation also shows signs of damage.

In her book, Dr. Davis also discusses the campaign of disinformation waged against reputable scientists and their studies — and points out that some of the reputable studies which have been falsely discredited actually showed the damage caused to the brain by radiation as early as 1972 (Frey).

In May of 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) official recognized that wireless radiation such as emitted by “smart meters” is a possible carcinogen. However, their tentative stance does not reflect the scientific reality. After decades of corporately-funded, biased research being held up as “industry-standard”, there are now hundreds of independent peer-reviewed scientific studies showing there is a clear health hazard with technology that emits wireless radiation in the range that “smart meters” do. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of people with a “smart meter” installed in their homes have contracted illnesses, insomnia, rashes, headaches, and worse. Many have been forced to leave their homes entirely, due to the adverse health effects of radiation.

What’s more, in apartment buildings where 30+ “smart meters” are installed in a single electrical room, the dangers are even higher. And, while the work of Dr. Salford and Dr. Davis is extensive, there have so far been no long-term health studies done on such high levels of Electromagnetic Radiation.

In a PBS interview with Dr. Keith Black, chairman of neurosurgery and director of the Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Institute at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, commented on the WHO’s classification of RF Electromagnetic radiation as a 2B possible carcinogen.

“We haven’t had any good studies in the pediatric population. A child’s skull is much thinner… and the amount of radiation that goes into the pediatric brain is much higher than in an adult. So we should be cautious with how we allow our children to use a cell phone. They’re going to be the ones that not only use [this technology] at a much younger age but at a much longer duration [than older generations].”

Are Cell Phones Safe or Dangerous?

Posted by

0


mobile cell phone cancer

In today’s technologically dependent society, many of us keep our cell phone on our person at all times. We do so without thinking about the long term consequences of this decision or reading the fine print. Since your cell phone consistently puts out a high level of radiation, keeping it close to your body 24/7 carries a significant risk.

However, there is no medical consensus. Some experts believe that all of the worrying is needless and that your cell phone will never cause any health issues. Others believe that cell phones are much like tobacco and that we will discover how harmful they are after years of overexposure.

looking-at-cell-phone

Since we have no way of seeing the future (yet!) and getting definitive proof one way or the other, our best bet is to be as safe as possible. There are a variety of measures you can take to safeguard yourself, without having to alter your regular routine.

Obviously, no one is going to get rid of their cell phone. They are a vital part of our daily living, firmly entrenched in our day to day lifestyle. Even if you believe that cell phone radiation poses no risk to your physical well being, there are still small steps that can be taken to minimize your radiation exposure.

phoneaccessory_5

Even the most rudimentary cell phone has a speaker phone function and many of them come with a hands free device that allows you to talk without holding the phone so close to your face. Even if you just use these options occasionally, you are able to limit your exposure to potentially toxic radiation, without having to give up your usual routine.

 

yell-cell-phone

For every millimeter of space you can leave between your body and your phone, you are able to reduce your exposure to radiation by roughly 15 percent. People who live in rural areas are more at risk, because the phone uses increased radiation to find a signal.

 

baby cell phone cancer

If you take the time to read your phone’s instructional manual (most of us don’t), you will typically find a warning that urges you not to carry your phone in close proximity to your body. Yet, that doesn’t stop us from tucking it into our shirt or pants pocket, or even a brassiere.

 

Phone_Case

Instead of keeping the phone so close to our heart or other important body parts, a holster, a backpack or a purse may work better in the long run. This is another change that requires very little effort on your part and can pay huge dividends.

 

Zack_Morris_cell_phone

Just because there is no smoking gun linking cell phone usage to radiation poisoning does not mean that safety should be ignored. With just a few minor tweaks to your mobile device usage, you can significantly reduce your potential risk factor and still enjoy all the convenience your cell phone has to offer.

Cell Phone Use In Children & Teens Translates Into 5 Times Greater Increase In Brain Cancer

Posted by

0


Cell phone use has undoubtedly become increasingly popular amongst the younger generation with one-fifth of children as young as the age of 8 shown to already own and use cellular devices. An ongoing study conducted in Sweden by the Hardell Group, in association with the International Interphone Study,  shows that this trend could be detrimental as children and teens are far more susceptible to brain tumor development from this exposure.

teenphone

Cell phone use has quickly become the societal norm for people of all ages to stay connected to one another and the rest of the world. Many of us have become so dependent upon them that it has become more common to see a bus filled with people all looking down at their phones rather than a bus filled with people communicating with one another. As troubling as this trend may be in general, it seems to be increasingly troublesome for the world’s younger generations who are now getting “connected” at even younger ages.

