Tag: tumori

Notizie dal mondo • • • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

Life of jail inmates at risk – High cell phone signal strength

[L’articolo espone alcuni concetti inerenti la pericolosità dei Campi Elettromagnetici in Alta Frequenza, che si possono riassumere come segue:

esperti di medicina e studi internazionali hanno detto che l’aumento della potenza del segnale dei ripetitori per la telefonia mobile, come si è evinto da osservazioni fatte in diverse prigioni del Punjab, possono causare il cancro tra la gente del posto;

secondo uno studio condotto in Brasile, oltre l’81% delle persone che muoiono a Belo Horizonte per specifici tipi di cancro, vive a meno di 500 metri da 300 antenne di telefonia mobile identificate in città;

un numero crescente di organizzazioni e molti altri studi sostengono le conclusioni dello studio Brasiliano;

sebbene lo studio condotto in Brasile riguardi una sola città, anche i residenti di altre città in Brasile e nel resto del mondo sono vulnerabili alle radiazioni emesse dalle Stazioni Radio Base;

i ricercatori dicono che anche le antenne stesse dei dispositivi mobili sono pericolose;

oltre al cancro, le antenne della telefonia mobile possono causare alcune altre malattie e condizioni mediche, tra cui mutazioni genetiche, disturbi della memoria, compromissione dell’apprendimento, Sindrome da Deficit di Attenzione e Iperattività, insonnia, disturbi cerebrali, squilibri ormonali, infertilità, demenza e complicazioni cardiache;

un medico professore di Radiologia che vuole rimanere anonimo, ha detto che anche se le radiazioni dei ripetitori di telefonia mobile sono meno dannose dei raggi X e Gamma, l’aumento della loro quantità nell’ambiente potrebbe danneggiare il corpo umano.]

Apart from cancer, cell phone antennas can cause certain other diseases and medical conditions including genetic mutations, memory disruptions, hindered learning, ADD, insomnia, brain disorders, hormonal imbalances, infertility, dementia and heart complications.

8 January, 2016

LAHORE – Increased signal strength of cell phone towers at different jails of the Punjab can cause cancer among the locals, said medical experts and international studies. Cellular companies have increased signal strength of their antennas installed near jails to counter the cell phone jammers installed at different jails of the province by the jail management. As per a study conducted in Brazil, more than 81 percent of people who die in Belo Horizonte by specific types of cancer live less than 500 meters away from the 300 identified cell phone antennas in the city. Scientists found between 1996 and 2006 in Belo Horizonte, a total of 4,924 victims within 500 meters and 7,191 within 1,000 meters died of cancer types that may be caused by electromagnetic radiation, such as tumors in the prostate, breast, lung, kidneys and liver.

The researcher claims that the antennas of the devices themselves are also dangerous. But cellular companies in Punjab have installed their antennas much closer to jails premises. A representative of National Radio and Telecom Corporation (NRTC) said that normal signal strength of a cell phone tower is -60 db but most of the companies have increased this strength to -30 db only to counter the jammers installed at different jails.
Adilza Condessa Dode, UFMG researcher and coordinator of the Brazilian study, also recommended the use of a cellular headset by keeping the unit away from the body, and to banning the use of mobile phones by children and in places such as schools and hospitals.

A growing number of organisations and many more studies support the conclusions of the Brazilian study. This study covers just one city but residents of other cities in Brazil and elsewhere in the world too are vulnerable the radiation emitting towers. The International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC), based upon findings from research conducted by an international think tank, came to the conclusion that radio frequency radiation, including the radiation spewing from cell towers, is a possible carcinogen – a radiation, substance or radionuclide that is an agent directly involved in causing cancer.

Apart from cancer, cell phone antennas can cause certain other diseases and medical conditions including genetic mutations, memory disruptions, hindered learning, ADD, insomnia, brain disorders, hormonal imbalances, infertility, dementia and heart complications. A jail officer said that there are number of cell phone antennas installed much closer to jails premises and only in Lahore two antennas are installed within just 30 meters from the jails while six antennas are installed within 100 meters perimeter. Punjab Inspector General Prisons Mian Farooq Nazir said that cellular companies had increased their signals strength at Sheikhupora jail where mobile phone services were also affected in adjacent premises of district courts. The issue was taken up with Punjab government and after that signal strength was made normal by the cellular companies.

He said that earlier jail management had installed imported phone jammers at Kotlakhpat jail which could not function any longer. Ultimately Punjab government purchased the same from NRTC Haripur. IG Prisons said that government has formed a committee to monitor the functioning of jammers which comprises representatives from Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), Frequency Allocation Department (FAD), (NRTC), Prisons department and Punjab Information Technical Board (PITB). A professor doctor in Radiology seeking anonymity said that there was insufficient research done on effect of electromagnetic fields on human body. He however, said though rays of cell phone towers were less harmful than that of X-rays and Gama Rays, their increased amount could harm the human body.

