Mese: <span>Dicembre 2015</span>

The Scams of EMF Protection by shields and pendants

[Alcune considerazioni del veterano di guerra ed esperto in comunicazioni militari George Parker riguardo a molti dei prodotti per la difesa dai Campi Elettromagnetici (CEM) presenti sul mercato (chip, diodi, neutralizzatori, pendenti, amuleti, ecc.).

E’ fondamentale capire che proteggersi dai CEM non è cosa facile, in quanto sono altamente pervasivi ed invasivi! Conseguentemente, non esistono soluzioni spicciole al problema!

Chi propone soluzioni spicciole cerca solo di sfruttare le paure delle persone per fare business, vendendo prodotti inutili allo scopo.

Purtroppo, in questo particolare periodo nel quale sempre più persone stanno prendendo coscienza della pericolosità dei CEM senza però avere le adeguate conoscenze per capire a fondo il problema e valutarne dunque le adeguate soluzioni, sono in molti a cadere nella trappola.

George Parker segnala anche un articolo scritto dall’esperto di Campi Elettromagnetici ed Elettrosensibilità Lloyd Burrel in merito alla questione, il cui link potete trovare verso la fine della trattazione.]

By George Parker

George Parker (2)

“I wear my heart my sleeve and call a spade a spade, and involved in military communications for many years, and qualify myself as an ex-military microwave expert; I am sure that all you will get from me is the truth that will set you free.

I know and everyone else knows that there is no new age, snake oil gimmick, such as shields, pendants, diodes, neutralisers, discs, and amulets that will give your protection from electrical magnetic fields (ELF) and microwave non-ionised radiation (MWNIR), which are mainly referred to as EMFs (electromagnetic fields). There is another product hitting the market offering protection against all these nasty wireless radiation and will cover you in a cone of natural frequencies keeping you safe and healthy.

EHS has become the curse of humanity and many suffer extremely from MWNIR and ELF, but sadly, literally hundreds of professed experts selling their snake oil wares, such as EMF prevention products come clambering out of the woodwork, claiming they can stop the suffering of EHS sufferers from MWNIR and ELF, which is nothing more than new age whiz-bang technology that is praying on the sick!

All the companies will assure the reader that their products works; it has been researched and scientifically proven by their clever marketing that’s supposedly “backed-up” by qualified researchers. Sadly, they omit to ignore all the scientific research and government documents telling a different story of the dangers and health risks of long-term and prolonged exposure to MWNIR and ELF, and the damage it can do to a person’s body. If all these protection products worked, I am sure the military and government would close them down very quickly.

To sell any gadget, there has to be research, because without it they wouldn’t sell, and to make them sell they make their products attractive. One product from one supplier was pulled apart, contained nothing more than pretty coloured plastic and bits of copper wire, sometimes curled.

These companies find the right researcher, because they pay to have their research done, to get a desired result, and then they follow-up these unfounded researches with so-called “personal testimonials” from people, who sing their praises. Their Sales Departments will constantly emphasise these testimonials of good reports, but we never hear of the bad reports and complete failures that the product doesn’t work.

I’ve always advised intentional purchasers, such as EHS sufferers, of these gadgets to ask themself:

(1) Which and what people say they work?

(2) Do you know anyone that says they work?

(3) When reading testimonials, ask: “How real are these testimonies?”

Unscrupulous companies will print anything to get your attention, and use false testimonials or pay people to give positive testimony, and we see it all the time on the multitude of companies who flaunt the universal laws of morality.

We all know about the placebo effect and sufferers will pay much money for these devices, on the testimony of the clever marketing of these companies. First off, their products are always expensive, and the sufferers manifest a strong belief that they will work, and because they believe they work, then sometimes they may. But in reality they don’t. The placebo effect is the beneficial effect of a fake “EMF protection device”, which is derived from expectations that a person may have about a gadget working for them.

There are many honest people who have reported apparent improved health when they first bought the gadget, and I’ve been there myself, but over time my health deteriorated much quicker, and so did all the other people. There is no “golden bullet” or “quick fix” for the penetrating and destructive MWNIR and ELF emitted from the wireless technology and electrical appliances and products of the 21st Century. It appears that most don’t realise that MWNIR and ELF is classified “2B Carcinogenic”, and past medical research has shown that exposure to MWNIR caused neurological, cardiovascular and haemodynamic disturbances.

All of these EMF Protectors have one thing in common and there’s virtually no way of knowing for sure if they work, but proof is in the pudding when you dismantle one and see what is inside of them. You can’t measure them with any form of EMF meter. When a particular product was pulled apart there were nothing than bits of coloured plastic and a few pieces of wire. Any company will gladly take advantage of the frustration and gullibility of an EHS sufferer, by selling their wares and giving their assurance that it works, when there is no guarantee.

EHS sufferers know that to gain EMF protection is diagnosed by taking measurable readings with specific measuring devices, such as an ELF and MWNIR metre. We buy a meter that reads electrical magnetic fields and electromagnetic radiation that displays electrical mg (milligauss) and v/m, and wireless readings of dBm, mW/m2, and v/m. When these metres show specific readings in our area, we take action to reduce these exposures by shielding oneself using specific proven shielding metals and cloth, and clothing to protect oneself from MWNIR and ELF that is coming through the walls and ceilings of their home from the wireless technology and electrical appliances and power lines.