A study conducted by the Massachusetts Aggression Reduction Center (MARC), which included over 20,000 children/ teens between grades 3 and 12, concluded that approximately 20% of grade 3 students already owned a cell phone. The numbers steadily rose from that point forward to approximately 25% in grade 4, 39% in grade 5  and 83% in middle school.

As wonderful as cell phones can be for both connectivity and as a safety tool for children in case of an emergency, the side effects seem to heavily outweigh these benefits -especially since most children make them a part of their regular life. The dangers of cell phone use gained a lot of mainstream credibility in 2011 when the World Health Organization (WHO) admitted that cell phone radiation may cause cancer. The statement was based off of a cumulative decision made by a team of 31 scientists, from 14 different countries, after reviewing evidence that suggested this to be the case.

The most conclusive evidence thus far however seems to have come from Sweden where the Hardell Group, in association with the International Interphone Study, have found a consistent pattern of increased brain tumors associated with mobile phone use. Unlike many other studies conducted on the subject matter, that which has been conducted by the Hardell Group spans over the course of 10 years allowing for a better understanding of the long-term effects of the devices. Professor Lennart Hardell himself, while speaking at a conference held at the Royal Society by the Radiation Research Trust, revealed that there was a five-fold increase in glioma within people who started to use mobile phones prior to the age of 20.

Glioma, for those that are unfamiliar with the term, is a tumor that begins in the brain or spinal cord, and is the most common form of brain tumour.

The reason why children and teens seem to be more at risk lies within the fact that unlike adults, their brain and nervous systems are still developing, and in this state are far more susceptible to troubling behaviour caused by cellular devices. Children in particular have been identified as being the greatest at risk because they have smaller brains, a lower skull bone density, a less effective blood brain barrier and more connective tissue making them capable of absorbing up to 3 times as much radiation as an adult.

As troubling as these findings may be, there are steps that we can take to help minimize the impact that cell phones can have on all of us, no matter our age. Aside from perhaps holding back on giving our children access to cell phones at such a young age, informing them of the dangers associated with their use is always a great first step. The same can be said for informing your friends and family of all ages, making sure they are made aware of how hazardous their favorite device can be, especially if heavily used and depended upon. Several helpful precautions are discussed in this article that we released in 2013, including dietary choices, technological devices and even alternative protection that are all readily available to be implemented. Check them out, and be sure to share your thoughts on cell phone use via the comment section below.

SOURCES:
Pandora Foundation – http://www.pandora-foundation.eu/research-projects/hardell-project/lennart-hardell-reports.html
CDN – http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/science/Research%20Findings_%20MARC%202011%20Survey%20Grades%203-12.pdf
MINA – http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/18275/2/
Mayo Clinic – http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/glioma/basics/definition/con-20035538
Prevent Disease – http://preventdisease.com/news/13/120913_Mobile-Phone-Use-In-Children-Transaltes-5-Times-Greater-Increase-Brain-Cancer.shtml

Heavy Cell Phone Use Can Quadruple Your Risk of Deadly Brain Cancer

Posted by

0


Story at-a-glance

  • Those who use their cell phones the most are twice as likely to develop lethal brain cancer (glioma) compared to those whose exposure is minimal
  • Those who have used either a cell phone or cordless house phone for more than 25 years have triple the risk of glioma, compared to those who have used them for less than one year

No one wants to hear that something as “indispensable” as your cell phone might cause grave harm to your health, but that’s exactly what mounting evidence tells us we’re faced with.

Wireless phones and other gadgets have the potential to cause all sorts of health problems, from headaches to brain tumors. The link between brain cancer and cell phone use has been a particularly persistent one, and mounting research has only made this association stronger…

As mentioned in the featured video, previous research has shown that those who begin using cell phones heavily before age 20 have four to five times morebrain cancer by their late 20s, compared to those whose exposure is minimal.

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an arm of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared cell phones a Class B Carcinogen, meaning a “possible cancer-causing agent,” based on the available research.

