Mese: Settembre 2015

Cell Phone Technology Disrupts Brain Activity

Pubblicato il 15 set 2015


September 15, 2015 – A new study is claiming that cellphone usage disrupts electrical activity in the brain. RT’s Lindsay France has the details of the potential effects of a mere fifteen minute phone call.

Find RT America in your area:
Or watch us online:

Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
PigmineNews on Facebook:
PigmineNews on Twitter:
PigMine2 on YouTube:

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law.

Exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields and behavioural problems in Bavarian children and adolescents.


Eur J Epidemiol. 2010 Feb;25(2):135-41. doi: 10.1007/s10654-009-9408-x. Epub 2009 Dec 4.

Thomas S1, Heinrich S, von Kries R, Radon K.

1Unit for Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology & NetTeaching, Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Ziemssenstrasse 1, Munich, Germany.


Article history
Received: 2 October 2009
Accepted: 23 November 2009
Published online: 4 December 2009

Behavioural problems
Radio-frequency electromagnetic fields


Only few studies have so far investigated possible health effects of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) in children and adolescents, although experts discuss a potential higher vulnerability to such fields. We aimed to investigate a possible association between measured exposure to RF EMF fields and behavioural problems in children and adolescents. 1,498 children and 1,524 adolescents were randomly selected from the population registries of four Bavarian (South of Germany) cities. During an Interview data on participants’ mental health, socio-demographic characteristics and potential confounders were collected. Mental health behaviour was assessed using the German version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Using a personal dosimeter, we obtained radio-frequency EMF exposure profiles over 24 h. Exposure levels over waking hours were expressed as mean percentage of the reference level. Overall, exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields was far below the reference level. Seven percent of the children and 5% of the adolescents showed an abnormal mental behaviour. In the multiple logistic regression analyses measured exposure to RF fields in the highest quartile was associated to overall behavioural problems for adolescents (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.1-4.5) but not for children (1.3; 0.7-2.6). These results are mainly driven by one subscale, as the results showed an association between exposure and conduct problems for adolescents (3.7; 1.6-8.4) and children (2.9; 1.4-5.9). As this is one of the first studies that investigated an association between exposure to mobile telecommunication networks and mental health behaviour more studies using personal dosimetry are warranted to confirm these findings.


A possible association between fetal/neonatal exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation and the increased incidence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD).

[Dati epidemiologici resi noti di recente indicano un drammatico aumento dell’incidenza di disturbi dello spettro autistico.
In precedenza l’incidenza di autismo riportata era di 4-5 casi ogni 10.000 bambini, mentre le evidenze più recenti indicano un incremento fino a circa 1 caso ogni 500 bambini.
Tuttavia l’eziologia dell’autismo è ancora da determinare, ma i dati recentemente resi noti suggeriscono una
possibile correlazione tra l’incidenza di autismo e una “tossina” ambientale precedentemente non considerata.
Nello specifico, è comunemente accettato nella comunità scientifica che le radiazioni in radiofrequenza siano un elemento biologicamente attivo ed è anche stato prontamente riconosciuto che l’esposizione umana alle radiazioni in radiofrequenza sia diventata pervasiva nel corso degli ultimi venti anni, mentre era rara nel periodo antecedente: questo fa dunque pensare che l’esposizione fetale o neo-natale alle radiazioni in radiofrequenza potrebbe essere associata all’incremento dell’incidenza di autismo.]

Med Hypotheses. 2004;62(2):195-7.

Kane RC1.

1The Associated Bioelectromagnetics Technologists, PO Box 133, Blanchardville, WI 53516-0133, USA.


Article history
Received: 6 January 2003
Accepted: 15 October 2003
Published: February 2004


Recently disclosed epidemiological data indicate a dramatic increase in the incidence of autism spectrum disorders. Previously, the incidence of autism has been reported as 4-5 per 10000 children. The most recent evidence indicates an increased incidence of about 1 per 500 children. However, the etiology of autism is yet to be determined. The recently disclosed data suggest a possible correlation between autism incidence and a previously unconsidered environmental toxin. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that radiofrequency (RF) radiation is a biologically active substance. It is also readily acknowledged that human exposures to RF radiation have become pervasive during the past 20 years, whereas such exposures were uncommon prior to that time. It is suggested that fetal or neo-natal exposures to RF radiation may be associated with an increased incidence of autism.


Prior to the twentieth century the only sources of radiofrequency (RF) radiation were the hyper-low levels of RF energy originating from our sun and the even lower levels of extra-solar RF noise. It is in this environment of low-level RF radiation that life on earth developed and exists to this day.

During the 1940s, primarily as a result of research and development performed as a part of the war effort, industry and the military establishment were successful in bringing the state of RF energy generation to maturity. From that time onward we have witnessed a broad range of commercial RF energy product applications including, most notably, broadcast FM radio, radar, television, publicservice mobile communication transceivers, residential microwave ovens, and the portable cellular telephone.

Initially, the contribution of each radiating device was imperceptible when weighed against the background of incoming solar radiation. However, over the span of decades the number of terrestrial RF radiation sources, now counted in the billions, has increased to the degree that, presently, the base radiation level is many thousands of times higher than from solar RF energy impinging on the earth.

Notwithstanding the proliferation of RF radiation sources during the early decades of the “radiofrequency age”, the 1940s through the 1970s, humans were seldom exposed to RF radiation at levels that might cause concern. Since the late 1970s a number of commercial products have become ubiquitous, which provide human exposures to levels of RF radiation that are significantly higher than either of the previous or present background levels. Research reports indicate that RF exposure levels, typically encountered from some commercial products, may induce alterations of biological processes or damage to the genome [1 – 13].

Concurrently the incidence of autism diagnoses demonstrates a pronounced, approximately linear, nearly three-fold increase occurring during the last twenty years. “The question as to when autism begins in any child remains to be answered. Some studies provide support for a prenatal or perinatal origin for autism.” [14] For several decades prior to 1980 autism incidence remained essentially invariant; reportedly at about one diagnosed case per 2005 children. Byrd has reported a present autism incidence of about one per 700 children.

RF radiation sources have become commonplace in the personal human environment from approximately 1980 to the present. Operation of an RF radiation source such as a two-way radio or a cell phone exposes the operator to levels of RF radiation shown to be biologically active. Operation of an RF radiation source also exposes others, in the near proximity, to similarly biologically active levels of electromagnetic field intensities [15].

