Thomas Cowan, M.D. hypothesizes that Coronavirus may be history repeating itself and linked to 5G. It was filmed at the Health And Human Rights Summit in Tucson, Arizona on March 12, 2020.
You Tube has removed his video stating it violated You Tube’s terms of service. It was re-posted and and also removed from Invidio.
Dr. Cowan is anthroposophical holistic medical doctor in San Francisco CA. He is the author of “Human Heart, Cosmic Heart”, “Cancer and the New Biology of Water”, “How (and Why) to Eat More Vegetables”, principal author of “Fourfold Path to Healing” and co-author of “The Nourishing Traditions Book of Baby and Child Care”.
There is much discussion in the EMF science community about the relevance of this theory. Some are dismissive, others are not. There are many unanswered questions on how 5G interacts with human health. Studies show wireless frequencies affect the immune system. Seems like it’s an important time to demand answers, and especially protect children from untested widespread technology use! Stay tuned!
This is a great 9 minute interview by Full Measure TV with Martin Pall, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences in the School of Molecular Biology at Washington State University.
Excerpts: “Chances are you haven’t met many people like Professor Martin Pall. Sharyl: Is it true that you do not carry a cell phone? Martin Pall: Yes, I don’t carry a cell phone…But before you make the mistake of writing off Pall as a nutty professor, you should know he’s considered one of the world’s pre-eminent scientists on Electro Magnetic Fields.”
“Sharyl: Is it your feeling that mobile phone use and 5-G in the future have been and are causes of chronic disease epidemics in this country?
Pall: I believe that the exposures we already have are producing major effects already on our health. And that 5-G will be vastly worse than anything that we, we are already exposed to.”
“Sharyl: How do you explain them saying the science doesn’t exist, that there’s nothing that gives us cause for concern?
Pall: It’s all corruption. There’s no other explanation. I think they’re at least 25 different reviews that have been published on this over the years.”
“Pall: We need to dramatically decrease exposures. We’re taking risks of the sort that no rational society can possibly take. We’re doing it blindly, and in my judgment with absolute stupidity.”
The EMF Health Effects Survey 2019 is an anonymous survey circulated online from 11/27/2018 to 1/27/2019 through the EMF Safety Network lists, website, and affiliate online EMF groups. There are 876 respondents and over 1300 comments. THANK YOU to all who took the survey and to all who helped to circulate it!
Ed Halteman, PhD of Survey Design and Analysis has prepared a report of the Survey Results. A summary of the results is 52% of all respondents stated “severely”or “a lot” in response to the question of “How much does the current EMF environment (cell phones/smart meters/wireless etc.) limit your lifestyle – your ability to work, shop, play, and or spend time with friends and family?” 22% said they are affected a moderate amount, 15.6% a little and 10.5% not at all limited.
Respondents were asked to best match themselves to the following descriptions which are synonymous with mild, moderate, and severe Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS). 49.3% said they are EMF Aware: “You are aware that electromagnetic fields and wireless radiation affect your health or make you feel unwell” 27.5% EMF Injured: “You have been injured by electromagnetic fields and/or wireless radiation” 19.1% Radiation sickness: “You have electromagnetic radiation sickness, a severe and chronic condition” 4.1% None of the above
The top health problems all respondents experience(d) and believe are related to EMF exposure are: Sleep; Fatigue; Concentration, memory or learning problems; and Stress and anxiety.
The top EMF device(s), all respondents believe caused or worsened their health problems are: Wi-fi; Cell phone; Smart meters; and Cell or radio tower.
The top remediations that people tried and reported as most helpful were: Prudent avoidance of EMF; turning electricity off at the breaker box, and shielding. The least helpful remedies were reported as: Medical doctors, prescription drugs and counseling or therapy.
When you look at the survey results segmented by self-description the numbers change. People with Radiation sickness had twice the number of health problems as EMF Aware, and 50% more than EMF Injured.
94% of people with Radiation sickness reported Concentration, memory or learning problems, compared to 47% of EMF Aware. People with Radiation sickness were more affected by cell or radio tower.
There is much to learn, and much more to say about these results. How can we best use this? Circulate this report to doctors and decision makers. Try a solution you haven’t tried yet. Have more compassion for people who are more affected than you. Understand not everyone is equally harmed. What else? Let us know!
In closing, please read the following commentary on this survey by Cindy Sage:
“The many hundreds of comments written by people responding to the EMF Health Effects Survey 2019 by the EMF Safety Network are illuminating and profoundly disturbing. The Survey itself is invaluable to teach us what it is like to live a life with EHS limitations. It doesn’t matter whether you live in the US, or Canada, or western Europe or Scandinavia. Or Asia. Or Australia. The accounts are so similar. The demoralizing effects are the same.
What is obvious is that these people are expressing the symptoms of microwave radiation illness that could be predicted based on decades of international scientific studies. The physiological basis for brain and body effects from microwave radiation exposures are well-accounted for in the science – so it should be no surprise to hear it. At least a dozen major studies and reviews of cell tower-level RF exposures (of 0.1 microwatt per centimeter squared or more) have identified these same health effects the Survey presents through the personal comments of responders.
