Tag: <span>danni alla salute</span>

Mobile devices could harm kids

12 ottobre 2015 – “in-cyprus.com”

[Il Comitato Nazionale di Cipro per l’Ambiente e la Salute del Bambino (ECH) dice di preferir peccare di eccesso di cautela piuttosto che rischiare seri danni a feti e bambini, e avverte il pubblico che l’uso di dispositivi mobili potrebbe essere potenzialmente dannoso per questi soggetti ancor più che per gli adulti.]

health-risk-mobile-children-750x347

The Cyprus National Committee on Environment and Child Health (ECH) says it wants to err on the side of caution, warning the public that using mobile devices could be potentially harmful to children.

According to World Health Organisation, electromagnetic radiation transmitted from mobile and hand-held devices, such as smartphones, tablets and Wi-Fi gadgets, are considered to be “possibly carcinogenic to humans” based on a WHO decision in 2011.

But Stella Michaelidou, President of the ECH, takes it a step further suggesting that more studies keep pointing to other possible harmful effects and society should respond by taking precautions.

“Documentation of other potential and more serious biological side effects are on the tip of an emerging iceberg,” she said.

Michaelidou cited studies that point to a lower safety threshold than the officially accepted, referring to the acceptable index for transmission of radio frequencies known as the ICNIRP index (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection).

She said multiple and frequent exposure to this kind of radiation, which falls below the acceptable levels of thermal effects, pose a health risk to a developing embryo.

Michaelidou also said that children who use their mobile phone more frequently face a higher risk at having a weaker memory, attention deficit disorder, and similar issues.

The official also admitted that a big segment of the scientific community does not agree with the elevated risk, which suggests that current safety levels are adequate.

The WHO does not have information of additional side effects than the ones made known officially. However, the orgnisation agrees that “potential harmful effects, when discovered, would be far greater and more serious for an embryo or young child compared to adults”.

Michaelidou insists that precaution is the best method to protect children from any potential health hazards.

Fonte:

http://in-cyprus.com/mobile-devices-could-harm-kids/

Tinnitus and cell phones: the role of electromagnetic radiofrequency radiation

[Il seguente studio ha evidenziato che le emissioni dei telefoni cellulari provocano dimostrati effetti termogenici e potenziali effetti biologici e genotossici.
Alcuni individui sono più sensibili all’esposizione a questi campi elettromagnetici in alta frequenza (Elettrosensibili), e, quindi, presentano più precocemente i sintomi.
Può esserci un processo patofisiologico comune tra Elettrosensibilità e tinnito.
Si conclude che esistono già prove ragionevoli per suggerire cautela nell’utilizzo dei telefoni cellulari, al fine di evitare danni uditivi nonchè l’insorgenza o il peggioramento del tinnito.]

1808-8694/© 2015 Associac¸ão Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda.
All rights reserved.

By:
Luisa Nascimento Medeiros (a,b), Tanit Ganz Sanchez (b,c)

(a) Department of Otolaryngology, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil
(b) Association for Interdisciplinary Research and Divulgation of Tinnitus, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
(c) Faculdade de Medicina, USP, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

ARTICLE INFO

Article history
Received: 20 December 2014
Accepted: 17 April 2015

Keywords
Cellular phone
Electromagnetic radiation
Tinnitus

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition and its prevalence has increased on the pastdecades. The worldwide progressive increase of the use of cell phones has exposed the peripheral auditory pathways to a higher dose of electromagnetic radiofrequency radiation (EMRFR).
Some tinnitus patients report that the abusive use of mobiles, especially when repeated in thesame ear, might worsen ipsilateral tinnitus.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the available evidence about the possible causal association between tinnitus and exposure to electromagnetic waves.

Methods: A literature review was performed searching for the following keywords: tinnitus,electromagnetic field, mobile phones, radio frequency, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
We selected 165 articles that were considered clinically relevant in at least one of the subjects.