Some of the known effects of exposure to RF radiation include cognitive impairment [16], memory deficit [17], EEG modifications [18], DNA damage [3 – 12], chromosome aberrations [6], micronucleus formation [7, 22], fetal malformation [1, 2], increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier [19, 23], altered cellular calcium efflux [20] and altered cell proliferation [21].

RF radiation exposures from residential microwave ovens are, typically, on the order of 1 milli-watt per cm2. RF radiation exposures from cell phones range from about 0.1 to 10.0 milli-watt per cm2. Portable two-way radios provide similar exposure levels. The scientific literature confirms that RF radiation exposures, at levels more than 1,000 times lower than described immediately preceding, or on the order of 1.0 micro-watt per cm2, induce significant changes in biological processes or molecular repair mechanisms [12].

During gestation the possibility of unobservable embryonic and fetal damage is increased as mothers-to-be utilize and are exposed to the emissions from RF radiation devices. Researchers have emphatically reported that an embryo or fetus should not be exposed to radiofrequency radiation such as that emitted by the portable cell phone or portable telephone. One particular reason to avoid RF radiation exposure during pregnancy is that an embryo or fetus may not be fully protected by amniotic fluid for extended periods of time due to the natural movement of the embryo or fetus within the womb. Secondly, the pelvic structure promotes deep RF radiation penetration and that radiation can be absorbed within the developing embryo or fetus.

Other researchers have postulated that there may exist a previously unidentified environmental toxin associated with the observed increased incidence of autism. For example, the works of Byrd (California – 1999) [14], Bertrand [24], (New Jersey – 2001), Taylor [25], (United Kingdom – 1999), and Chakrabarti & Fombonne [26], (United Kingdom – 2001) clearly support the proposition that the identified increased incidence of autism has an origin at about 1980: an increased incidence that has its origin established at the very time the personal RF radiation devices came into popular use – about 1980. We propose that RF radiation, a new form of exposure of the human embryo, fetus, and infant, and an acknowledged environmental toxin under many exposure conditions, may be associated with the increased incidence of autism. This proposition is further based on the fact that these radiating products are periodically and typically utilized in the embryonic, fetal and neonatal environment. RF radiation is the only known toxin, exposure to which is wholly correlated with the repeatedly documented increased incidence of autism: now reported by at least some researchers as greater than 1 per 100 newborn.


1. Berman E, Kinn JB, and Carter HB, Observations of mouse fetuses after irradiation with 2.45 GHz microwaves, Health Physics, 35, pp. 791-801, 1978.
2. Kaplan J, Polson P, Rebert C, Lunan K, and Gage M, Biological and behavioral effects of prenatal and postnatal exposure to 2450-MHz electromagnetic radiation in the squirrel monkey, Radio Science, 17(5S), pp. 135S-144S, 1982.
3. Sagripanti JL, and Swicord ML, DNA structural changes caused by microwave radiation, Int J Radiat Biol, 50(1), pp. 47-50, 1986.
4. Leszczynski D, Joenväärä S, Reivinen J, and Kuokka R. Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: Molecular mechanism for cancer and blood-brain barrier-related effects, Differentiation, 70, pp. 120 – 129, 2002.
5. Sagripanti JL, Swicord ML, and Davis CC, Microwave effects on plasmid DNA, Radiation Research 110, pp. 219-231, 1987.
6. Fucic A, Garaj-Vrhovac V, Skara M, and Dimitrovic B, X-rays, microwaves and vinyl chloride monomer: their clastogenic and aneugenic activity, using the micronucleus assay on human lymphocytes, Mutat Res 282(4), pp. 265-271, 1992.
7. Maes A, Verschaeve L, Arroyo A, De Wagter C, and Vercruyssen L, In vitro cytogenetic effects of 2450 MHz waves on human peripheral blood lymphocytes, Bioelectromagnetics 14(6), pp. 495-501, 1993.
8. Sarkar S, Ali S, and Behari J, Effect of low power microwave on the mouse genome: a direct DNA analysis, Mutat Res 320, (1-2), pp. 141-147, 1994.
9. Lai H, and Singh NP, Acute low-intensity microwave exposure increases DNA single-strand breaks in rat brain cells, Bioelectromagnetics, 16(3), pp. 207-210, 1995.
10. Lai H, and Singh NP, Single- and double-strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, Int J Radiat Biol, 69(4), pp. 513-521, 1996.
11. Repacholi MH, Basten A, Gebski V, Noonan D, Finnie J, and Harris AW, Lymphomas in E mu-Pim1 transgenic mice exposed to pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields. Radiat Res, 147(5), pp. 631-640, 1997.
12. Phillips JL, Ivaschuk O, Ishida-Jones T, Jones RA, Campbell-Beachler M, and Haggren W, DNA damage in Molt-4 T-lymphoblastoid cells exposed to cellular telephone radiofrequency fields in vitro, Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics, 45, pp. 103-110, 1998.
13. Hardell L, Hansson Mild K, Pahlson A, Hallquist A, Ionizing radiation, cellular telephones and the risk of brain tumours. Europ J Cancer Prevent 10, pp. 523-529, 2001.
14. Byrd RS, Sigman M. Bono M, et al, Report to the legislature on the principal findings from the epidemiology of autism in California: a comprehensive pilot study, M.I.N.D. Institute, University of California, Davis, 2002
15. Bawin SM, Kaczmarek LK, and Adey WR, Effects of modulated VHF fields on the central nervous system, Ann NY Acad. Sci, 247, pp. 74-81, 1975.
16. Chiang H, Yao GD, Fang QS, Wang KQ, Lu DZ, Zhou YK, Health effects of environmental electromagnetic fields. J. Bioelectricity 8:127-131, 1989.
17. Lai H, Horita A, and Guy AW, Microwave irradiation affects radial-arm maze performance in the rat, Bioelectromagnetics 15(2), pp. 95-104, 1994.
18. von Klitzing L, Low-frequency pulsed electromagnetic fields influence EEG of man, Phys. Medica, 11, pp. 77-80, 1995.
19. Salford LG, Brun A, Sturesson K, Eberhardt JL, and Persson BR, Permeability of the blood-brain radiation on cytolytic T lymphocytes, FASEB J , 10(8), pp. 913-919, 1996.
20. Paul Raj R, Behari J, and Rao AR, Effect of amplitude modulated RF radiation on calcium ion efflux and ODC activity in chronically exposed rat brain, Indian J Biochem Biophys, 36(5), pp. 337-340, 1999.
21. Cleary SF, Du Z, Cao G, Liu LM, and McCrady C, Effect of isothermal radiofrequency barrier induced by 915 MHz electromagnetic radiation, continuous wave and modulated at 8, 16, 50, and 200 Hz. Microsc Res Tech, 27(6), pp. 535-542, 1994.
22. d’Ambrosio G, Massa R, Scarfi MR, and Zeni O, Cytogenetic damage in human lymphocytes following GMSK phase modulated microwave exposure. Bioelectromagnetics, 23, pp. 7-13, 2002.
23. Persson BR, Salford LG, and Brun A, Blood-brain barrier permeability in rats exposed to electromagnetic fields used in wireless communication, Wireless Network 3, pp. 455-461, 1997.
24. Bertrand J, Mars A, Boyle C, Bove F, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Decoufle P., Prevalence of Autism in a United States Population: The Brick Township, New Jersey Investigation, Pediatrics, 108 (5), pp. 1155-1161, Nov. 2001.
25. Taylor B, Miller E, Farringdon et al, MMR Vaccine and Autism: No Epidemiological Evidence for a Causal Association, Lancet, 353, pp. 2026-2029, 1999.
26. Chakrabarti S, & Fombonne E, Pervasive Developmental Disorders in Preschool Children, JAMA, 285 (24), 2001.