This places cell phones in the same category as diesel engine exhaust, some pesticides, and some heavy metals. The expert panel ruled that there was “some evidence” that regular cell phone use increased the risk of two types of tumors – brain tumors (gliomas) and acoustic neuromas.

When you consider the fact that your body is bioelectric, it’s easier to understand how and why biological damage from wireless phones might occur.1

For starters, your body uses electrons to communicate, and inside every cell are mitochondria, the “power plants” of the cell, and these mitochondria can be adversely impacted by electromagnetic fields, resulting in cellular dysfunction. Other mechanisms of harm have also been discovered in recent years.

Wireless Phone Use Increases Risk of Malignant Brain Tumor

The latest analysis,2, 3 published online ahead of print in October, was performed by Dr. Lennart Hardell, a professor of oncology at University of Örebro in Sweden, and statistician Michael Carlberg from the same University.

The pair looked at data from two previous case-controlled studies on Swedish patients diagnosed with malignant brain tumors during the periods of 1997-2003 and 2007-2009.

The patients were between the ages of 18 and 80 years old at the time of their diagnosis. Cell phone use was ascertained via questionnaires. (Use of a hands-free device counted as non-exposure.) In all, nearly 1,500 brain cancer patients were included, along with 3,530 cancer-free controls.

Using regression analysis, adjusted for gender, age, year of diagnosis, and socioeconomic index, the odds of developing a malignant and highly lethal brain cancer called glioma rose concurrently with increased cell phone use.

The more hours spent with a cell phone pressed to their ear, and the more years they’d spent using a mobile phone, the higher the odds were.

  • Those who logged the most amount of hours on their cell phones were twice as likely to develop glioma compared to those who used them the least
  • Those who used either a cell phone or cordless house phone for more than 25 years had triple the risk of glioma, compared to those who had used wireless telephones for less than one year

To put this risk ratio into some perspective, just over five people out of 100,000 were diagnosed with malignant brain cancer between 1995 and 2002. If that rate triples, the odds of developing a malignant brain tumor rise to about 16 out of 100,000.

But, there are also signs that technology is progressively getting more harmful—not less so… As noted in the featured article:4

“The case control studies covered periods during which phone technologies had changed considerably. It started with first generation analogue phones that had an output power of 1 W at about 900 MHz.

The 2nd generation GSM (Global System for Mobile Communication) phones (2G) with either 900 or 1800 MHz frequency had pulsed output power averaging tens of mW.

The 3rd generation (3G) phones UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunication System) are more amplitude modulated than pulsed, and typically use a broad frequency band (5 MHz width) from 700-3 590 MHz on a worldwide basis, and from 900-2 170 MHz in Europe with output power of the order of tens of μW.”

The findings show that 3G phones may cause more harm than earlier versions, raising the risk of brain cancer four-fold. It also appears to have shorter latency period—just five to 10 years, compared to about 25 years for earlier mobile phone versions.

Proposed Mechanisms of Harm

One mechanism of harm, published in 2010,5 explains how electromagnetic fields damage your cells and DNA by inducing a cellular stress response. The research was conducted by Dr. Martin Blank,6 PhD, a former Associate Professor at Columbia University in the department of physiology and cellular biophysics, and past president of the Bioelectromagnetics Society.

He gave an informative speech at the November 18, 2010 Commonwealth Club of California program, “The Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields,” co-sponsored by ElectromagneticHealth.org.

In his lecture, Dr. Blank explained that DNA, with its “coil of coils” structure, is very vulnerable to electromagnetic fields. It possesses the same structural characteristics of a fractal antenna (electronic conduction and self-symmetry), and these two properties allow for greater reactivity of DNA to electromagnetic fields than other tissues.

Moreover, no heat is required for this DNA damage to occur. Dr. Blank believes the potential harm of wireless technologies can be significant, and that there’s plenty of peer-reviewed research to back up such suspicions.

A review of 11 long-term epidemiologic studies published in the journal Surgical Neurology7 in 2009 revealed that using a cell phone for 10 years or longer approximately doubles your risk of being diagnosed with a brain tumor on the same side of the head where the cell phone is typically held. Both Dr. Hardell and Carlberg were involved in that study as well, and these findings are very similar to the findings in their latest review, discussed earlier.

