Health Hazards of Wireless Technologies by Dr. Joel Moskowitz

Dr. Joel Moskowiz webinar

WEBINAR LINK: ACCESS TO ALL PRESENTATION SLIDES BY DR. MOSKOWITZ:

WEBINAR HIGHLIGHTS FACT SHEETS: 

Introduction to webinar: 
Wireless technologies, including cell phones, wireless internet, and Bluetooth devices, have become ubiquitous in our lives. Most adults in the US own a cell phone, and cell phone use is widespread among children and adolescents. New cell antenna sites are being deployed widely. Wireless technologies and equipment designs also change rapidly.

The preponderance of scientific evidence shows adverse biological and health effects from the radiofrequency (RF) radiation, or electromagnetic fields (EMFs), used and generated by these devices. A number of studies have considered the mechanisms of biological harm from RF radiation, and federal studies have documented increased incidence of certain tumors in laboratory animals associated with RF exposure. Epidemiological studies have found increased risk of certain tumors associated with long-term use of wireless phones. Read more and watch webinar. 

Dr. Thomas Cowan on Coronavirus and 5G

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”.

Dr. Cowan’s article references the work of Dr. Martin Pall: Massive Predicted Effects of 5G in the Context of Safety Guideline Failures.

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!

Protect Yellowstone from 480+ wi-fi antennas

TAKE ACTION!

A large-scale wireless communication system covering Canyon Village, Grant Village, Lake, Mammoth Hot Springs, and Old Faithful is proposed, including five microwave antenna locations, twelve wireless backhaul antennas, and up to four hundred and eighty (480) transceivers. Overview: https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=89100
Send comments by Friday, November 29
Suggested Template (copy and paste and/or add your own comment):
I oppose the deployment of wi-fi and other wireless radiation technology in Yellowstone, and all National Parks. Peer reviewed published science shows wireless radiation harms trees, birds, bees and insects. Peer-reviewed published science shows wireless radiation harms people, and children are especially vulnerable. People with electromagnetic sensitivity (EHS) depend on having wi-fi free accommodations and access to nature to restore and heal. Increasing wi-fi in parks could become an ADA issue.
Wired and corded communications are safer and more reliable. Protect people, nature, and access to our wilderness treasures by creating policy to reduce wireless radiation throughout the park. Invite visitors to unplug and enjoy nature.
See science references in this joint letter to Congress asking them to oppose wireless radiation expansion: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Letter-to-Congress-2017-1.pdf
Thank you for your consideration.

 

Brainwashing vs. Brainwashing: Eastern and Western World views and Wireless Woes

By Patricia Burke, 9/9/2019.
A few months ago, while lying on the acupuncture table, I broke my nose. Understanding how and why that happened, and the danger it presents, could change everything.

Brain-Washing: Timeless Ayurvedic Knowledge and Wisdom

Chiropractor and Ayurvedic expert Dr. John Doulliard has written a number of articles about ancient medicine’s practices of “brainwashing.”

But he isn’t referring to the kind of brainwashing that Westerners think of when they hear the word. He is speaking about practices developed by Indian sages, thousands of years ago, to support the cerebral-spinal fluid’s action in detoxifying the brain.

I have written numerous articles on the new discovery of lymphatic vessels that drain 3 pounds of toxins annually from the brain while you sleep at night, but this understanding is just the tip of a massive health-promoting iceberg—and I am super excited to share these latest developments regarding the best ways to detox your brain.

For me, the most exciting part is how the ancient practices of Yoga and Ayurveda, which directly addressed brain cleansing, are now being supported by new studies linking cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) flow to brain lymph drainage.

Dr. Douillard goes into further detail about the glymphatic system recently “discovered” by modern science in his article, “The Brain Cleansing Process.”

Brain States: Cool, Cushioned, and Lubricated, or Overheated, Compressed, and Dehydrated?

In addition to detoxification responsibilities, while studying yogic anatomy, I learned from one of my mentors, Swami Nirmalananda, that the cerebral-spinal fluid flows up and over the top of the head to perform 3 functions:

  • To cool the brain
  • To lubricate the brain
  • To cushion the brain

When the human energy field detects what it perceives to be a dangerous frequency in the electromagnetic environment, is it responding with a mechanical defense strategy that inhibits this process?

I propose that a remarkable thing happens. Alongside the other well-known components of the fight-or-flight response, the bony plates in the skull can contract in order to create a protective helmet-like physical barrier to protect the brain.  At the same time, the sac that surrounds the heart (the pericardium) can tighten up in order to act as a shock absorber.

Why does the body do this? Continue reading Brainwashing vs. Brainwashing: Eastern and Western World views and Wireless Woes

EMF Health Effects Survey 2019

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.