L’uso dei telefoni cellulari è pericoloso per la salute?

16 aprile 2014 – “”, a cura di Valerio Pignatta

L’elettrosmog e l’elettrosensibilità: i danni dei telefoni cellulari per la nostra salute


Utilizzare il telefono cellulare per diverso tempo al giorno fa davvero male?
Abitare nei pressi di un elettrodotto è un pericolo per la salute?
Le leggi italiane ci tutelano dall’inquinamento elettromagnetico?
Quali sono i sintomi della sindrome da Elettrosensibilità?
Per rispondere a queste e altre domande abbiamo intervistato Angelo Gino Levis, già professore ordinario di mutagenesi ambientale all’Università di Padova, attualmente esperto di inquinamento elettromagnetico e vice presidente dell’Associazione per la Prevenzione e la Lotta all’Elettrosmog (

Se dovesse definire la situazione dell’elettrosmog oggi nel nostro paese cosa potrebbe dire? Come siamo messi?
In Italia, tra la fine degli anni ’90 e i primi anni 2000, le leggi – sia nazionali che regionali – sul controllo della nocività dei campi elettromagnetici non-ionizzanti (CEM) erano sufficientemente cautelative. In particolare nelle leggi regionali i limiti di esposizione allora fissati, improntati al Principio di Precauzione che fa parte della nostra Costituzione, erano: 0,2 microTesla (µT) per il campo magnetico prodotto dai CEM a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF: linee per il trasporto dell’energia elettrica e strumenti elettrici per uso domestico e industriale) e 0,5 Volt/metro (V/m) per il campo elettrico dei CEM a frequenza alta (RF, radiofrequenze: impianti radio-TV) e altissima (MO, microonde: telefoni mobili – cellulari e cordless, radar, forni a microonde).
A partire dal 2003, per la pressione dei gestori delle linee elettriche (elettrodotti) e delle compagnie di telefonia cellulare, queste leggi sono state cancellate o, comunque, rese meno cautelative: i limiti regionali sono stati dichiarati incompatibili con quelli fissati per tutto il territorio nazionale dalla sentenza n.307 del 7.10.03 della Corte Costituzionale, ed i nuovi limiti sono stati fissati dal DPCM 8.7.03 a 3-10-100 µT per i CEM/ELF, a seconda dei tempi di esposizione e della tipologia degli elettrodotti, e a 6-20 V/m per i CEM/RF-MO.
Inoltre le procedure per l’installazione degli impianti che emettono CEM sono state liberalizzate al massimo e, di recente, anche le metodologie di controllo dell’intensità delle esposizioni sono state modificate in modo da permettere un ulteriore innalzamento dei limiti, a scapito della salute.

Lei pensa che l’inconcludenza dei nostri legislatori di fronte alle problematiche legate a questo tipo di inquinamento sia ascrivibile alla mancanza di fonti scientifiche a comprova dei vari danni psicofisici che esso causa alle persone e delle diverse sensibilità degli individui all’esposizione a fonti elettromagnetiche? Oppure questi studi ci sono?
Le conoscenze sugli effetti dannosi dei CEM erano già sufficienti alla fine del secolo scorso per imporre la minimizzazione delle esposizioni e si sono consolidate al punto che l’OMS, tramite l’Agenzia internazionale per la ricerca sul cancro (IARC) di Lione, ha classificato i CEM a bassissima frequenza (ELF), con riferimento specifico alle leucemie infantili nelle esposizioni residenziali ad elettrodotti (2002), ed i CEM a radiofrequenza, con specifico riferimento all’aumento del rischio di contrarre tumori cerebrali e al nervo acustico da parte degli utilizzatori abituali e da lungo tempo di telefoni cellulari (2011) come “possibili agenti cancerogeni per l’uomo”. Ma questa è senza dubbio una sottovalutazione dei dati disponibili che avrebbero richiesto un giudizio di “probabile anziché possibile cancerogenicità”. Sottovalutazione dovuta soprattutto ai conflitti d’interesse che hanno pesato su più del 60% dei partecipanti ai due Gruppi di valutazione della IARC sui CEM. Nonostante queste valutazioni suggeriscano comunque un atteggiamento prudenziale, le nostre Autorità Sanitarie (ministero della Salute, Consiglio superiore di sanità, Istituto superiore di sanità, Commissione oncologica nazionale) hanno continuato a negare l’esistenza di rischi per la salute provocati dai CEM. Solo nell’ottobre 2012 il ministero della Salute ha attivato un sito Internet dove chi ne è informato può trovare alcuni consigli, comunque incompleti e in parte contraddittori, per una autotutela lasciata alla libera scelta degli utilizzatori di telefoni cellulari.