We don’t often get a window into the life of a person with EHS – how isolating it is – how marginalized people are – and how withdrawn they must become to protect what is left of their health. We need to listen with ears wide open. This is real and real people are living greatly diminished lives. Imagine yourself forced to give up a productive life to live on the edge, and that edge keeps moving. Imagine being denied access to business opportunities, education, transportation, healthcare, public participation, recreation and places of celebration and renewal.
Again and again we are hearing the same things. I lived a normal life until… smart meters were installed on my wall… until a major macrocell tower was built next door…. until my office installed several wireless routers. My family didn’t understand. It took me some time to realize what was making me sick. It destabilized my relationships. I lost my freedom.
People with EHS have to give up so many things most people take for granted in life. Shopping, going out to dinner, attending meetings in public places, going to a child’s graduation or recital, travel along an interstate or by rail or air. Everyday activities that make up the fabric of life are no longer accessible – at least without paying the price.
It is an insidious and invisible progression where the activities of daily life are incrementally diminished by exposures that intensify with time, subject to no health and safety accounting at all. No one is keeping track of cumulative RF body burdens. There is no governmental agency that is tracking EHS illness reports, nor conducting a serious effort to revise health standards.
Perhaps the most valuable lesson we can learn from this Survey is educated compassion. The first thing we can do is to accept that EHS is real. The next thing we can do is to change our own behaviors. And, after that, wherever we have influence – we need to help others find healthier ways of interacting with technology that protects all of us.”
Commentary by Cindy Sage: Not long ago, a Physician Assistant in a hospital emergency room told us she was asked to wear a wireless headset (that connects wirelessly to the internet) while seeing her patients. She declined.
In that same week, a young mother went to a new internist in the bay area. The nurse asked if she would give consent for the doctor to wear a wireless headset while examining her child. She also declined.
What is it that these two young women know?Is it something you should be aware of? Here are some important things people should know about the problems posed by wearable wireless computers in the doctor’s office.
Driving drunk, and talking or texting on a cell phone may have in more in common than you think with extended use of a wireless headset. The exposure levels from a wireless headset are about equivalent to (or in some cases higher) than holding a smart phone to the head. Use of a cell phone while driving disrupts cognition and increases the risk of vehicular collision by 4-fold. Now imagine your doctor under the influence of constant workplace RF exposure while they treat patients, prescribe treatments, write prescriptions and juggle intense workday tasks.
Effects on brain function seem to depend in some cases on the mental load of the subject during exposure (the brain is less able to do two jobs well simultaneously when the same part of the brain is involved in both tasks). Some studies show that cell phone exposure speeds up the brain’s activity level; but also that the efficiency and judgment of the brain are diminished at the same time. Faster work but worse mental capacity is not a good thing for a practicing medical doctor.
Multitasking, memory, learning, attention, and concentration are all impaired by the use of wireless devices. Why would anyone want a distracted doctor with impaired thinking skills treating them? Or any healthcare person for that matter? And, doctors should know that wearing the equivalent of a smart phone mounted against their head is a potential risk for brain cancer (glioma and acoustic neuroma).
Next time you need to see your doctor, you may be asked if you object to them wearing wireless headsets. This could easily happen to you. Be prepared with some information.
Is your doctor using wireless medical glasses? A new paper by Cindy Sage and Lennart Hardell warns about the risks to doctors and their patients.
Wireless-enabled headsets that connect to the internet can provide remote transcribing of patient examination notes. Audio and video can be captured and transmitted by wireless signals sent from the computer screen in the frame of the glasses. But using wireless glass-type devices can expose the user to a specific absorption rates (SAR) of 1.11–1.46 W/kg of radiofrequency radiation. That RF intensity is as high as or higher than RF emissions of some cell phones. Prolonged use of cell phones used ipsilaterally at the head has been associated with statistically significant increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma. Using wireless glasses for extended periods to teach, to perform surgery, or conduct patient exams will expose the medical professional to similar RF exposures which may impair brain performance, cognition and judgment, concentration and attention and increase the risk for brain tumors. The quality of medical care may be compromised by extended use of wireless-embedded devices in health care settings. Both medical professionals and their patients should know the risks of such devices and have a choice about allowing their use during patient exams. Transmission of sensitive patient data over wireless networks may increase the risk of hacking and security breaches leading to losses of private patient medical and financial data that are strictly protected under HIPPA health information privacy laws. Link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2017.1422261
There is a major push all over the country to install LED streetlights based on assumptions of saving energy and money. In places where the LEDs have been installed there are so many complaints. On February 16 Sebastopol will consider whether or not to allow PG&E to install the LED streetlights. PG&E owns the streetlights and requires cities to opt-in to the changeout.
PG&E is currently installing LED streetlights in Santa Rosa, and we took a team to investigate, measure and photograph there. What we found is, unlike the warm yellow streetlights, the LED’s are very white, with cold blue tones, and painfully bright.