Even the specific filters that claim to reduce the electrical fields of dirty electricity causes other problems that most are not aware of. These gadgets may also emit untested and unnatural emissions, and then it can also cause other health problems.

You cannot emulate a natural frequency, because natural frequencies are not stable and wanders around a lot. A manmade frequency of MWNIR is like a knife, and cuts through human flesh, and reflects in all directions of any reflecting layer.

All EHS sufferers I have spoken to who have tried these products all said that they did nothing, and they passed them onto other EHS sufferers to see if it helps them, and it didn’t help them either. My contacts who are highly qualified people and they all said: “They don’t work!”

Here is an example of one such paid review:
“I’m Electrosensitive, so I’ve been researching this subject for a number of years. I’ve also tried a lot of the devices out there, and agree that many of them can’t be measured for effectiveness. However, I did find that Earth-calm products do work really well for me. All my symptoms got better almost immediately–some it took a few months–but I’m functioning now like a “normal” person, for the first time in years.”

Wow, this person is acting like a “normal person” after hanging a piece of metal around their neck that is full of coloured plastic and a few pieces of wire. It’s obvious they are not EHS.

The trials and tribulations of people suffering from EHS are enough of a burden without them being preyed upon by companies or new age whackos, who market “EMF protection devices”, such as: neutralising chips, diodes, pendants, clocks or shields; and there is one bloke out there peddling a computer software that will stop the MWNIR and ELF symptoms.

The people who “invented” these devices are either naive and self-deluded, or dishonest; take your choice. The research or “experimental proof” they present is an elaborate fabrication, is conducted without proper controls or is grossly misinterpreted and the researcher is paid for the right result. There is no good scientific evidence that any of the devices work, nor would they be expected to work, since at best the mentality of their “inventors” appears to approach that of a child who shows you they have assembled a working radio from a string of beads.

One inventor claimed that his device turned electrons into neutrons, which of course is impossible and nonsense. In the case of EMF, their imagination doesn’t create reality. And the only reality they will prove is their financial profit and sadly more sensitisation to EMF for the EHS sufferer.

These devices are scams that are not believable to anyone unless their judgement is biased by wishful thinking. My knowledge and understanding of science and my personal background in the workings of ELF and MWNIR, my intuition and my common sense all tell me that that the only way any of these devices could work is via a placebo effect and nothing more.

Here is another EHS expert who is well known and respected amongst the EHS sufferers, and I would have much faith in Lloyd:

When these companies decide to give a 90-day guarantee of refunding all monies if a customer isn’t satisfied, as some give a 30-day guarantee, which is full of holes!

I have offered on many occasions to these groups if they are prepared to send me their products so I could test drive or hand them out to other EHS sufferers to test drive for a professional review from experts and not paid testimonies, but all have declined.”

Tyler Hoffmann – Colwood, BC [another negative story about Wi-Fi in schools]

[Una storia un po’ datata che vale comunque la pena di leggere.]

August 15, 2013 – “”, by Kim Goldberg

8-year-old Tyler Hoffmann (Photo by Janis Hoffmann)

Eight-year-old Tyler Hoffmann has energy to burn. And his backyard trampoline, bike, basketball, and hockey stick each get a thorough workout on the afternoon I visit him at his grandmother’s home near Victoria, BC.

But in April 2012, a different story was unfolding. Tyler began coming home from Sangster Elementary School in the Sooke School District with extreme headaches and fatigue. And he was having trouble sleeping at night.

When asked to touch the part of his head that hurt, he would point to the top, his mother Lori recalls. But as the headaches grew worse over the next few weeks—to the point of nausea—Tyler was no longer able to touch the source of it, stating it was now in the middle of his head.

“After a few weeks of using Advil and Tylenol to alleviate the severe pain in Tyler’s head, we knew something was seriously wrong,” Lori says.

The following month, she discovered what it was.

“We accidently discovered, through another parent, that the school district had just finished installing commercial wi-fi networks throughout every school,” Lori explains. “This was done without informing parents. We were denied any opportunity for input,” she adds.

Tyler’s pediatrician recommended that the school shut off the wi-fi router closest to Tyler’s classroom, so that Tyler could remain in school and complete Grade 2 with his friends.

The school’s wi-fi routers, all active and transmitting day and night, were not being used at the time (and still aren’t) because there were no computers to connect them to. So the request from a doctor to turn off a single unused router seemed simple enough, Lori thought. The Sooke School District did not agree.

School District usurps parental choice on wireless radiation

“The Assistant Superintendent told us that the router would not be turned off but would stay on 24/7 because they did not want to set a precedent,” Lori recalls. “I don’t have a cell phone, wireless router, cordless phone, wireless keyboard, wireless mouse or any other wireless devices in my home because I have made the choice of not exposing my children or myself to microwave radiation. The school district has now decided for me that Tyler will be exposed to it,” she says.