See the survey report by Survey Design and Analysis for more details on all descriptors and varying results between the three groups as well as a link to Survey summary and all comments. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/EMF_Wireless-Study-2019_Final-1.pdf

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.”

Cindy Sage
Editor, BioInitiative Reports
Sage Associates

Senator Blumenthal Raises Concerns on 5G Health Risks

Blumenthal criticizes the FCC & FDA for inadequate answers on outstanding public health questions. Wireless carriers concede they are not aware of any independent scientific studies on safety of 5G technologies 

[WASHINGTON, DC]— During today’s Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing on the future of 5G wireless technology and their impact on the American people and economy, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) raised concerns with the lack of any scientific research and data on the technology’s potential health risks. 

Blumenthal blasted the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—government agencies jointly-responsible for ensuring that cellphone technologies are safe to use—for failing to conduct any research into the safety of 5G technology, and instead, engaging in bureaucratic finger-pointing and deferring to industry. 

In December 2018, Blumenthal and U.S. Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr seeking answers regarding potential health risks posed by new 5G wireless technology. At today’s hearing, Blumenthal criticized Carr for failing to provide answers, and instead, just echoing, “the general statements of the FDA, which shares regulatory responsibility for cell phones with the FCC.”  Blumenthal also decried the FDA’s statements as “pretty unsatisfactory.”  

During an exchange with wireless industry representatives, Blumenthal asked them whether they have supported research on the safety of 5G technology and potential links between radiofrequency and cancer, and the industry representatives conceded they have not. 

I believe that Americans deserve to know what the health effects are, not to pre-judge what scientific studies may show, and they also deserve a commitment to do the research on outstanding questions,” said Blumenthal.  “We’re kind of flying blind here, as far as health and safety is concerned.” 

Giving Back on #GivingTuesday

Today is #GivingTuesday, that day of the year when many non-profits reach out for financial support. In honor of this giving day I wanted to ask for your support, but also give something back to you.

My gift back is an anonymous survey on EMF health effects. When you’re done taking it you can see the survey results. My hope is that the results would be validating, a source of comfort, and also be educational. Many people who’ve been injured by EMFs need to know they aren’t alone. This survey will be available for one month or 1000 responses. Click here to take the survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8WYDLYZ

Here’s a brief recap of this years work:  This year EMF Safety Network created and distributed 2000 new brochures called “What are EMF’s?”, created a new website page on How to oppose 5G and 14 website posts to keep people informed about important events, including a call to action alert to stop Senate Bill S.3157. We engaged attorney Gail Karish from Best Best and Krieger to write a letter on how to legally oppose 5G. We held an EMF educational forum for doctors, and supported activists and EMF injured nationwide in their campaigns for justice via website, email, and phone support.

EMF Safety Network co-coordinated $10K flow fund grant with Ecological Options Network to include support to the following groups: Cellular Phone Task Force, Halt MA smart meters, New York Safe Utility Meter Association, Manhattan Neighbors for Safer Telecommunications, and Electronic Silent Spring. We also won Constant Contact All-Star Award for high open and click rates.

THANK YOU!

Update March 12, 2019: Here are the survey results: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/emf-health-effects-survey-2019/

Major US study links cell phone radiation to cancer

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) concluded there is clear evidence that male rats exposed to high levels of radio frequency radiation (RFR) like that used in 2G and 3G cell phones developed cancerous heart tumors, according to final reports released today. There was also some evidence of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats. For female rats, and male and female mice, the evidence was equivocal as to whether cancers observed were associated with exposure to RFR. The final reports represent the consensus of NTP and a panel of external scientific experts who reviewed the studies in March after draft reports were issued in February.

“We believe that the link between radio frequency radiation and tumors in male rats is real, and the external experts agreed,” said Bucher.

The $30 million NTP studies took more than 10 years to complete and are the most comprehensive assessment, to date, of health effects in animals exposed to RFR with modulations used in 2G and 3G cell phones. 2G and 3G networks were standard when the studies were designed and are still used for phone calls and texting.

For future studies, NTP is building smaller RFR exposure chambers that will make it easier to evaluate newer telecommunications technologies in weeks or months, rather than years. These studies will focus on developing measurable physical indicators, or biomarkers, of potential effects from RFR. These may include changes in metrics like DNA damage in exposed tissues, which can be detected much sooner than cancer.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration nominated cell phone RFR for study by NTP because of widespread public use of cell phones and limited knowledge about potential health effects from long-term exposure. NTP will provide the results of these studies to FDA and the Federal Communications Commission, who will review the information as they continue to monitor new research on the potential effects of RFR.

NTP uses four categories to summarize the evidence that a substance may cause cancer:

  •  Clear evidence (highest)
  •  Some evidence
  •  Equivocal evidence
  • No evidence (lowest)