Results: EMRFR can penetrate exposed tissues and safety exposure levels have been established. These waves provoke proved thermogenic effects and potential biological and genotoxic effects. Some individuals are more sensitive to electromagnetic exposure (electrosensitivity),and thus, present earlier symptoms. There may be a common pathophysiology between this electrosensitivity and tinnitus.

Conclusion: There are already reasonable evidences to suggest caution for using mobile phones to prevent auditory damage and the onset or worsening of tinnitus.

Fonte:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1808869415001639#item1

Versione PDF integrale scaricabile al seguente link:

Tinnitus and cell phones

Mobilfunk: Brustkrebs, Impotenz und verkrüppelte Tiere

[Le terribili condizioni di vita degli abitanti di Volturino (FG) a causa dello spaventoso inquinamento elettromagnetico generato da una moltitudine di ripetitori siti in prossimità del paese, raccontate nel servizio di una tv tedesca.]

Caricato il 06 mar 2011

Bürgerinitiative in Italien in dem verstrahltesten Dorf Voltorino

Weitere Details zum Thema Mobilfunk unter http://www.ulrichweiner.de

Expert Docs Urge U.S. Secretary of Education: Play it Safe With Kids—Go Wired Not WiFi

October 2015 – “Environmental Health Trust”

[Eminenti scienziati e medici consiglieri della Environmental Health Trust (EHT), hanno inviato una lettera aperta al Segretario dell’Istruzione degli Stati Uniti Arne Duncan e al Segretario entrante John King, spiegando nei dettagli la vulnerabilità specifica dei bambini nei confronti dei danni alla salute derivanti dall’uso della tecnologia wireless.]

Top medical experts advise schools to stop experimenting on our children. WiFi in Schools is Risky Business that has never been evaluated for safety.

Leading expert scientists and doctors who are advisors of the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) have sent an open letter to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and incoming acting Secretary John King detailing children’s unique vulnerability to the health risks of wireless technology. The scientists outline specific steps the U.S. Department of Education can take to safeguard children’s health in the 21st century, such as choosing safe corded (non-wireless) technology and creating a national education program for students. The scientists applaud the fact that such efforts are already well implemented in several schools and countries and call on the United States to take a leadership role.

The letter cites how over 20 countries have taken a precautionary approach to the issue of wireless and are educating citizens on how to reduce exposures with many recommending against wireless in schools. Early in 2015, France passed a national law banning wifi from nursery schools and mandating that schools turn off wifi whenever it is not in use, and Israel has established a new national institute to review scientific evidence and recommends wired computers for teachers. In the United States, both public and private schools are taking steps to reduce and remove wireless exposures. EHT maintains an updated list of these policy actions.

In 2013, the American Academy of Pediatrics wrote to the FCC calling for more protective wireless RF-EMF radiation exposure standards and stated, “Children are not little adults and are disproportionately impacted by all environmental exposures, including cellphone radiation. Current FCC standards do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific to pregnant women and children.”

“Considering that no research documents long-term exposure to low-intensity microwave radiation as safe for children, the best approach is precautionary.” The letter references the accumulated scientific research showing that wireless radiation, also known as radio-frequency (RF) radiation or microwave radiation, could increase cancer risk and has been shown to damage the reproductive system and alter neurological development.

The letter cites the research of Yale Professor Dr. Hugh Taylor that showed prenatal exposure resulted in decreased memory and hyperactivity in offspring. This study joins a growing list of experimental research showing neurotoxic effects which has informed the BabySafe Project of over 100 physicians who recommend reduced wireless exposures for pregnant women in order to mitigate the risk of fetal brain damage.

Professor Martha Herbert, MD PhD, a Harvard pediatric neurologist, is quoted: “RF radiation from wifi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function.”

The scientists made the following recommendations to the U.S. Department of Education:

1. Raise school community awareness through new educational curriculum:Students, teachers, and their families should be given information on wireless health risks and simple precautionary steps they can take to protect their health. It is important to teach children how to use technology both safely and more responsibly in order to protect their health and wellbeing.