Cosa so può dire sulla telefonia cellulare? Spesso leggiamo informazioni sanitarie in merito molto contrastanti…
Singoli studi epidemiologici e loro rianalisi cumulative finanziate da enti pubblici e basate su metodologie corrette, analisi statistiche dei dati e interpretazioni coerenti, hanno evidenziato un aumento fino al raddoppio del rischio di contrarre tumori maligni al cervello, tumori benigni alle meningi e ai nervi cranici, in particolare all’acustico, e tumori maligni e benigni alle ghiandole salivari, in particolare alla parotide, tra quanti hanno utilizzato abitualmente (più di 40 minuti/giorno) e da o per lungo tempo (più di 10 anni) telefoni mobili (cellulari e/o cordless). Per contro, studi cofinanziati dalle compagnie di telefonia cellulare, basati su protocolli inadeguati ed errori sostanziali, dati insufficienti e interpretazioni incoerenti, sostengono l’apparente innocuità dell’uso dei cellulari. Di conseguenza, l’opinione pubblica, informata in modo contraddittorio tramite la stampa e in maniera del tutto tranquillizzante dai responsabili della salute pubblica (v. sopra), resta confusa e, nel dubbio, per abitudine e comodità è portata a sottovalutare i rischi e a non utilizzare alcune semplici norme di autotutela per ridurre l’esposizione durante l’uso dei cellulari, neppure per quanto riguarda l’uso da parte dei bambini e degli adolescenti, che sono tra i soggetti più a rischio. Comunque qualcosa ha cominciato a muoversi dopo la trasmissione “Report” su RAI3 (novembre 2011) e dopo che nell’ottobre 2012 la suprema Corte di Cassazione italiana ha definitivamente convalidato la sentenza della Corte d’Appello di Brescia che nel 2009 aveva riconosciuto le tesi dei due consulenti di parte ricorrente (un oncologo e il sottoscritto) e del consulente nominato dal Tribunale stesso, basate sui dati epidemiologici di cui sopra e aveva sancito la relazione causale tra uso di cellulari e cordless e sviluppo di un tumore al nervo trigemino in un dirigente d’azienda. Pertanto, avendo classificato questo caso come dovuto ad una malattia professionale, la Corte aveva condannato l’Ente previdenziale (INAIL) a risarcire all’interessato il danno alla salute per una invalidità dell’80%.

C’è di peggio della telefonia in quanto a inquinamento elettromagnetico?
Nonostante i rischi cancerogeni dovuti ai CEM/ELF (elettrodotti, v. sopra) siano documentati nella letteratura e più volte riconosciuti dalla nostra Magistratura Civile di ogni ordine e grado, è oggi praticamente impossibile quantificare tali rischi non essendo nota la numerosità della popolazione esposta. La telefonia mobile, che conta oggi più di 6 miliardi di contratti per i soli cellulari, una parte consistente dei quali riguarda l’uso da parte dei minori che sono tra i maggiori e i più sensibili utilizzatori, rappresenta senza dubbio il settore più a rischio.

Quali sono le patologie caratteristiche di questo tipo di degrado dell’ambiente?
L’inquinamento da CEM (“elettrosmog”) può procurare oltre ad effetti a lungo termine (cancri e tumori, malattie neurodegenerative, danni genetici e funzionali, p. es. agli spermatozoi di chi tiene il cellulare nella tasca dei pantaloni mentre telefona usando gli auricolari), anche danni alla salute a breve e a medio termine che colpiscono alcuni soggetti particolarmente sensibili, dando luogo a sintomatologie dolorose di vario tipo che caratterizzano una sindrome chiamata “Elettrosensibilità”, (ES).

Ci sono soluzioni medico-scientifiche e o socio-ambientali che è possibile realizzare per ovviare a questi problemi di salute? La medicina ufficiale che posizioni ha in merito?
Le “soluzioni” – se così si possono definire – ai danni a lungo termine provocati dai CEM (tumori, cancri, malattie neurodegenerative) sono quelle tradizionali: terapie farmacologiche e radianti, interventi chirurgici, con le conseguenze ed i limiti che queste hanno. Per la ES non sono state trovate finora soluzioni mediche, ma solo socio-ambientali. Dato che molti elettrosensibili sono costretti a lasciare il lavoro e la casa in cui vivono per rifugiarsi in zone meno inquinate dai CEM, in Svezia, dove la ES è riconosciuta come un “handicap”, chi ne è colpito viene favorito nella ricerca di un lavoro e di una casa alternativi. Inoltre sono state create “aree protette”, per esempio mezzi di trasporto e interi quartieri dove sono vietati l’installazione e l’uso di tecnologie ad alta frequenza (ripetitori, cellulari, WiFi ed altro), e anche vere e proprie “aree di rifugio extraurbane”. Purtroppo la medicina ufficiale è poco informata e poco sensibile a questi problemi, e questo rende molto difficile il riconoscimento e l’assistenza a chi è colpito da ES. Tuttavia da qualche tempo alcuni medici in Italia, Francia e Svezia si dedicano alla diagnosi e alla messa a punto di terapie per chi è affetto da ES.
In conclusione, la soluzione ai problemi sanitari creati dall’inquinamento elettromagnetico richiede:
1) una corretta informazione da parte delle Autorità Sanitarie internazionali e nazionali nonché dei medici di base e di specialisti;
2) una informazione capillare sulla indispensabile adozione di adeguate forme volontarie di autotutela; 3) una significativa riduzione dei limiti di esposizione ai CEM per la popolazione generale, per i minori di età e per i lavoratori;
4) lo smascheramento dei conflitti d’interesse.