Mary Carvalho who lives in Santa Rosa writes, “Has anyone noticed lately that the night sky is lit up like a full moon every night?”
Paul Marantz, a lighting designer said about the yellow streetlights, “there was a warmth about them that’s missing from the new lights. And because of the way the LEDs are designed, it’s a much more directed light, with more glare.”
When the environment is saturated with blue rich light it causes melatonin reduction which can affect sleep. Harvard Medical School reported blue light has a dark side. “Light at night is bad for your health, and exposure to blue light emitted by electronics and energy-efficient lightbulbs may be especially so.”
Bob Parks, executive director of the International Dark-Sky Association states, “Now, people can certainly close their blinds and block-out that rich blue-white light. The problem is that every other species on the planet can’t do that, so you have an impact on everything else. And not just animals — we are talking plants, trees, right down to one-cell organisms.”- Earth Island Journal
The Department of Energy (DOE) and IEEE reported there are serious health risks from LEDs if inexpensive drivers are used. DOE writes, “Why is flicker bad? For one thing, in addition to being annoying and distracting, it can cause eyestrain, blurred vision, and impairment of performance on sight-related tasks. And in those who are flicker-sensitive, it can cause debilitating headaches and migraines — 10% of the population is estimated to suffer from migraines, and that’s only one of the groups prone to flicker sensitivity. According to the IEEE recommended practice, flicker has been reported to contribute to autistic behaviors, and can be a trigger for epileptic seizures.… Some of these problems might occur even when the flicker isn’t detectable by the eye.”
The EMF Safety Network sent a list of questions to PG&E about their LED streetlights. We await their answers. We can trust PG&E will cut costs and we can’t be certain they will tell the public the truth. We don’t know whether or not PG&E will be using the streetlights for wireless transmissions, as has been done in Los Angeles and Florida. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) had a presentation on their website that touted the benefits of “intelligent” wireless streetlights.
We don’t know if PG&E is installing these, but we do know the rapid increase of microwave technologies deployed on our homes and in our neighborhoods, largely without informed consent, threatens privacy, public health, children, wildlife and nature.
The other risk is whether or not the LED streetlights add unintentional radiation to the power lines, creating “dirty electricity” like PG&E smart meters do. Samuel Milham, MD and David Stetzer, Electrical Engineer wrote a peer reviewed published paper in 2013. They wrote, “Dirty electricity, also called electrical pollution, is high-frequency voltage transients riding along the 50 or 60 Hz electricity provided by the electric utilities… has been associated with cancer, diabetes and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in humans.
Some people claim brighter streetlights will help reduce crime. However, Earth Island Journal reported “Public safety was a big motivator behind the Oakland conversion project, and it may seem intuitive that brighter lights improve safety. However, some studies suggest that though brighter streets make people feel safer, they have no impact on actual crime levels.”
In 2015, PG&E’s claims of LED cost and energy savings were merely assumptions. In the CPUC 2015 Uncertain List they stated, “market move to LED technology requires verification.” As yet PG&E has offered no proof. In addition the city claimed the streetlight conversion would be free, however PG&E intends to recover streetlight costs through customers rate increases. So we all pay for the LED streetlights.
Why should perfectly good streetlights be scrapped for a risky technology whose benefits are questionable? A study published in late 2010 in the journal Environmental Science and Technology found that LEDs contain lead, arsenic and a dozen other potentially dangerous substances. While it is possible that the LED’s save energy, it’s not worth the cost to public and environmental health.
In September 2015, the Sebastopol city council had the PG&E streetlight conversion on their consent calendar. Due to complaints, they took the issue off consent and put it on the regular agenda. At that meeting, Rich Emig, Public Works superintendent, gave a report acknowledging the LED health risks. Public comments included one woman who said when she was a child she had seizures from light flicker. See the Sebastopol City Council’s video which starts at 1:40:00
Considering the city acknowledged the serious pubic health risks, why are they bringing it back to the council, and why have they not notified the public of this issue that will affect each and everyone of us?
Darkness is a requisite part of life. “Half of your life, half of the lives of all nature, half of all human history has occurred between sunset and sunrise. We and all of the natural kingdom have evolved in a landscape that segues from a bright blessed day to a dark sacred night. A dark night is really that–sacred. Every cell in the human body has time-related functions, part of the bigger circadian system. I’m referring to science, not some woo-woo feel-good incense-laden chanting mysticism. Healthy life depends on critical functions for which the absence of light is essential.”
1. All outdoor lighting shall be full cutoff, or fully shielded.
2. If LED lights are used, they shall have a correlated color temperature (CCT) less than 3000K.
3. All lights shall minimize glare, sky glow, and light trespass. —–Excerpt and recommendations from www.Nightwise.org
Dr. Martin Pall states EMF’s are the major cause of autism. In addition, chemicals and EMF’s combined produce autism. In this lecture he presents the scientific evidence. Dr. Pall is a professor emeritus of biochemistry and basic medical sciences at Washington State University.