International Scientists Appeal to U.N. to Protect Humans and Wildlife from Electromagnetic Fields and Wireless Technology

NEW YORK–Today 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, UN member states and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk. These exposures are a rapidly growing form of environmental pollution worldwide.

“ICNIRP guidelines set exposure standards for high-intensity, short-term, tissue-heating thresholds. These do not protect us from the low-intensity, chronic exposures common today. Scientists signing the Appeal request that the UN and member nations protect the global human population and wildlife from EMF exposures.”

The International EMF Scientist Appeal” asks the Secretary General and UN affiliated bodies to encourage precautionary measures, to limit EMF exposures, and to educate the public about health risks, particularly to children and pregnant women.

The Appeal highlights WHO’s conflicting positions about EMF risk. WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified Radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B “Possible Carcinogen” in 2011, and Extremely Low Frequency fields in 2001. Nonetheless, WHO continues to ignore its own agency’s recommendations and favors guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). These guidelines, developed by a self-selected group of industry insiders, have long been criticized as non-protective.

The Appeal calls on the UN to strengthen its advisories on EMF risk for humans and to assess the potential impact on wildlife and other living organisms under the auspices of the UN Environmental Programme, in line with the science demonstrating risk, thereby resolving this inconsistency.

Martin Blank, PhD, of Columbia University, says, “International exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields must be strengthened to reflect the reality of their impact on our bodies, especially on our DNA. The time to deal with the harmful biological and health effects is long overdue. We must reduce exposure by establishing more protective guidelines.”

Joel Moskowitz, PhD, of University of California, Berkeley, says, “ICNIRP guidelines set exposure standards for high-intensity, short-term, tissue-heating thresholds. These do not protect us from the low-intensity, chronic exposures common today. Scientists signing the Appeal request that the UN and member nations protect the global human population and wildlife from EMF exposures.”

International EMF Scientist Appeal: EMFscientist.org

Are EMF concerns irrational? Dr. Ted Litovitz explains

Dr. Ted Litovitz, physicist, in his presentation to members of Congress in 2001 recognizes consumer EMF concerns and he asks his listeners, “Are they irrational?” “Can an electromagnetic field have any effect at all on your body?” “Are there health effects?”

He proceeds to explain the FCC guidelines are based on heating only, and states many papers are showing biological effects below the thermal limit, including psychological changes, stress response, DNA damage, and affects on the immune system, heart, and blood brain barrier.

According to Dr. Litovitz biological effects are seen at 75,000 times below the FCC guideline! Dr. Litovitz explains the evidence of non-thermal EMF biological effects based on scientific studies, including the role genetics play.


Video by The Council on Wireless Technology Impacts.

Prenatal EMF Exposures Can Lead to Childhood Obesity

Posted by Dr. Louis Slesin:

De-Kun Li, an epidemiologist at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland, California, has a new paper out showing that EMF exposures in the womb are linked to an increased risk of childhood obesity.

“Maternal exposure to high [magnetic fields] during pregnancy may be a new and previously unknown factor contributing to the world-wide epidemic of childhood obesity/overweight,” Li writes in a paper posted today by Scientific Reports, a peer-reviewed, open access journal owned by the group that publishes Nature.

Read the full story at: http://microwavenews.com/news-center/emf-exposures-womb-can-lead-childhood-obesity

La Soupe Electro- Serge Andre Jones

This video by pianist and composer Serge Andre Jones illustrates the electronic soup we are consuming daily. Click for more info on the artist.

Here’s the translation in English.

My name is Thérèse Cash.

I prepare and sell delicious homemade dishes.

One of them, my best-seller,

is full of good organic ingredients.

Teens love it!

It’s my Electro Soup.

In it, I put healthy greens … and a cell phone,

Potatoes … and a compact fluorescent light bulb,

A nice big WIFI router, marinated in garlic,

Ham and a telecommunications antenna.

To improve the taste of all that

I add a flat-screen TV and a wireless video game control pad.

That helps to sleep soundly!

I finish the cooking in the microwave oven.

Everything becomes nice and tender.

I serve the soup with white bread

Generously covered in Smart Meter spread.

And Smart Meters, we can put a whole lot!

3,8 million, why not?

Recipe Canada states that the Electro Soup causes no health risk whatsoever.

How delicious!

You’ll see! How delicious!

Delicious for lunch, supper, breakfast and before going to bed.

You can have some all day, it’s easy to sip.

I also sell it in pills and it can even be injected.

How delicious!

You’ll see! How delicious!

Come on! Buy some!

You’ll love it!

It’s even good for kids!