Per approfondire
Che cos’è l’Elettrosensibilità (ES)
La Elettrosensibilità (ES) consiste in una varietà di disturbi di carattere generale (debolezza, facile esauribilità, sensazione di freddo, malessere indefinito) e che interessano il sistema nervoso (distonia neurovegetativa, disturbi del sonno, perdita della memoria, difficoltà di concentrazione e di apprendimento, depressione, aumento dei tempi di reazione, stress, neurastenia, ansietà, mali di testa, nausea, vertigini, irritabilità), muscolare (crampi, dolori muscolari, astenia, disturbi motori, tremori, rigidità), cardiovascolare (aritmie, disturbi della pressione arteriosa, vasocostrizione dei capillari, ictus cerebrale, vasolabilità cutanea, flebiti e tromboflebiti, cardiopalma), respiratorio (oppressione toracica, respiro corto o irregolare), ormonale e immunitario (riduzione della sintesi di melatonina e di altri ormoni, reazioni autoimmuni, stress ossidativo, ipertiroidismo), scheletrico (dolori e fragilità articolari, ipersensibilità a innesti metallici e a protesi dentarie, artrosi, dolori reumatici), della sfera sessuale, della riproduzione e della gravidanza (perdita della libido, semisterilità, aborti spontanei, minzione frequente, impotenza), del sistema visivo, acustico, olfattivo, digestivo (ipersensibilità alla luce solare, a suoni e ultrasuoni, disturbi uditivi, problemi gastrointestinali) ecc.
Si tratta di sintomi fastidiosi o dolorosi e di veri e propri stati di malattia che tendono ad aggravarsi e a cronicizzare e che comportano, a volte, compromissione o perdita della capacità lavorativa e, in ogni caso, degrado della qualità della vita. Come avviene per molte reazioni a stimoli ambientali mediate dal sistema immunitario – si pensi ad esempio ai fenomeni respiratori provocati da allergie a particolari antigeni, che risentono molto della diversa sensibilità individuale – anche la ES colpisce una particolare frazione della popolazione, sensibile a livelli di esposizione ai CEM anche estremamente bassi, ai quali la maggioranza della popolazione non reagisce. La ES è una patologia in rapida crescita, come dimostrano i dati raccolti soprattutto nei Paesi del Nord-Europa che da tempo censiscono i soggetti che ne sono affetti: l’aumento della popolazione elettrosensibile è esponenziale essendo passato dallo 0,1% nel 1985 al 5% nel 2000 e al 10% nel 2005, con la previsione di poter raggiungere quasi il 50% nel 2020! Negli ultimi anni si sono accumulate molte evidenze sperimentali a supporto della obiettività delle “malattie da elettrosmog” e delle loro possibili basi molecolari, cellulari e funzionali.

Bibliografia e sitografia
European Environment Agency (2013): “Late lessons from early wornings: science, precaution, innovation” (
Bioinitiative, 2 (2013): “A rationale for a biologically-based exposure standards for low-intensity electromagnetic radiation” (
Levis, A.G., Gennaro, V., Garbisa, S. (2012): “Business bias as usual: the case of electromagnetic pollution”; in Elsner, W., Frigato, P., Ramazzotti, P. eds: “Social Costs Today. Institutional Analyses of the Present Crises”. Routledge: Frontiers of Political Economy”; Taylor&Francis Group, London and New York: pp 225-268 (
Siti Internet

Abbiamo intervistato Angelo Gino Levis
Nato nel 1937, laureato in Biologia nel 1961, Professore Ordinario di Mutagenesi Ambientale nel 1971, membro della Commissione Tossicologica Nazionale (1977-1989), della Commissione Oncologica Nazionale (2007-2008) e del Comitato Scientifico dell’International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE/Italia 2007-2012). Dal pensionamento (1997) si dedica allo studio e alla divulgazione degli effetti nocivi dei CEM. (


A Challenging Issue in the Etiology of Speech Problems: The Effect of Maternal Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields on Speech Problems in the Offspring

[Segnalato da Joel Moskowitz e Dave Ashton di “UK Electrosensitives”.

Questo articolo Open Access riporta il primo studio effettuato per indagare l’esistenza di una possibile associazione tra esposizione materna ai campi elettromagnetici (CEM) e problemi di linguaggio nella prole.
Anche se un grande limite di questo studio è la dimensione relativamente piccola del campione, esso indica che l’esposizione materna a fonti comuni di CEM come i telefoni cellulari, è in grado di influenzare il futuro sviluppo di problemi di linguaggio nella prole.]


J Biomed Phys Eng. 2015 Sep; 5(3): 151–154.

S. Zarei,1 S. M. J. Mortazavi,2 A. R. Mehdizadeh,3 M. Jalalipour,1 S. Borzou,1 S. Taeb,4 M. Haghani,5 S. A. R. Mortazavi,6 M. B. Shojaei-fard,5 S. Nematollahi,7 N. Alighanbari,8 and S. Jarideh5

1Speech and Language Pathology Department, School of Rehabilitation, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2President of the Ionizing and Non-ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC); Professor of Medical Physics in the School of Medicine of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
3Department of Medical Physics and Engineering, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Science, Shiraz, Iran
4Ph.D candidate at the Ionizing and Non-ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
5Ionizing and Non-ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
6Medical Student at Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
7Master Student at the  Biostatistics Department, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
8Occupational Health Department, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran


Article history
Accepted: 31 December 2014
Published online: 1 September 2015

Speech Problem
Maternal Exposure
Electromagnetic Fields
Mobile Phones


Nowadays, mothers are continuously exposed to different sources of electromagnetic fields before and even during pregnancy.  It has recently been shown that exposure to mobile phone radiation during pregnancy may lead to adverse effects on the brain development in offspring and cause hyperactivity. Researchers have shown that behavioral problems in laboratory animals which have a similar appearance to ADHD are caused by intrauterine exposure to mobile phones.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the maternal exposure to different sources of electromagnetic fields affect on the rate and severity of speech problems in their offspring.

In this study, mothers of 35 healthy 3-5 year old children (control group) and 77 children and diagnosed with speech problems who had been referred to a speech treatment center in Shiraz, Iran were interviewed. These mothers were asked whether they had exposure to different sources of electromagnetic fields such as mobile phones, mobile base stations, Wi-Fi, cordless phones, laptops and power lines.

We found a significant association between either the call time (P=0.002) or history of mobile phone use (months used) and speech problems in the offspring (P=0.003). However, other exposures had no effect on the occurrence of speech problems. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate a possible association between maternal exposure to electromagnetic field and speech problems in the offspring. Although a major limitation in our study is the relatively small sample size, this study indicates that the maternal exposure to common sources of electromagnetic fields such as mobile phones can affect the occurrence of speech problems in the offspring.


Does Cell-Phone Radiation Cause Cancer?