2.  Install a safe communication and information technology infrastructure in schools to meet educational needs: Solutions exist to reduce exposures to wireless emissions and mitigate the health risk. Low-EMF Best Practices have been developed allowing educational needs to be met with safer hard-wired Internet connections, which are also faster and more secure.

“A 21st century classroom must bridge the digital divide in the safest way possible. The United States of America can thoughtfully integrate safe technology into every classroom while safeguarding the health of generations to come by installing safe and secure wired internet connections.” stated Dr. Davis, President of the EHT and Visiting Professor, The Hebrew University Medical School.

Please download the letter at this link.

In fall 2014, the EHT wrote to several educational organizations—including the National Education Association, the National Association of Independent Schools and the National Parent Teacher Association—informing them of the health risks of wireless installations. Letters are available on the EHT Schools and Safe Technology webpage.

This new letter calls on the U.S. Department of Education to provide leadership on common sense technology steps to safeguard children’s health just as classrooms across the country are upgrading their technology systems. EHT applauds the Collaborative for High Performance Schools Low EMF criteria which provides the detailed steps schools can take to reduce EMF exposures.

Scientists have long been cautioning against wireless networks in schools and, most recently, new letters from scientists to a Massachusetts school were included in a federal complaint filed by parents alleging the school’s upgraded wireless network made their child ill.

In 2014, an independent group of 29 international expert scientists of the Bioinitiative Report wrote a letter to the CEOs of wireless technology education companies such as Google, Dell, Apple, Adobe and Facebook stating that, “It does not reflect well on the ethics of your corporations to encourage the FCC to provide $2 billion dollars for new wireless classroom infrastructure and devices for school children, knowing that wireless emissions have been classified as a Possible Human Carcinogen by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (2011). To promote wireless technologies in schools is to deliberately and knowingly disregard current health warnings from international science and public health experts.” These scientists have long made clear recommendations for Low-EMF Best Practices in schools based on the published scientific research.

Recently, a group of over 200 scientists (who have collectively published over 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on non-ionizing radiation)appealed to the United Nations for immediate action on this issue in order to protect public health and the environment.

Over 20 countries now take a precautionary stance towards wireless radiation. As an example, former Microsoft President Frank Clegg heads a safe technology organization C4ST calling on federal election candidates in Canada to develop an awareness campaign related to the safe use of information and communication technologies in schools after the Canadian Parliamentary Health Committee unanimously voted for 12 recommendations concerning wireless radiation and public health.

ABOUT THE SCIENTISTS

Anthony B. Miller, MD FACE , Professor Emeritus at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, is a physician and epidemiologist specializing in cancer etiology, prevention and screening. He has conducted research on ionizing radiation and electromagnetic fields and cancer, and other aspects of cancer causation. He has served on many expert committees assessing the carcinogenicity of various exposures, including working groups of the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer.

Devra Davis, PhD MPH, is President of the Environmental Health Trust, a non-profit scientific and policy think tank. She was the 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.

Priyanka Bandara, BSc, PhD, is an Australian researcher/educator in environmental health. She has worked as a clinical researcher at Westmead and Royal Prince Alfred Hospitals and University of Sydney Medicine and as a research scientist (biochemistry and molecular pharmacology) at the University of NSW.

Gunnar Heuser MD PhD FACP, is a practicing physician and clinical toxicologist who has coauthored several books, scientific papers and abstracts with a special emphasis on neurotoxicology and immunotoxicology. He has given expert comments to the EPA and served on advisory committees and testified to the U.S. Congress on toxic chemicals and human health.

Beatrice Alexandra Golomb, MD PhD, is a Professor of Medicine at University of California San Diego School of Medicine. She has worked as Chief Scientist for the Department of Veterans Affairs Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses. She has published numerous scientific research papers and coauthored books with a focus on chemical exposures, toxicity and neurobiology.

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.