Another important study, funded by the US government, was published in JAMA8, 9 in 2011. Using a specialized brain scanner capable of detecting alterations in glucose, the researchers determined that cell phone radiation triggers your brain cells to metabolize glucose at an increased rate. Glucose metabolism equates to cell activation, so the findings indicate that radiation from your cell phone has a well-defined measureable influence on your brain. Essentially, each time you put a cell phone up to your ear, you’re artificially activating your brain cells. While that much is clear, it’s still unknown whether this excess glucose production is harmful, or can cause a cascade of problems down the line.

Common-Sense Guidelines to Protect Your and Your Family’s Health

It’s important to note that researchers are in general agreement that there’s a latency period of about 10 years or more before the damage shows up, which places children at greatest risk—a risk that is potentially exacerbated with more modern 3G technologies, which appear to be even more harmful than earlier versions.

From my perspective, the evidence clearly indicates that we need to invoke the precautionary principle with regards to cell phone use, as well as other wireless technologies. Until the industry starts taking this matter seriously, the responsibility to keep children safe falls on the parents. To minimize the risk to your brain, and that of your child, pay heed to the following advice:

    • Don’t let your child use a cell phone. Barring a life-threatening emergency, children should not use a cell phone, or a wireless device of any type. Children are far more vulnerable to cell phone radiation than adults, because of their thinner skull bones.
    • Keep your cell phone use to a minimum. Turn your cell phone off more often. Reserve it for emergencies or important matters. As long as your cell phone is on, it emits radiation intermittently, even when you are not actually making a call. Use a land line at home and at work.
    • Reduce or eliminate your use of other wireless devices. Just as with cell phones, it is important to ask yourself whether or not you really need to use them every single time. If you must use a portable home phone, use the older kind that operates at 900 MHz. They are no safer during calls, but at least some of them do not broadcast constantly even when no call is being made. Note the only way to truly be sure if there is an exposure from your cordless phone is to measure with an electrosmog meter, and it must be one that goes up to the frequency of your portable phone (so old meters won’t help much). As many portable phones are 5.8 Gigahertz, we recommend you look for RF meters that go up to 8 Gigahertz.

You can find RF meters at www.EMFSafetyStore.com. Even without an RF meter, you can be fairly certain your portable phone is problematic if the technology is labeled DECT, or digitally enhanced cordless technology. Alternatively, you can be very careful with the base station placement as that causes the bulk of the problem since it transmits signals 24/7, even when you aren’t talking. If you can keep the base station at least three rooms away from where you spend most of your time, and especially your bedroom, they may not be as damaging to your health. Ideally it would be helpful to turn off or disconnect your base station every night before you go to bed.

  • Limit cell phone use to areas with excellent reception. The weaker the reception, the more power your phone must use to transmit, and the more power it uses, the more radiation it emits, and the deeper the dangerous radio waves penetrate into your body. Ideally, you should only use your phone with full bars and good reception.
  • Avoid carrying your cell phone on your body, and do not sleep with it below your pillow or near your head.Ideally, put it in your purse or carrying bag. Placing a cell phone in your bra or in a shirt pocket over your heart is asking for trouble, as is placing it in a man’s pocket if he seeks to preserve his fertility. The most dangerous place to be, in terms of radiation exposure, is within about six inches of the emitting antenna. You do not want any part of your body within that area while the phone is on.
  • Don’t assume one cell phone is safer than another.There’s no such thing as a “safe” cell phone.
  • Respect others; many are highly sensitive to EMF. Some people who have become sensitive can feel the effects of others’ cell phones in the same room, even when it is on but not being used. If you are in a meeting, on public transportation, in a courtroom or other public places, such as a doctor’s office, keep your cell phone turned off out of consideration for the “secondhand radiation” effects. Children are also more vulnerable, so please avoid using your cell phone near children.
  • Use a well-shielded wired headset: Wired headsets will certainly allow you to keep the cell phone farther away from your body. However, if a wired headset is not well-shielded — and most of them are not — the wire itself can act as an antenna attracting and transmitting radiation directly to your brain. So make sure the wire used to transmit the signal to your ear is shielded. One of the best kinds of headsets use a combination of shielded wire and air-tube. These operate like a stethoscope, transmitting the sound to your head as an actual sound wave; although there are wires that still must be shielded, there is no wire that goes all the way up to your head.

Watch the video.URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnY7utiMwG0