24 settembre 2015 – “”, by David Schipper

[L’articolo pone l’accento sulla ormai innegabile esistenza di prove concrete riguardo alla pericolosità dei telefoni mobili, che ancora gli organi preposti alla salvaguardia della salute dei cittadini continuano ad ignorare, non prendendo provvedimenti adeguati come informare la popolazione sui rischi che corre e soprattutto adottare il principio di precauzione.]

x ray phone
As the debate over cell-phone radiation heats up, consumers deserve answers to whether there’s a cancer connection

But not everyone is unconcerned. In May 2015, a group of 190 independent scientists from 39 countries, who in total have written more than 2,000 papers on the topic, called on the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and national governments to develop stricter controls on cell-phone radiation. They point to growing research—as well as the classification of cell-phone radiation as a possible carcinogen in 2011 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the WHO—suggesting that the low levels of radiation from cell phones could have potentially cancer-causing effects.

“I think the overall evidence that wireless radiation might cause adverse health effects is now strong enough that it’s almost unjustifiable for government agencies and scientists not to be alerting the public to the potential hazards,” says David O. Carpenter, M.D., director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany in New York and one of the authors of the recent letter to the U.N. and WHO.

Some countries have taken steps to protect users, at least when it comes to children. For example, France, Russia, the U.K., and Zambia have either banned ads that promote phones’ sale to or use by children, or issued cautions for use by children.

The city council of Berkeley, Calif., has also acted. In May 2015, it approved a “Right to Know” law that requires electronics retailers to notify consumers about the proper handling of cell phones. CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group, is now tring to block that law from going into effect, as it successfully did after San Francisco passed its own Right to Know law five years ago.

Of course, scientific seesawing like that doesn’t provide a lot of clarity or confidence for the 90 percent of American adults and roughly 80 percent of teens who report having a cell phone. So how concerned should you be about cell-phone radiation? Consumer Reports’ health and safety experts conducted a thorough review of the research and offer some guidance.

What Is Cell-Phone Radiation, Anyway?

Your phone sends radiofrequency, or RF, waves from its antenna to nearby cell towers, and receives RF waves to its antenna from cell towers when you make a call or text or use data. The frequency of a cell phone’s RF waves falls between those emitted by FM radios and those from microwave ovens, all of which are considered “non-ionizing” forms of radiation. That means that—unlike radiation from a nuclear explosion, a CT scan, or a standard X-ray—the radiation from your phone does not carry enough energy to directly break or alter your DNA, which is one way that cancer can occur. (FM radios and microwaves don’t raise alarms, in part because they aren’t held close to your head when in use and because microwave ovens have shielding that offers protection.)

How Could the Radiation From Cell Phones Cause Cancer?

At high power levels, RF waves can heat up water molecules (which is how microwave ovens work). Scientists used to focus their concerns on the possibility that such heating of human tissue, which is mostly water, might damage cells. In fact, the FCC’s test of cell-phone emissions—which was set in 1996 and which all phones must pass before being allowed on the market—is based on that effect.

But most experts now aren’t concerned about that possible tissue heating caused by RF waves. Instead, what’s worrying some scientists are newer lab studies suggesting that exposure to cell-phone radiation can have biological effects without raising temperature.

In 2011, researchers at the National Institutes of Health showed that low-level radiation from an activated cell phone held close to a human head could change the way certain brain cells functioned, even without raising body temperature. The study did not prove that the effect on brain cells was dangerous, only that radiation from cell phones could have a direct effect on human tissue.

RF waves from cell phones have also been shown to produce “stress” proteins in human cells, according to research from Martin Blank, Ph.D., a special lecturer in the department of physiology and cellular biophysics at Columbia University and another signer of the recent letter to the WHO and U.N. “These proteins are used for protection,” Blank says. “The cell is saying that RF is bad for me and it has to do something about it.”

And just this year, a German study found that RF waves promoted the growth of brain tumors in mice, again at radiation levels supposedly too low to raise body temperature. The U.S. National Toxicology Program is now running an animal study of its own, exposing rats and mice to low-dose radiation. Results are expected in 2016.

What Do Cancer Studies in Human Populations Show?

The research above describes some lab and animal studies that looked at how cell-phone radiation might cause cancer or affect the body in other ways. But we also reviewed studies that investigated whether cell phones increased brain-cancer risk in humans.

We focused on five large population studies, plus follow-ups to those studies, that investigated that question. Together the studies included more than a million people worldwide, comparing cell-phone users with nonusers.

Though some findings were reassuring, others do raise concerns. Specifically, three of the studies—one from Sweden, another from France, and a third that combined data from 13 countries—suggest a connection between heavy cell-phone use and gliomas, tumors that are usually cancerous and often deadly. One of those studies also hinted at a link between cell phones and acoustic neuromas (noncancerous tumors), and two studies hinted at meningiomas, a relatively common but usually not deadly brain tumor.

Though those findings are worrisome, none of the studies can prove a connection between cell phones and brain cancer, for several reasons. For one thing, cell-phone use in certain studies was self-reported, so it may not be accurate.

In addition, the findings might be influenced by the fact that the study subjects owned cell phones that were in some cases manufactured two decades ago. The way we use cell phones and the networks they’re operated on have also changed since then. Last, cancer can develop slowly over decades, yet the studies have analyzed data over only about a five- to 20-year span.

Are Today’s Phones Safer?

Cell-phone designs have changed a lot since the studies described above were completed. For example, the antennas—where most of the radiation from cell phones is emitted—are no longer located outside of phones near the top, closest to your brain when you talk, but are inside the phone, and they can be toward the bottom. As a result, the antenna may not be held against your head when you’re on the phone. That’s important because when it comes to cell-phone radiation, every milli­meter counts: The strength of exposure drops dramatically as the distance from your body increases.

Perhaps our best protection is that more people today use phones to text instead of talk, and headphones and earbuds are growing in popularity. On the other hand, it’s also true that we use cell phones much more than we used to, so our overall exposure may be greater.

So Should I Stop Using My Cell Phone?

No, Consumer Reports does not think that’s necessary. But we do have some concerns.