Annie Sasco, MD DrPH, has served 22 years as Unit Chief of Epidemiology for Cancer Prevention at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France and served as Acting Chief of the Cancer Control Programme of the World Health Organization (WHO). She specializes in cancer research and epidemiology and holds two Masters plus a Doctoral degree from Harvard University.

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 health concerns about wireless in schools and recommending safer hardwired internet connection installations. The Environmental Health Trust maintains a regularly updateddatabase of worldwide precautionary policies on wireless related to children and schools. Please visit EHtrust.org and on Facebook.

RESOURCES

Download the October 13, 2015 Letter here http://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Letter-to-U.S.-Secretary-of-Education-from-EHT-on-Wireless-in-Schools-October-13-2015-.pdf

Letters by Scientifc Experts Against Wireless Networks to Fay School Trusteeshttp://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Expert-Letters-Against-WiFi-to-Fay-school-trustees.pdf

Collaborative for High Performance Schools Low-EMF Best Practices http://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/US-CHPS__Criteria_2014_Low-EMF-Criteria102314.pdf

VIDEOS

Dr. Devra Davis and Dr. Sharma Lecture at George Washington University on Wireless and Health June 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNeA26lQTvA

Dr. Devra Davis lectures at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNNSztN7wJc

Excerpt from Q and A at George Washington University on the issue of wireless in school https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gkcPZV4coQ

Fonte:

http://ehtrust.org/expert-docs-urge-u-s-secretary-of-education-play-it-safe-with-kids-go-wired-not-wifi/

Is cell phone radiation actually dangerous? We asked an expert

21 Aprile 2015 – “www.digitaltrends.com”, by Simon Hill

can-cell-phones-cause-brain-cancer-we-asked-the-experts-640x0
“It’s looking increasingly likely that cellular phones (mostly smartphones these days) are harmful in terms of cancer risk, particularly to the head and neck,” says Joel M. Moskowitz, Director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California at Berkeley. “A lot of scientists have come round to the view that radiofrequency radiation is probably carcinogenic because of new research that has emerged since 2011.”

That was the year the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” A panel of 31 expert scientists from 14 different countries concluded radiofrequency radiation, which is emitted by cell phones and other wireless communication devices should be placed in Group 2B alongside a fairly long list of other substances that includes lead, coffee, nickel, and gasoline.

But is it really so dangerous? Despite the passionate views espoused by many experts, others are confident that the risk is overblown, or at least reluctant to push for sweeping societal changes. So should you be afraid, or gab away as usual? We asked a few experts to find out the truth.

Independent studies are showing danger

Cell phone emissions were classified as “possibly carcinogenic” based on an increased risk of glioma, which is the most common form of brain cancer, but they were also strongly linked with another type of tumor, benign acoustic neuromas. A lot of the available evidence back in 2011 came from a series of studies known as the Interphone studies, which were partly funded by the wireless communications industry.

“I’ve been tracking the research for five years now and the evidence of the effect is growing stronger,” Moskowitz told Digital Trends. “This is perhaps in part because the new studies are independent, not funded by the wireless industry.”

Back in 2006, Henry Lai, a professor at the University of Washington analyzed all available studies on cell phone radiation from 1990 to 2006. He found that 50 percent of the 326 studies showed a biological effect from radio-frequency radiation, but when he divided them into independently funded studies and those funded by the wireless industry he found the split was 70 – 30.

“Even if you accept all the industry studies, you still end up with 50-50,” Lai told Seattle Mag in 2011. “How could 50 percent all be garbage? People always start with the statement ‘hundreds of studies have been done on this topic, and no effect has been found’ — but this is a very misleading statement.”

Another potentially telling revelation is that the industry can’t get product liability insurance for mobile devices. Some people within the insurance industry feel that there’s a real risk of a wave of lawsuits related to brain tumors and other conditions caused by cell phones over the next couple of decades. Insurance giant the Swiss Re Group included “unforeseen consequences of electromagnetic fields” in its Emerging Risk Insights report.