Tyler Hoffmann - back to normal once removed from his wi-fi'ed school. (Photo © Kim Goldberg)

Lori pulled Tyler out of school that same day rather than risk his health any further. And upon doing so, she was promptly informed by the school principal that Tyler’s teacher was under no obligation to give Tyler homework, marking, or evaluation so that he could complete Grade 2.

“After we removed Tyler from school, his headaches and associated nausea completely stopped,” says Lori.

In September 2012, his mother enrolled Tyler in an elementary school in the neighboring Victoria School District, where there would be no wi-fi router in his classroom.

Free from the toxic effects of commercial wi-fi in the classroom, Tyler performed at the top of his math and reading classes at his new school.

Tyler Hoffmann (Photo by Janis Hoffmann)

But transferring Tyler to an out-of-district school is, at best, a temporary solution, and does nothing to help the 8,500 other students in the Sooke School District. So Tyler’s family along with the Jeskes (another local family with electrosensitive children) have launched a legal challenge in an attempt to make Sooke School District classrooms safe for all children. Read their legal brief here.

The Hoffmann and Jeske families seek, at the very least, to bring the Sooke School District into compliance with the policies adopted in 2012 by the BC Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils, which call for a moratorium on installation of further wi-fi in BC schools plus a minimum of one school at each level in each district to be free of wi-fi to accommodate electrosensitive students.

“unlawful to experiment on children”

Tyler & his sister Julianna with both be attending schools in the Victoria School District to avoid wi-fi in classrooms. (Photo © Kim Goldberg)

“It is unethical and unlawful to experiment on children,” says Tyler’s grandmother Janis Hoffmann. “Wi-fi is an unregulated technology that has not been tested for safety for children in schools,” she adds. “Parents have not been informed of the risks and have never been asked to sign a consent form. Ironically, the student field trips are explained in great detail, requiring parents to sign a permission slip before children are permitted to attend.”

Tyler and his five-year-old sister Julianna will each attend school in the Victoria School District in September 2013 where they will not be exposed to wireless radiation from commercial wi-fi routers in their classrooms.

To donate to the legal fund for electrosensitive children sickened by wi-fi in schools, go here.

Text and images © Kim Goldberg 2013 (unless images are otherwise credited)

(Tyler Hoffmann’s story will be included in Kim Goldberg’s forthcoming book REFUGIUM: Wi-Fi Exiles and the Coming Electroplague, due out in 2014. Read more people’s stories here.)


Wi-Fi: like a mast in your home?

Untested technology

Cordless phones, Wi-fi, digital baby monitors and other wireless products have become ubiquitous. While their health effects are largely untested, there have been numerous studies of the effects of the electro-magnetic radiation emitted from these devices. All scientists agree that this radiation is dangerous at high levels but it is hoped that the low levels emitted from these household devices are safe. We are not convinced.

Radiation 24/7

The levels of radiation emitted from mobile and cordless phones on standby, and of wi-fi routers, digital baby monitors and bluetooth are a fraction of those of a mobile or cordless phone in use on a call. But this does not mean they are safer.

The radiation exposure from wireless products is a “chronic” exposure, constantly at a low level rather than short bursts of high power. There is evidence that this type of exposure might be more damaging in the long-term. It is thought that when the body first experiences a new source of radiation, it reacts by strengthening its immune defences, but then the immune system begins to weaken progressively as the radiation exposure continues. Read more…

There is evidence that long-term chronic exposure to electro-magnetic radiation has a range of health effects. We also know that children are more vulnerable than adults.

The German and French governments have advised against the use of wireless products like wi-fi and cordless (DECT) phones at home. Read more…

A phone mast in your home?

The clearest evidence that this day-in-day-out low-level exposure might be dangerous is from thestudies of the health effects of mobile phone masts.Two studies have shown significantly increased levels of cancers amongst those living within a few hundred meters of a mobile phone mast. Other studies have demonstrated a host of other symptoms linked with exposure to mobile phone mast radiation.  One study has shown directly that wi-fi can affect children’s cognitive skills like memory, attention and reaction time.

The radiation exposure from a wi-fi router at 5 meters’ distance, a cordless DECT phone base unit at 3 meters’ distance, or digital baby monitor at less than 1 meter are all experienced at roughly the same level as a mobile phone mast only 150 meters away. If any of these are closer, for example if you sleep with a cordless phone next to the bed, it is equivalent in radiation terms to being only about 50 meters away from a mast. Read more…

There is now much annecdotal evidence of people experiencing symptoms in the short term, like headaches, nausea, dizziness and loss of concentration. Read more… For this reason, some government and public bodies have stopped the introduction of wi-fi in some public places and schools.

Read more about the health effects of cordless (DECT) phones…

Wifi may be more damaging to some people than mobile phones…

Cumulative exposure

Even if the power level of one wireless router or computer is small, a child’s environment may include many of these devices at once. Radiation exposure from a wi-fi system comes from the router and each of the computers. A cordless DECT phone emits radiation from the base stations and the handsets. A mobile phone on standby, or worse on a call, also adds to the radiation “load”. 

At school, a set of wirelessly connected computers in a classroom is known to result in exposures much higher than one computer being used alone. The radiiation level has been found to be equivalent to being in the main beam of a mobile phone mast (which official guidelines state should not fall on school grounds without the consent of parents and the school). In 2007 a BBC Panorama programme found that the readings next to a classroom laptop showed radiation at double the level experienced only 100 metres from a mobile phone mast. This exposure from wi-fi is additional to mobile phones, cordless DECT phones and bluetooth used around the children in schools.