“The evidence so far doesn’t prove that cell phones cause cancer, and we definitely need more and better research,” says Michael Hansen, Ph.D., a senior scientist at Consumer Reports. “But we feel that the research does raise enough questions that taking some common-sense precautions when using your cell phone can make sense.” Specifically, CR recommends these steps:

  • Try to keep the phone away from your head and body. That is particularly important when the cellular signal is weak—when your phone has only one bar, for example—because phones may increase their power then to compensate.
  • Text or video call when possible.
  • When speaking, use the speaker phone on your device or a hands-free headset.
  • Don’t stow your phone in your pants or shirt pocket. Instead, carry it in a bag or use a belt clip.

A Call for Clarity

The substantial questions raised regarding cell phones deserve some clear answers:

• The Federal Communications Commission’s cell-phone radiation test is based on the devices’ possible effect on large adults, though research suggests that children’s thinner skulls mean they may absorb more radiation.

• Consumer Reports agrees with concerns raised by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Government Accountability Office about the tests, and thinks that new tests should be developed that take into account the potential vulnerability of children.

• We think that cell-phone manufacturers should prominently display advice on steps that cell-phone users can take to reduce exposure to cell-phone radiation.

This article also appeared in the November 2015 issue of Consumer Reports magazine.

Olle Johansson “Health effects of electromagnetic fields”

Pubblicato il 05 ott 2014

Olle Johansson at the Open Mind Conference 2014, Copenhagen.

“Health effects of electromagnetic fields” Olle Johansson is associate professor at the Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

He is a leading authority in the field of EMF radiation and health effects. He has also been a professor in basic and clinical neuroscience at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm.

He has published more than 650 original articles, reviews, book chapters and conference reports within the field of basic and applied neuroscience, dermatoscience and health effects of electromagnetic fields.

His studies have been widely recognised in the media, including newspapers, radio and TV, as well as on the Internet, both nationally and internationally. He has on-going international scientific collaborations with e.g. Japan, Brazil, South Africa, Serbia, Germany, the UK and the USA.

Olle Johansson’s presentation covers the historic background of electricity and electromagnetic fields, how suspicions arose early on concerning fields and signals producing negative health effects and how this led to today’s global public discussion about the subject. It will also touch upon the functional impairment electro hypersensitivity.

The lecture will go into depth about the scientific research results regarding the health effects of electromagnetic fields and the urgent need for independent research projects that need to be initiated to ensure our public health.

These projects should be entirely independent of all types of commercial interests as public health cannot have a price-tag. This is the responsibility of the democratically elected body of every country.

The body of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to protection of public health; the growth and development of the fetus, and of children; and argues for strong preventative actions. These conclusions are built upon prior scientific and public health reports documenting the following:

1) Low-intensity (non-thermal) bioeffects and adverse health effects are demonstrated at levels significantly below existing exposure standards.

2) ICNIRP and IEEE/FCC public safety limits are inadequate and obsolete with respect to prolonged, low-intensity exposures.

3) New, biologically-based public exposure standards are urgently needed to protect public health world-wide. 4) It is not in the public interest to wait.

Find out more on Health Effects from EMFs


Articles by Olle Johansson

“MYSTERY IN THE SKIN. Screen dermatitis, the effect of computer work on human skin.” An interview with Olle Johansson, 2001



Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, 2002




Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, 2004



Olle Johansson, 2006

Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, 2006

DISTURBANCE OF THE IMMUNE SYSTEM BY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS – A potentially underlying cause for cellular damage and tissue repair reduction which could lead to disease and impairment, 2009


Does YOUR toddler play on an iPad? Taiwan makes it ILLEGAL for parents to let children under two use electronic gadgets… and under-18s must limit use to ‘reasonable’ lengths

28 gennaio 2015 – “” – by Sara Malm for Mailonline

  • Children under two banned from using electronic devices in Taiwan
  • Parents who allow children to use iPads and smartphones face fines
  • Under-18s are only allowed devices for a ‘reasonable length of time’

Taiwan has banned children under the age of two from using electronic devices such as iPads, televisions and smartphones.

Parents who allow their young children to play with their gadgets face fines of up to £1,000, in line with a law passed last week.

The new law also states that parents must ensure that under-18s only use electronic products for a ‘reasonable’ length of time.

Taiwanese lawmakers passed the new legislation last Friday, completely banning parents from allowing their under-twos to use any electronic devices, China’s official news agency Xinhua reports.

Meanwhile Taiwanese under-18s are not allowed to ‘constantly use electronic products for a period of time that is not reasonable’, although the ‘reasonable length of time’ has not been defined.

The new law means that iPads, smartphones and televisions are now listed alongside cigarettes and alcohol as restricted.

The new law was originally proposed by Taiwanese MP Lu Shiow-yen, who said his intention was to protect young people by stopping them using electronic devices for more than 30 minutes at a time, The Telegraph reports.

Research published in December last year found that 7.1 per cent of the population in Asia is addicted to the internet.

In neighbouring China, online addiction among young people has become a serious problem, with an estimated 24million children considered ‘web junkies’.

As well as introducing laws requiring games companies ‘to develop techniques that would limit the gaming time of minors’, more than 250 military style boot camps have been set up across China to tackle under-18 internet addiction.

Since the release of the first iPad in 2010, an ever increasing number of parents use the Apple device to ‘babysit’ their children.

A recent poll found that half of British parents routinely allow infants to play with their smartphone or tablet, and one in seven let them spend more than four hours a day on hand-held devices.

Even Prince William recently admitted to letting Prince George play games on his iPad, saying that he believes it is ‘a good way to each him the inner workings of electronics’.

Research published in the British Medical Journal found that a child born today will have spent a full year staring at screens (tablets, computers, TVs) by the time they reach seven.


George Washington University Lecture on Science and Policy – June 9, 2015 – “Ongoing Research from the Indian Medical Research Council on Cell Phones and Health”

9 giugno 2015 –  “”

A Review of epidemiology and toxicology: Dr. R.S Sharma, Dr. Devra Davis and special guest Dr. George Carlo
George Washington University
The Milken Institute School of Public Health
Tuesday, June 9th, 2015

Dr. R.S. Sharma, Indian government Senior Deputy Director General & Scientist of the Indian Council of Medical Research, reviews the research showing genetic damage and health effects from wireless exposures which are informing India’s new telecommunications policy. He describes how the government is supporting efforts to reduce exposures. Slides from Dr Sharma’s presentation can be found here.

