Category: Public Health

San Francisco recommends cell phone precautions

The City and County of San Francisco announced the nations first cell phone ordinance.

Recommendations from the city include:

• Limiting cell phone use by children: Developing brains and thinner skulls lead to higher absorption in children.

• Using a headset, speakerphone or text instead: Exposure decreases rapidly with increasing distance from the phone.

• Using belt clips and purses to keep distance between your phone and body: Do not carry on your body to at least meet the distance specified in your phone’s user manual

• Avoiding cell phones in areas with weak signals (elevators, on transit, etc.) Using a cell phone in areas of good reception decreases exposure by allowing the phone to transmit at reduced power.

• Reducing the number and length of calls: Turn off your cell phone when not in use.

The materials required under the ordinance include a factsheet, poster and stickers.

 

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!

Crossing the line with wireless

Kimberly Grigg, a Victoria Canada resident, practices prudent avoidance of EMF and wireless devices.  The home phone is corded, the computer is wired for internet access, and they do not use a microwave oven.

In a recent BC local news article Kimberly expresses what many of us feel when told we must have a microwave transmitter installed on our home: It crosses the line.

“I think it’s an outrage … it’s an violation of my freedom. …We are already forced to live in an environment that is totally toxic and it’s bad enough without having it attached to your house. We’ve made choices here and I don’t want (BC Hydro) to take that away from us.”

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

Renewable energy project warning to CA cities

Open Letter from the City of Chino Hills to:

California Public Utilities Commission,
Past and Present Members Board of Directors,
Southern California Edison
Governor Jerry Brown

SUBJECT: TEHACHAPI RENEWABLE TRANSMISSION PROJECT IN CHINO HILLS

I write this letter on behalf of the City of Chino Hills, as our community is witnessing the invasion of 198-foot tubular steel poles erected through the heart of our City. These iron giants are massive beyond our worst expectations and tower over our neighborhoods; permanently and irrevocably impacting 1,000 families’ homes, churches, parks, and public facilities. We dread the additional looming impacts when the poles will be strung with six extremely high voltage lines.

We are outraged, disgusted, and disheartened over the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) cavalier dismissal of our community during the Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project’s review process. Our message to Californians… “Beware!” Southern California Edison, hiding under the cloak of delivering politically correct “green energy,” can get the CPUC’s approval to build anything on their existing rights-of-way with complete disregard for people impacted along the way and even disregard for their own standards. Our entire community is permanently disfigured by the CPUC’s decision.

This damage can never be mitigated. The reality for many families is that their children will grow up, playing in their own yards, under these massive double-circuit 500 kV power lines buzzing and crackling as their parents wonder if the proximity of their own backyards to these power lines will someday prove harmful to them. Most will be unable to sell their homes as they watch the value drop in an already depressed market. Unable to walk away from their homes, which represent their biggest investment, these families will suffer from the stress of this fear forever.

Families did choose to live next to a normal neighborhood 220 kV SCE transmission line, de-energized for nearly 40 years. Never did anyone expect that a CPUC review process would allow the construction of poles that climb to nearly 200 feet in a 150-foot easement, much less that they would be approved to carry double-circuit 500 kV power lines – a level of energy unheard of in residential neighborhoods throughout the entire United States. And SCE says “the residents knew the easement was there”. Talk about misleading.

The CPUC’s mission is to”regulate privately-owned electric companies and serve the public interest by protecting consumers and ensuring the provision of safe, reliable utility service and infrastructure at reasonable rates, with a commitment to environmental enhancement and a healthy California economy.” Clearly, the CPUC has abused its vast and unchecked regulatory powers by allowing SCE to construct the massive infrastructure which permanently alters our community’s way of life and damages our families.

In recent TV coverage, KABC Channel 7 reported,”The California Public Utilities Commission sided with SoCal Edison, saying in a statement that “there are overriding statewide values which outweigh the community values of Chino Hills:’

How clear is that statement from the CPUC? Very clear. For the record, the City of Chino Hills never opposed this renewable energy project. Instead we developed a RESPONSIBLE alternate proposal that would reduce the impact on our residents while allowing SCE to move forward to meet renewable energy mandates.

If the CPUC remained true to its mission, this route through the City of Chino Hills would have been deemed unsuitable due to its significant health and safety impacts. A legitimate review process would have eliminated the route through Chino Hills and required SCE to develop a viable alternative that would not harm existing residents. Instead, our City spent $2.4 million to identify and design a viable alternative that had the support of environmentalists. The CPUC should have required SCE to do so. During the hearings and testimony, we witnessed the relationship between the SCE executives and CPUC Commissioners and staff. What is now clear is that our small City, with limited resources, likely could never prevail against SCE, a giant corporate entity with vast rate-payer funded resources and close friends at the CPUC. The path of least resistance is not always the right path.

This SCE project represents the height of corporate irresponsibility and it has been blessed by the CPUC. I believe that it is time to evaluate the CPUC’s relationships with the public utilities and their effectiveness in regulating these utilities, which they are supposed to do on behalf of the people of California.