So at any one time a child may be exposed to cumulative levels of radiation much higher than each product emits alone. They may be exposed constantly at school and at home, even when asleep.

Formative exposure

This exposure generally starts young and continues throughout children’s lives. Children are now being exposed to wireless products from a very early age and often throughout their developing childhood and teenage years. This is experimental – no-one has any idea of the cumulative effect of such long-term exposure starting at such a formative age.

We know from the scientific studies relating to mobile phones that children are more vulnerable to this type of radiation, absorbing more radiation than adults through their thinner skulls. Given the many studies that show this radiation could be very dangerous, do we not have a duty to protect children from the possibly serious future health effects of this exposure?

Read about the dangers of mobile phones…

Read more about children’s greater vulnerability…

Read more about this global experiment…


Finnish education professor’s warning: Wireless technology in schools may lead to a global epidemic of brain damages.

17 December 2015

From Agenta Jonsson who has been in contact with Finnish professor Rainer Nyberg. The following is a current update from a Jan 14, 2014 interview with Professor Rainer Nyberg

Finnish education professor’s warning: Wireless technology in schools may lead to a global epidemic of brain damages.
“We must protect children and youth more than we do today.”

Yle Arenan. Yle Nyheter, Finland Jan. 24, 2014

Translated by Agneta Jonsson
Revised by Rainer Nyberg. Nov. 27, 2015

Professor Rainer Nyberg changed his opinion of wireless technology in March 2013. At that time he had been lecturing in Finland and Sweden for many years and had written books about the uses and benefits of online learning. In this interview, for TV-Finland’s Channel, he explains how he found out about the health risks directly linked to wireless emissions from the technology he had assumed would only have positive effects.

What started your interest in wireless technology and its effects on health?

It actually began with my deep interest and involvement in new technology. As a teacher-trainer at the Faculty of Education I also started projects on IT-pedagogy and e-Learning. This resulted, among other things, in two books. One was How To Teach Online Education, another was a 350 page Research Guide, with 120 pages on how the Internet can be used to search for scientific information.

So your starting point was about the benefits, and not about the harmful effects?

Yes, definitely. I could only see the benefits then. I had been using cellphones for a long time and wifi-gadgets too. While I was working intensively on the fifth edition of the Research Guide I used both a wireless keyboard and mouse, but started getting a prickling sensation in my fingers. I wondered, why is this happening? Around that time, just before Christmas 2012, I read my grandchild’s letter to Santa Claus, “Please, please Santa, most of all I want to have an iPad.”

How did you react to that wish?

I thought it was great, really great that my grandchild wanted to use computers. At that time I had no idea there could be problems too. I just wanted to promote it, so I bought her an iPad.

Now you have explored the research available in this field, and learned about the injurious health effects. Are you surprised about what you found out from different research studies?

Yes, very surprised. Actually it started with my sister sending me a newspaper article from Sweden about how cellphones and iPads may be harmful to health. That’s silly, I thought. How could that be? Everyone’s using them. But I also thought, I may as well look into it. So in March 2013 I spent three weeks researching. I had been teaching information retrieval and had just written 120 pages in the Research Guide, so I knew how to do online research. We have easy access to fantastic tools at the university, the NELLI portal, where we can search many large scientific databases for free, as well as retrieve and print articles very fast.

What was your first impression? What did you find?

The first thing that really made an impression on me was the warning by the Council of Europe. In 2011 they called on all of the member states of the European Union by basically saying: you must warn all your citizens that there is a danger to cellphone technology and wireless internet. Children especially need to be warned, because they are particularly sensitive. Their cranium is thinner and more susceptible because they’re still growing. I got the message. Yes, protect the children. The warning from the Council of Europe also made it clear that if we don’t do something now, it could lead to devastating human and economic costs.

So you became absorbed in this new knowledge. What happened then?

I became quite concerned and continued looking deeper into scientific reports. The recommendation from the Council of Europe is from a socio-political standpoint but based on science. So I thought I’d better read up on the science. Among many findings I read the new BioInitiative Report of 2012 that included 1800 reviewed studies. The scientists concluded: If we don’t do something now, we may soon see a global epidemic of brain damage. Children are most vulnerable to the effects of pulsed electromagnetic radiation. And of course I thought of my grandchild, to whom I had just given an iPad.

I take it that’s quite challenging for a senior educator to hear?

That’s when I became very troubled about the technology I had been promoting in my books and lectures. I now understand that wired connectivity causes fewer problems and wireless creates many kinds of problems. Millions of people are affected.

Injuries to the brain’s blood vessels have been discovered as well. In our brains we have about 600 km of blood vessels. They have to feed 60-100 billion nerve cells with oxygen and glucose. Even if each nerve cell is extremely small, every nerve cell has many microscopic branches. The longest branch from each neuron (nerve cell), which includes axons (nerve fibers), is between one millimeter and 20 cm. The average is less than a millimeter. However, if we were to connect all these neurons and use only the longest branch from each one and put all neurons in a line, it would reach four times around the equator. Each neuron can have contacts (synapses) to more than thousands of other neurons.