Dr. Devra Davis, PhD MPH, former Clinton Presidential appointee, founding Director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the National Academy of Sciences described current research on wireless exposures to children and what people can do to protect themselves.

Dr. George Carlo attended the lecture and came up on the podium to answer questions in the Q and A session (on the video at 1 hour 18 minutes ). Dr. Carlo is a lawyer and epidemiologist who chaired the 28 million dollar Wireless Technology Research Program that revealed cell phones could impact DNA repair and cause serious biological effects. He discusses the program and describes next steps for communities concerned about wifi in schools and cell towers on schools.


EHT Lauds Israel’s Ban on Wi-Fi in Kindergarten and Limits to Children’s Wireless Exposures in Schools

22 settembre 2015 – “”

Additionally, the Italian State of Tyrol Now Calls for Limiting Wireless in Schools

Teton Village, WY — (SBWIRE) — 09/22/2015 — As of this fall, Israel and Italy are officially recommending schools reduce children’s exposures to wireless radiation. The Israeli Ministry of Health has initiated a major public awareness effort to reduce wireless and electromagnetic radiation exposures to children. In similar action, the Italian State Parliament of South Tyrol voted to allow the application of the precautionary principle to replace existing wireless networks whenever possible with wired networks or those that emit less radiation.

The Israeli Ministry of Health (MoH) recommendations are published in the Environmental Health in Israel Report 2014 which states that

“Precautions should be strictly enforced with regard to children, who are more sensitive to developing cancer.”

The Report makes the following points:

Cell Phones: “The MoH recommends sensible use of cellular and wireless technology, including: considering alternatives like landline telephones” MoH recommendations include: use a speaker or hands-free phone accessory or (non-wireless) personal earphone in order to distance the telephone from the body, reduce the amount and duration of calls, and in areas of weak reception reduce calls because of higher radiation.

Children: MoH recommends: “refraining from installing the base of wireless phones in a bedroom, work room, or children’s room.”

Schools: Levels of non-ionizing radiation were measured in 25 schools nation-wide and “based on these findings, the MoEP recommends that students remain at a distance of at least 1.5 meters from electrical cabinets and that use of wireless communication networks in schools be reduced.”

Reduce Exposure in Cars: The MoH recommends not using cellphones in closed places like cars or elevators, buses, and trains unless there is an external antenna “due to amplified radiation in such places.” “When driving, a hands-free device should be used for calls. It is recommended to install an antenna outside the vehicle and to use a line connection between the telephone and the speaker as opposed to using Bluetooth.”

Research: Previous research findings in Israel “clearly indicated a link between cellphone use for more than 10 years and the development of tumors in the salivary glands.” Israel is currently a partner in two additional international studies: (1) MOBI-Kids, a multi-center study involving experts from 16 countries who are examining potential associations between use of communication devices and other environmental factors and risk of brain tumors, and (2) the GERoNiMO (Generalised EMF Research using Novel Methods) project, which uses an integrated approach and expertise from 13 countries to further the state of knowledge on EMF and health.

The Report concludes with a chapter by Linda S. Birnbaum, Director of the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program, who states, “Israel is a world leader in research on the health effects of non-ionizing radiation. If some of the studies turn out to be harbingers of things to come, we may have major health consequences from the nearly ubiquitous presence of wireless equipment.”

The recently published ISRAEL 2015 RF Safety Report details current actions on EMFS such as:

New Public Education Website: The Israeli government launched the public education website TNUDA ( of the National Information Center for Non-Ionizing Radiation to guide the public and decision-makers on the educated use of technology.

Guidelines for the installation and operation of Wi-Fi networks in schools: Following a petition seeking an outright ban on Wi-Fi in Schools, the government is banning Wi-Fi in kindergartens and restricting hours of use in schools, installing equipment with exposures to be set as low as possible, and monitoring radiofrequency (RF) radiation levels.

Government Testing Finds that Mobile Phones Violate Manufacturers’ Reported SAR: In a study conducted by the Ministry for Environmental Protection and the Holon Institute of Technology, the SAR of 10 models of mobile phones was measured using phantoms. The measured SAR exceeded the SAR declared by the manufacturer, when the phone was held close to the head and in bad reception mode (100% of the maximum power).

ELF EMF limits are recommended at numbers far below international limits. These recommendations were set to account for research showing links to leukemia. “The Ministry of Health (MoH) jointly recommend a threshold of two milligauss on an average annual basis when planning an electrical facility or four milligauss on a daily average.” A study performed by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and by the Education Ministry has found that in more than 60% of the schools in Israel at least one classroom had magnetic fields exceeding 0.4 ?T. Action was taken to reduce exposure in these schools.

Headsets and safety information required with every new mobile phone: According to a settlement agreement accepted by the Tel Aviv-Yafo District Court in February 2014, cellular operators must inform buyers of new mobile phones about the radiation safety instructions as formulated by the manufacturer, provide a hands-free kit with every new mobile phone, and provide information on the safe use of mobile phones on its website.

National radiofrequency monitoring program: The Ministry of Environmental Protection is operating a national RF monitoring system with stations that continuously measure the entire range of RF and transmit the data to a central computer that analyzes and displays online the results of measurements.

On June 10, 2015, the Italian State Parliament of South Tyrol voted to allow the application of the precautionary principle to cell phones mandating the state government to:

1. To replace existing wireless networks whenever possible with networks that emit less radiation at schools, preschools, hospitals, nursing homes, and other public facilities.

2. Establish a working group whose mandate it is to assess these new technologies and their exposure levels. With regard to wireless communication technologies, mobile Internet access, and public health, the working group shall clarify which technologies emit less radiation and provide sustainable technology options and

3. To start an education and awareness campaign that informs about possible health risks, especially regarding the unborn, infants, children, and adolescents and that develops guidelines for a safer use of cell phones, smartphones, and Wi-Fi.

Environmental Health Trust (EHT) educates individuals, health professionals and communities about controllable environmental health risks and policy changes needed to reduce those risks. Currently EHT is raising health concerns about wireless in schools and recommending safer hardwired internet connection installations. The foundation’s website is the go-to place for clear, science-based information to prevent disease. Please visit and on Facebook.

Source: Environmental Health Trust
Posted Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 11:38 AM CDT