“Governments are flying blind on this, they’re either ignorant or they’re in denial,” Moskowitz says. “In part it’s ignorance, but in part they’re getting pressure from an industry that dwarfs big tobacco. It’s just too profitable, about a sixth of your cell phone bill in the U.S. goes to government in fees or taxes.”

Do we all have our heads in the sand? This is a controversial topic and it’s hard to get definitive answers. We decided to speak to Dr. Kurt Straif, Head of the World Health Organization program that classified RF electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic” back in 2011. And in Straif’s eyes, the situation is far muddier.

“We don’t know for sure if it’s causing cancer or not.”

“We’ve done almost 1,000 different agent assessments,” Dr. Straif told Digital Trends, “and this is probably the most heated controversy in terms of strong believers — scientists in the field that say we already know it’s causing cancer to the other extreme that says every additional cent spent on research is wasted because we know it can never cause cancer.”

The IARC Monographs program Straif headed up was formed with the backing of the World Health Organization and the United Nations, at the request of member states looking to identify substances and circumstances that are known to cause cancer in humans, and to make that information available for cancer prevention.

An independent advisory group suggests topics and the Monographs group decides what to pursue. It gathers all the published research, identifies the best experts in the world for each topic, and they draft working papers, and then there is an 8 day meeting to classify each possible carcinogen and create a volume of Monographs.

Dr. Kurt Straif, left, led the World Health Organization program that classified cell phone radiation as "possibly carcinogenic to humans".
Dr. Kurt Straif, left, led the World Health Organization program that classified cell phone radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans”.

“The Monographs are the most authoritative program in cancer-hazard identification, running for the longest time, looking at all types of environmental exposure, but also known for being the strongest program in terms of a very strict policy to exclude conflicts of interest,” Straif explains. “Scientists with a link to industry, or on the other hand, scientists with a very strong link to advocacy groups, would not be eligible to serve on the working group.”

He points out that, though the Interphone study was partly funded by industry, there was a very strict firewall in place overseen by the Union for International Cancer Control.

“I did not sense any strong orchestrated efforts by industry to influence the outcome of the 2011 meeting,” he told us.

We can safely say that the IARC group is impartial. It’s no stranger to controversy and it does not bend to big business. Take for example the recent classification of glyphosate — the main chemical in the pesticide Roundup — as “probably carcinogenic,” a move that incurred the wrath of Monsanto, the pesticide’s maker. Glyphosate is in group 2A, which is still one step down from Group 1, “carcinogenic to humans.” Radiofrequency EMF radiation was placed in Group 2B, largely based on cell phone studies. So what does the “possibly carcinogenic” classification actually mean?

The IARC, headquartered in Lyon, France, conducts reserach without funding form the wireless industry.
The IARC, headquartered in Lyon, France, conducts reserach without funding form the wireless industry.

“It means that there is scientific evidence, in this case limited evidence from the human studies, that it could cause cancer in humans,” says Straif. “There is also limited evidence from animal studies, and there is weak mechanistic data. These three things together result in the evaluation of possibly carcinogenic.”

There is currently no firm plan to reassess radiofrequency EMF radiation, but Dr. Straif says it is on the radar, and if important new evidence was to emerge, the IARC Monographs group could make it a priority.

“Knowing about the studies that have been published since 2011, I think that the epidemiological evidence is still limited,” says Straif, making it clear that this is his personal opinion and not that of the IARC group. “It has not changed in the one or the other direction. There are lots of different scientific groups out there. Some think with the new publications that the human evidence is now sufficient to result in a Group 1 classification as a known human carcinogen. I don’t think these studies would change the current overall evaluation of 2B.”

Articolo originale al seguente link:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/can-cell-phones-cause-brain-cancer/

Q&A – Olle Johansson Health effects of electromagnetic fields by Open Mind Conference – Denmark 2014

[In questo video il prof. Olle Johansson risponde a domande su esposizione a CEM e possibili danni alla salute, rivoltegli dal pubblico al termine della Open Mind Conference di Copenhagen del 2014.]


Pubblicato il 04 ottobre 2015

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.

www.openmindconference.com