With this context I started to understand why the brain was particularly sensitive. The blood vessels in the brain are far-reaching and extremely thin, and that’s where one problem lies. As it turns out, the thin blood vessels in the brain have walls that are even thinner. When someone is exposed to a cellphone or other wireless radiation, the walls of the blood vessels start to leak. A protein from the blood (albumin) can also leak out to the brain cells and has the potential to kill nerve cells. This has been shown in pictures in research reports from Sweden, published by professors Bertil Persson and Leif Salford in Lund. They studied the effects of active cellphone radiation in close vicinity to a box where rats ran freely. They found that even weak radiation causes damage to the blood vessels and the brain cells in the rats after only 2 hours of exposure. Imagine what can happen to children and adults who hold cellphones close to their ears and brains for several hours every week for years?

Your lecture today is about health consequences from staying too long in wireless environments. What steps have you personally taken to solve this problem?

Nowadays I keep the cellphone in flight mode 99% of the time to reduce emissions. I don’t use this ’smart’ technology much anymore, even though I always had my phone with me and on me for many years. Now I mostly leave it at home, or have it turned off, but check for messages. At home I use wired internet and a wired keyboard and mouse. I also replaced the wireless DECT phone with a traditional wired phone, and I avoid places with high levels of electromagnetic radiation.

As a guest lecturer, what will your key message be today?

First of all I will give a brief overview of how important an instrument our brain is. It’s the most complex structure in our world. It is more complex than any aircraft and so on. It’s very sensitive to electromagnetic pulses. All communication in our brains and bodies is also dependent on electric pulses, which are much weaker than man-made digital electromagnetic pulses. In airplanes you are not allowed to use cellphones because it might disturb the electronic equipment on board. Yet most people still think that a cellphone could not harm the brain, which is much more complex than an airplane and runs on much weaker electric pulses. I will also talk about various damages caused by wireless gadgets, but above all how to protect yourself and how to avoid being exposed to too much electromagnetic radiation.

Based on what you have said so far, your recommendation is that it pays to use traditional cable connectivity and just use wireless networks when we have no other choice. Is that about right?

Yes, it’s much better to use cable internet whenever possible, but you can’t use cable for cell phones, tablets and iPads, because they only function on wireless networks. All digital communication uses high frequencies. Tablets are not held to the ear, but you sit with them in your lap, maybe even while holding a child. Boys and men often keep their smartphone in their pockets. Research shows that sperm die from such exposure, and the sperm that survive is of less quality.
One experiment (by A. Balmori) found a marked difference between two containers of tadpoles placed 140 meters from a celltower. One container was shielded by a Faraday cage. In that container only 4% died, but 90% of the tadpoles died in the unprotected one, and deformities were found among the remaining 10%. No wonder then that sperm die or are damaged if you carry a smartphone in a pants pocket. Frogs, people and birds have also been studied, and the results show that they were also negatively affected by celltowers. This is not just about cancer. Immediate injury is noticeable on EEG, brain activity changes, and also damages to the DNA.
So there are many different types of damage. That’s why it’s so important to protect children and not install wireless networks and iPads in the schools. The worst scenario is when many tablets are in use at the same time and in the same room, as in schools, because they continually search to connect to the same wifi-modem. It’s like every iPad is shouting at the same time to the modem and this electromagnetic smog just gets louder and louder. That’s when it becomes particularly harmful. How would kids know if their teachers do not understand the risks?

Lots of important issues to talk about today. Thank you so much for this interview, and
I wish you all the best with your lecture.
Thank you too.


“The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation” — Dr Devra Davis

[Il 30 novembre 2015, la Conferenza del Decano presso l’Università di Melbourne è stata tenuta dalla prof.ssa Devra Davis riguardo alla domanda: “Quali sono gli effetti sulla salute dei telefoni cellulari e della radiazione wireless?”. 

La dott.ssa Davis, epidemiologa ed esperta di effetti sulla salute delle radiazioni elettromagnetiche, ha delineato l’evoluzione di telefoni cellulari e smartphone e spiegato il background degli attuali standard di sicurezza per le radiazioni elettromagnetiche vecchi di 19 anni, sviluppi politici e legislazione internazionale.

Durante la Conferenza sono stati presentati nuovi studi globali sulle conseguenze per la salute delle radiazioni wireless, compresi quelli riguardanti l’esposizione dei bambini e i relativi rischi.]

Pubblicato il 02 dic 2015

“The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation: what we know, what we need to find out, and what you can do now”
Presented by Dr Devra Davis, Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey.

The Lecture
What are the health effects of mobile phones and wireless radiation? While Australia has led the world in safety standards, including compulsory seat-belt legislation, plain packaging on cigarettes, and product and food disclosure legislation, it falls behind in addressing the significant issues associated with mobile phone use. In this Dean’s Lecture, epidemiologist and electromagnetic radiation expert, Dr Devra Davis, will outline the evolution of the mobile phone and smartphone, and provide a background to the current 19 year old radiation safety standards (SAR), policy developments and international legislation. New global studies on the health consequences of mobile/wireless radiation will be presented, including children’s exposure and risks.