How delicious!

You’ll see! How delicious!

My delicious Electro Soup is even more fun than a party!

How delicious!

My delicious Electro Soup is especially good … for my wallet!

Ha! Ha!

Wireless microwaves made visible

From a San Francisco Bay Area, California KTVU news special report:

Health and science editor John Fowler investigated wireless health risks stating “the amount of microwave radiation these devices emit is so high- it’s illegal in many countries”.

Dr. Magda Havas, Canadian professor and environmental researcher, measures a family’s home with a microwave sound detector.  Using the sound detector she exposes the microwaves emitted by a cell phone, baby monitor, wi-fi router and a cordless phone.  Health risks mentioned in the video report included “mood disorders, chronic fatigue and even cancer”.

A doubting UC Berkeley physicist, Dr. Richard Muller claims microwaves don’t have enough energy to disrupt “even a molecule”.

Libby Kelley (Electromagnetic Safety Alliance) says, “It’s a crime in progress”…”We need to take action as a nation to protect health.”

Dr. Muller counters that people have always sought something to blame their ills, and “back in the 1600’s it was witches”.

It seems Dr. Muller has not heard about the World Health Organization classification of wireless as a potential carcinogen, or about the recent study by the National Institutes of Health which found cell phone exposure was associated with increased brain glucose metabolism.

Big thanks to KTVU and to editor John Fowler, for this special report! http://www.ktvu.com/video/29335616/index.html

Maternal Exposure to Magnetic Fields During Pregnancy in Relation to the Risk of Asthma in Offspring

The conclusions of the Li et al paper support an association between a mother’s magnetic field (MF) exposure during pregnancy and asthma in children born to those mothers. Here are some of the conclusions of the study.

“Our findings provide new epidemiological evidence that high maternal MF levels in pregnancy may increase the risk of asthma in offspring.” Children born to mothers who had a median daily MF exposure during pregnancy between 0.3 milligauss (mG) and 2 mG had a 74% increased risk of asthma.  Children born to mothers who had a median daily EMF exposure during pregnancy over a 2 mG EMF had a 3.5-fold increased risk (a 350% increased risk) of asthma.

This study shows a statistically significant increased risk for asthma.  Every 1 mG increase of maternal EMF level was associated with a 15% increased risk of asthma in the child. 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04- 1.27).  A dose-response is shown for increasing maternal MF during pregnancy and asthma in the off-spring.

Comments

This study is one more that underscores the importance of limiting exposures to elevated magnetic field (EMF) during pregnancy.   There are so many studies that now document EMF exposures (using the all-inclusive EMF to cover both ELF-EMF and RF) to be potentially neurotoxic and genotoxic, we should actively be limiting indiscriminate and persistent exposure of families and their children to avoidable EMF.

Li et al previously published a study linking miscarriage to intermittent ELF-EMF exposures of 16 mG.  A few years ago, Divan et al reported that maternal use of a cell phone during pregnancy was associated with increased risk of behavioral and learning problems in children of these mothers by the time the child was in primary school. Whether it is the ELF-EMF component, or the RF component of cell phone exposures isn’t known (it may be one or both). Whether it is a function of the exposure level on the fetus in-utero, or something about the mothers’ immune status as affected by the cell phone emissions is not known either. Johansson has published extensively on EMF/RF effects on the immune system.

Sage and Johansson published a paper in Bioelectromagnetics showing that cell phones and PDAs can produce excessively high ELF-EMF exposures when worn in the ON mode (on a belt, in a pocket, close to the body). These exposures were on the order of tens to hundreds of milligauss.  Since the study did not discriminate between magnetic field exposure (EMF) and the possible presence of ‘dirty electricity’, (which Sam Milham and Magda Havas have reported to be associated with asthma in children), dirty electricity’ may be an important but unmeasured factor here. Future studies really need to address the ‘dirty electricity’ component of EMF.

Both ELF-EMF and RF are now classified as possible human carcinogens by the WHO IARC.

People need better information on EMF and health risks, so they can make educated choices about limiting exposures, if they wish to.  People also need better informed decision-makers when it comes to new technologies that emit ELF and RF on a persistent and repetitive basis, so entire communities are not exposed to involuntary EMF exposures in daily life. There is more than sufficient evidence now to actively review where such exposures come from, what the alternatives are, and commonsense ways to improve the living environment (homes, schools, offices, healthcare facilities, etc) by making more informed choices.

Cindy Sage

[Cindy Sage, MA is the Science and Public Policy Advisor for the EMF Safety Network, Co-Editor Bioinitiative Report http://www.sageassociates.net/]