Californians beware…..your community may be next. Sincerely,

CITY OF CHINO HILLS

Mayor Ed Graham

Medical Implants and Wireless Hazards


Widespread wireless installations including Smart Meters are creating safety risks for 20-25 million people, who have medical implants such as pacemakers, infusion pumps, metal rods and hearing aids.  In some cases these interference risks are life threatening. Dr. Gary Olhoeft, professor of Geophysics in Colorado, has a medical implant, a deep brain stimulator for Parkinson’s disease.  Olhoeft shares his research and knowledge about wireless interference with implants.

In part two Dr. Ohloeft describes a situation where as he passed through a retail store security system his stimulator was turned off.  He shares, “I had to turn myself back on. I have about four seconds to do that before I start shaking so bad I can’t do it.”

Special thanks to EMR Policy for these important videos.  EMR Policy writes, “Translating the complex science and drawing upon personal experience of such interference with his own implant, Olhoeft’s information poses important policy questions on protecting the disabled from interference. ”

Wireless devices-potential cancer risk says World Health Organization

Cell phones, cell towers, wi-fi, smart meters, DECT phones, cordless phones, baby monitors and other wireless devices all emit non ionizing radio frequencies, which the World Health Organization (WHO) has just classified as a potential carcinogen. This is big news from the WHO and governments and decision makers can no longer hide behind the “no RF health effects” industry mantra.

Cindy Sage, co-editor of the Bioinitiative Report writes, ” The WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer has just issued it’s decision that non-ionizing radiofrequency radiation is classified as a 2B (Possible) Carcinogen. This is the same category as DDT, lead, and engine exhaust. This mirrors the 2001 IARC finding that extremely low frequency (ELF-EMF) that classified as a 2B (Possible) Carcinogen. This pertained to power frequency (power line and appliance) non-ionizing radiation. These two findings confirm that non-ionizing radiation should be considered as a possible risk factor for cancers; and that new, biologically-based public safety standards are urgently needed. ”

IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS

Lyon, France, May 31, 2011 ‐‐

“The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use.

Background
Over the last few years, there has been mounting concern about the possibility of adverse health effects resulting from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, such as those emitted by wireless communication devices. The number of mobile phone subscriptions is estimated at 5 billion globally.
From May 24–31 2011, a Working Group of 31 scientists from 14 countries has been meeting at IARC in Lyon, France, to assess the potential carcinogenic hazards from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. These assessments will be published as Volume 102 of the IARC Monographs, which will be the fifth volume in this series to focus on physical agents, after Volume 55 (Solar Radiation), Volume 75 and Volume 78 on ionizing radiation (X‐rays, gamma‐rays, neutrons, radio‐nuclides), and Volume 80 on non‐ionizing radiation (extremely low‐frequency electromagnetic fields).
The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed the possibility that these exposures might induce long‐term health effects, in particular an increased risk for cancer. This has relevance for public health, particularly for users of mobile phones, as the number of users is large and growing, particularly among young adults and children.
The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed and evaluated the available literature on the following exposure categories involving radiofrequency electromagnetic fields:
␣ occupational exposures to radar and to microwaves; ␣ environmental exposures associated with transmission of signals for radio, television and wireless telecommunication; and ␣ personal exposures associated with the use of wireless telephones.
International experts shared the complex task of tackling the exposure data, the studies of cancer in humans, the studies of cancer in experimental animals, and the mechanistic and other relevant data.

1 237 913 new cases of brain cancers (all types combined) occurred around the world in 2008 (gliomas represent 2/3 of these). Source: Globocan 2008

Results
The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited2 among users of wireless telephones for glioma and acoustic neuroma, and inadequate3 to draw conclusions for other types of cancers. The evidence from the occupational and environmental exposures mentioned above was similarly judged inadequate. The Working Group did not quantitate the risk; however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period).

Conclusions
Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that “the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk.”
“Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings,” said IARC Director Christopher Wild, “it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐ term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting. ”
The Working Group considered hundreds of scientific articles; the complete list will be published in the Monograph. It is noteworthy to mention that several recent in‐press scientific articles4 resulting from the Interphone study were made available to the working group shortly before it was due to convene, reflecting their acceptance for publication at that time, and were included in the evaluation.
A concise report summarizing the main conclusions of the IARC Working Group and the evaluations of the carcinogenic hazard from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (including the use of mobile telephones) will be published in The Lancet Oncology in its July 1 issue, and in a few days online.

2 ‘Limited evidence of carcinogenicity’: A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered by the Working Group to be credible, but chance, bias or confounding could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence.
3 ‘Inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity’: The available studies are of insufficient quality, consistency or statistical power to permit a conclusion regarding the presence or absence of a causal association between exposure and cancer, or no data on cancer in humans are available.
4 a. ‘Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case‐ control study’ (the Interphone Study Group, in Cancer Epidemiology, in press) b. ‘Estimation of RF energy absorbed in the brain from mobile phones in the Interphone study’ (Cardis et al., Occupational and Environmental Medicine, in press)
c. ‘Risk of brain tumours in relation to estimated RF dose from mobile phones – results from five Interphone countries’ (Cardis et al., Occupational and Environmental Medicine, in press) ”