The Speaker
Dr Devra Davis is an internationally recognised expert on electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and other wireless transmitting devices. She is currently the Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey. Dr Davis was Founding Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at The University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute —­ the first institute of its kind in the world, to examine the environmental factors that contribute to the majority of cases of cancer.

In 2007, Dr Devra Davis founded non­profit Environmental Health Trust to provide basic research and education about environmental health hazards. Dr Davis served as the President Clinton appointee to the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board in the U.S.A. from 1994–­1999, an independent executive branch agency that investigates, prevents and mitigates chemical accidents.
As the former Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services, she has counseled leading officials in the United States, United Nations, European Environment Agency, Pan American Health Organization, World Health Organization, and World Bank.

Dr Davis holds a B.S. in physiological psychology and an M.A. in sociology from the University of Pittsburgh, 1967. She completed a PhD in science studies at the University of Chicago as a Danforth Foundation Graduate Fellow, 1972 and a M.P.H. in epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins University as a Senior National Cancer Institute Post-­Doctoral Fellow, 1982. She has authored more than 200 publications and has been published in Lancet and Journal of the American Medical Association as well as the Scientific American and the New York Times.

Dr Devra Davis is an internationally recognised expert on electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and other wireless transmitting devices.

Magda Havas shows the effects of living near Cell Phone Towers

This is honestly one of the best presentations you will see on highlighting the dangers of living near Cell Phone Towers. Held at Oakville, Ontario, Canada, Professor Magda Havas from Trent University gives a thorough presentation to the concerned citizens affected by a recent cell phone tower installation.

Dr. Havas reveals the results from numerous international studies, which conclusively prove that exposure to the radiation from cell phone towers and masts cause dangerous health problems in humans, including cancer and death.

More Cellphone-Cancer proof at

Original article is located at…

Link to this clip on Youtube…

Telecom Funded Review on Children and Cell Phone Radiation Should Be Retracted According to Independent Scientists of the Environmental Health Trust

[Un nuovo documento dai ricercatori di Environmental Health Trust svela incoerenze evidenti ed errori sistematici in una analisi finanziata dall’industria Telecom, la quale afferma che la dose di radiazioni al cervello di un bambino durante l’uso del telefono cellulare non differisce da quella degli adulti.

“Il nostro lavoro mostra che la letteratura pubblicata sostiene esattamente la conclusione opposta a quella cui sono giunti Foster e Chou. I bambini che utilizzano i telefoni cellulari assorbono dosi di picco più elevate di radiazioni a microonde rispetto agli adulti”, afferma la Devra Davis, Visiting Professor di Medicina presso l’Università Ebraica, presidente dell’Environmental Health Trust (EHT) e co-autrice del documento.]

New research claims that an industry supported review alleging children and adults absorb the same radiation from mobile phones used biased methods and contains major systematic errors.

Teton Village, WY — (ReleaseWire) — 12/17/2015 — A new paper by Environmental Health Trust researchers exposes glaring inconsistencies and systematic errors in a Telecom industry-funded review alleging that the radiation dose to a child’s brain from cell phone use does not differ from adults. According to the newly published study’s lead author, Dr. Robert Morris, Senior Medical Advisor to the Environmental Health Trust, “Our detailed analysis of this review by two researchers with extensive ties to industry reveals what appears to be a deliberate distortion of the science and a boldfaced effort to downplay potential risks to children using mobile devices. Unless the authors can correct the glaring inconsistencies and internal contradictions in their work, the paper should be retracted.”

“Our paper shows that the published literature supports exactly the opposite conclusion to that reached by Foster and Chou. Children using cell phones absorb higher peak doses of microwave radiation than adults,” states Dr. Devra Davis, Visiting Professor of Medicine at The Hebrew University, President of Environmental Health Trust (EHT) and a co-author of the paper.

In 2014, Chou and Foster published a review of 23 publications that had used computer models to compare the dose of microwave radiation absorbed by the brains of children and adults. In that review, the authors concluded that the published literature showed no consistent difference between adults and children with respect to the peak absorbed dose of microwave radiation.

In this newly published critique of the 2014 review, EHT researchers found glaring internal inconsistencies and systematic errors in the presentation of data by Foster and Chou. They found summaries of the 23 studies, as quoted by Foster and Chou, support the opposite conclusion that at a fixed level of exposure, children absorb higher peak doses of radiation than adults.

The researchers point to a graphical Figure by Foster and Chou that purports to summarize results abstracted from individual studies. This graphic indicated 25% of the results showed higher peak doses in children, 30% showed little or no difference, and 46% showed higher peak doses in adults. Yet, when the authors of those same studies summarize their findings, summaries quoted by Foster and Chou, most reached the opposite conclusion. “Contrary to what Foster and Chou assert, the majority of studies find that children do absorb greater doses of microwave radiation from mobile phones than adults,” said Morris, noting that 57% of studies concluded that doses are higher in children, while only 10% concluded that doses were higher in adults. These inconsistencies are summarized in Figure 1.

“The probability of this discrepancy occurring by chance alone is less than 1%. This leaves only two possible explanations. The first possibility is that many authors of the 22 individual studies misinterpreted and/or misrepresented their review findings in their text summaries. This seems unlikely given the number of authors involved and the fact that the peer review process would need to have failed repeatedly for this to occur. The only other explanation is that a bias in the methods used by Foster and Chou introduced a systematic error in their abstraction of review results,” stated the authors.

“The authors are heavily supported by the cell phone industry,” states co-author Lloyd Morgan describing how the Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF) funded the 2014 Chou and Foster review and earlier had sent Foster to Greece to Co-Chair a Workshop on the this very topic with CK Chou who was then Chief EME Scientist for Motorola. Ken Foster’s research is also often funded by industry organizations such as the Wi-Fi Alliance. “CK Chou seems to have been at the forefront of protecting industry’s interests for many decades. He was a Motorola executive while serving on the IEEE Committee that created the exposure limits adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). He still chairs the IEEE Committee that will likely be involved in considering the FCC’s adoption of even higher exposure limits than exist today,” explains electrical engineer Lloyd Morgan, co-author of the paper.

The authors also summarize two key additional problems with Foster and Chou’s paper. They state that no clear protocol was specified for the identification of the reviewed studies. They question why Foster and Chou spend almost half of their discussion “focusing on papers that are more than a decade old, but say nothing about half of the studies published in the past decade, most of which contradict their primary conclusion.”

“The evidence is clear and compelling,” states Davis, “Children absorb more radiation than adults and their brains are especially vulnerable.” She refers to a newly published paper by researchers at the Federal Universities of Brazil in which sophisticated modeling of the absorption of cell phone radiation in the brains of children “confirms that substantially higher radiation doses occur in younger children as compared to adults.”

In summary, the authors conclude that the published literature supports exactly the opposite conclusion to that reached by Foster and Chou. The published literature supports a conclusion that children using cell phones absorb higher peak doses of microwave radiation than adults. “Either the majority of the original authors in the published literature misrepresented their own results or Foster and Chou have misrepresented the result of those studies. It appears that cell phone industry authors have produced cell phone industry results.,” states Morris.

The paper Children Absorb Higher Doses of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation From Mobile Phones Than Adults can be accessed at this link The IEEE/Access is one of the world’s leading engineering and scientific magazines.

A graphic abstract for this paper by the Environmental Health Trust can be found at this link

About The Authors
Robert D. Morris, MD, PhD, is a physician and an environmental epidemiologist. He has taught at Tufts University School of Medicine, Harvard University School of Public Health and the Medical College of Wisconsin and has served as an advisor to the EPA, CDC, NIH, the President’s Cancer Panel and worked with the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Environmental Epidemiology and with the National Cancer Institute.

Devra Davis, PhD, MPH, is President of the Environmental Health Trust, a non-profit scientific and policy think tank. She is currently Visiting Professor of Medicine at The Hebrew University, Hadassah Medical Center and Ondokuz Mayis University Medical School and was Founding Director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council and Founding Director, Center for Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. President Clinton appointed Dr. Davis to the newly established Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, and she is a former Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services.

Lloyd Morgan is an Electronic Engineer by training with 38 years of industrial experience to the VP level in Silicon Valley and is a Board member with the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States (CBTRUS), theInternational EMF Alliance and Senior Research Fellow with the Environmental Health Trust(EHT). He has been involved in the study of exposure to electromagnetic fields and resultant health problems since 1995. He continues to carry out critical analyses of epidemiological studies in the field and presents findings to local expert forums in Teton County, as well as nationally and internationally. His paper on the brain modeling of cell phones with Dr. Gandhi, Dr. Herberman and Dr. Davis, was one of the most widely cited papers in the field.

About Environmental Health Trust
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 awareness on how to reduce exposure to cell phone and wireless radiation. The Environmental Health Trust maintains a regularly updated database of worldwid e precautionary policies detailing how countries are taking action to protect public health and features lectures of EHT experts. Please visit http://www.EHtrust.organd on Facebook.

Dr. Devra Davis Delivers the Dean’s Lecture at the University of Melbourne

10/12/2015 Newsweek: Short-sighted Savings Endangers Flint Kids, by EHT Advisor Robert Morris MD PhD




4 dicembre 2015 – “”, di 

Morire a 15 anni perché elettrosensibile, questa è la storia incredibile di Jenny Fry , una ragazza come tante altre , come tua figlia ,tua nipote o semplicemente come una tua amica , raccontata dall’articolo del dailymail (leggi QUI l’articolo in lingua inglese), e questo è solo l’apice di un problema che sta diventando sempre più frequente anche qui in Italia tra gli adolescenti che frequentano i licei (fino a qualche anno fa era limitato agli studenti universitari) perché oggi valutiamo le scuole per le loro connessioni internet non per i loro programmi o capacità.


La notizia è di qualche giorno, ci siamo presi del tempo per verificare la veridicità di tale informazione, che ci è stata confermata dall’Associazione Eletttrosensibili

L’ elettrosensibilità è una malattia, una sindrome immuno-tossica che compromette diverse funzioni dell’organismo, nel caso di Jenny ha dato problemi alla vescica , stanchezza cronica e mal di testa  (immaginatevi di essere celiaci e di essere costretti a mangiare sempre e tutto a base di glutine), ancora oggi , non viene riconosciuta (anche se qualche tribunale afferma il contrario) e qualche paese in Europa (Francia e Svezia) hanno adottato leggi più cautelative delle nostre ,

Ma noi abitiamo in un paese dove la stampa è più preoccupata delle interferenze che possono generare le luci degli alberi di natale agli effetti generati dalle reti WI-FI, non ci stupiamo quindi come questa notizia venga coperta mediaticamente.

Si proprio il Wi-Fi , ultimo ritrovato della nostra società, che ci permette di essere connessi sempre e ovunque (ma poi per quale ragione !!), abbiamo immesso nella nostra società una tecnologia senza nemmeno porci il ben che minimo dubbio se facesse male o no, prendendo per scontato che le alte frequenze , come le basse , essendo non ionizzanti non fanno male.

A questo si aggiunge l’ignoranza di molti , qualcuno in buona fede e qualcun altro magari mascherando un conflitto d’interessi, non si fanno scrupolo di arrecare danni ai malati con i loro comportamenti scriteriati assumendo posizioni quasi “medioevali”.

Le emissioni Wireless, costituite da microonde, danneggiano l’organismo anche di chi non è in grado di percepirne gli effetti dannosi, proprio come succede se accendiamo un forno a microonde, visto che entrambi i dispositivi hanno le stesse frequenze di funzionamento  ovvero operano sulla banda di frequenza pari a 2,4 Ghz. con la differenza che il  forno ( che è schermato solo sul vetro ) serve a cuocere i cibi, il Wi-Fi a connetterci ad internet , ma la domanda che sorge è : cosa succede al nostro organismo ?

Ammettere la pericolosità significherebbe ammettere che i Campi Elettromagnetici in alta e bassa frequenza (tradotto antenne radio base , Wi-Fi , cellulari , elettrodotti ecc…) sono in grado di arrecare danni all’organismo e questo causerebbe un problema politico ed economico enorme, e allora, per molti  è  meglio stare in silenzio negando anche l’evidenza, far soffrire “l’altro”, sempre che l’altro un giorno non si trasformi in te stesso o in tuo figlio o qualche tuo parente o amico, perché allora l’egoismo personale che ha regolato il tuo stile di vita muta drasticamente.
Crediamo che si possa vivere in modo differente dal modo attuale, senza necessariamente abbandonare tale tecnologia, e per chi è preoccupato degli effetti delle luci di natale consigliamo di non accenderle quando è connesso così come consigliamo vivamente di spegnere il WI-FI quando non lo si usa.
Alla famiglia di Jenny va la nostra solidarietà e la nostra vicinanza come va a tutti gli elettrosensibili che devono vivere nascosti perché frutto di un effetto indesiderato di una tecnologia imposta che a ben guardare, forse, non ci serve e la verità forse è troppo scomoda ( leggi QUI l’articolo di  microwavenews in lingua inglese)



30 novembre 2015 – “”

Si toglie la vita a soli 15 anni a causa di una rara allergia. Jenny Fry, una studentessa inglese, si è impiccata dopo aver scoperto di essere allergica al wifi a causa della sua elettrosensibilità.

La mattina della morte, come riporta il Mirror, aveva mandato un messaggio a un suo amico dicendo che non sarebbe andata a scuola, poi il tragico ritrovamento.

Dal 2012 aveva iniziato a soffrire di cefalea, stanchezza paralizzante e altri sintomi della sua allergia. La sua vita era cambiata e anche il semplice andare a scuola era diventato problematico. «Non penso che volesse togliersi la vita», ha raccontato la madre, «si sentiva frustrata ed esasperata e ha commesso un drammatico errore».


Jenny Fry, allergica al wi-fi, si impicca a 15 anni

1 dicembre 2015 – “”, di redazione Blitz

LONDRA – Si suicida a 15 anni perché allergica al wi-fi. Una allergia che le rendeva impossibile frequentare regolarmente la scuola. La connessione wirelles ad internet, infatti, alla ragazza, Jenny Fry, inglese, procurava terribili mal di testa e una continua stanchezza.

Di questa allergia soffre anche la madre, Debra, che adesso, intervistata dal tabloid britannico The Mirror, accusa la scuola: “Loro sapevano dell‘allergia di Jenny. Noi stavamo benissimo in casa, dove avevamo tolto il wi-fi. Ma quando lei andava a scuola riprendeva a stare male. Ne avevo parlato con i suoi insegnanti, ma loro mi avevano detto che c’erano tante prove dell’esistenza di danni da wi-fi quante ve ne erano del fatto che non fosse affatto nocivo”.

Erano ormai tre anni che Jenny stava male per questa allergia, che aveva modificato completamente la sua vita. “Non penso che volesse togliersi la vita”, ha detto la madre al Mirror, “si sentiva frustrata ed esasperata e ha commesso un drammatico errore”.

Ma qualche giorno fa Jenny ha mandato un sms ad un amico, dicendo che quel giorno non sarebbe andata a scuola. Poi è andata in un parco non distante da casa, a Chaldington Oxon, e si è impiccata ad un albero.