Published in The Nation newspaper on 08-Jan-2016

Source/Fonte:

http://nation.com.pk/newspaper-picks/08-Jan-2016/life-of-jail-inmates-at-risk

Notizie dal mondo • • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

THORNER: CELL PHONE DANGERS: INDUSTRY DENIES TRUTH – PART 2

4 december 2015 – “illinoisreview.typepad.com”, by Nancy Thorner

Cell-phones

The public has been intentionally misled by industry and utility propaganda to believe that smart meters are safe because cell phones are safe. The usual defensive comment is that a smart meter will emit less Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) than a cell phone call. So why should we worry?

This link conveys the findings of Dr. George Carlo, who oversaw the comprehensive research group Wireless Technology Research (WTR) commissioned by the cell phone industry in the mid-1990s. When Carlo’s research began to reveal how there were indeed serious health concerns with cell phones, the industry sought to bury the results. Carlo’s research has since been validated by a wealth of subsequent studies and has continuing relevance given the ubiquity of wireless devices.

“The main health concern with electromagnetic radiation emitted by wireless technologies is that EMF and RF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function.”

In an article entitled “Radiation from Wireless Technology Affects the Blood, the Heart, and the Autonomic Nervous System” (November 2013), Dr. Magda Havas addresses the health conditions that most individuals would find a moreimminent threat than the long-term carcinogenic effects discussed in Part 1.  According to Dr. Havas, symptoms that can appear as an early-warning signal of excessive RF radiation exposure are “fatigue, sleep disturbance, headaches, feeling of discomfort, difficulty concentrating, depression, memory loss, visual disruptions, irritability, hearing disruptions, skin problems, cardiovascular problems, dizziness, loss of appetite, movement difficulties, and nausea.” Dr. Havas has coined the phrase, “Rapid Aging Syndrome” to cover many of the health effects caused by radio frequency radiation exposure.

Is Anyone Sounding the Alarm?

In May 2015, 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, UN member states, and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk.  The International EMF Scientist Appeal calls upon the United Nations and the World Health Organization to address the emerging public health crisis related to cell phones, wireless devices, wireless utility [smart] meters and wireless infrastructure in neighborhoods and to substantially reduce human exposures to non-ionizing radiation.

Although it is not as well known to the public, Lloyds of London considers the risk too high to cover claims for illnesses related to RF exposure from cell phone use. The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion 32 states, “The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionizing radiation exposure through mobile phone usage. We will not make any payment on your behalf for any claim, or incur any costs and expenses, or reimburse you for any loss, damage, legal expenses, fees or costs sustained by you, or pay any medical expenses. This would include the microwave radiation and electromagnetic radiation emitted from Smart Meters.

An A. M. Best bulletin in 2013 is entitled, “Emerging Technologies Pose Significant Risks with Possible Long-Tail Losses.” RF (Radio Frequency) Radiation Risk is at the top of the list and mentions the “risks associated with long term use of cell phones”. “Insurance companies need to monitor the manner in which emerging technologies are deployed; the risks associated with their use; their residual or unintended impacts; and the manner in which the insurance policies may be called upon to cover losses.”

The Industry Has Ignored the Warnings over Decades

Dr. George Carlo, mentioned above, was head of the WTR which began in 1993 to research the possibility of brain tumors and any other health issues related to cell phone use. Six years later, frustrated over inactivity by the industry to inform and protect the public, Dr. Carlo wrote the following letter to the CEO of AT&T.  Below are letter excerpts:

At the annual convention of the CTIA (The Wireless Association), I met with the full board of that organization to brief them on some surprising findings from our work. My understanding is that all segments of the industry were represented. At that briefing, I specifically reported: The rate of death from brain cancer among [cell phone] users was higher than the rate of brain cancer death among those who used [non-wireless] phones;

  • The risk of acoustic neuroma, a benign tumor of the auditory nerve that is well in range of the radiation coming from a phone’s antenna, was fifty percent higher in people who reported using cell phones for six years or more, moreover, that relationship between the amount of cell phone use and this tumor appeared to follow a dose-response curve;
  • The risk of rare neuro epithelial tumors on the outside of the brain was more than doubled, a statistically significant risk increase, in cell phone users as compared to people who did not use cell phones;
  • There appeared to be some correlation between brain tumors occurring on the right side of the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head;
  • Laboratory studies looking at the ability of radiation from a phone’s antenna to cause functional genetic damage were definitively positive.

Today, I sit here extremely frustrated and concerned that appropriate steps have not been taken by the wireless industry to protect consumers. I am concerned that the wireless industry is dealing with these public health concerns through politics, creating illusions that more research over the next several years helps consumers today, and false claims that regulatory compliance means safety. Alarmingly, indications are that some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings and have repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including children.

The most important measure of consumer protection is missing: complete and honest factual information to allow informed judgment by consumers about assumption of risk. I am especially concerned about what appear to be actions by a segment of the industry to [enlist] the FCC, the FDA and WHO with them in following a non-effectual course.”    

Two years before Dr. Carlo wrote his letter (January 1997), “Microwave News” published “Motorola, Microwaves and DNA Breaks: ‘War-Gaming’ the Lai-Singh Experiments”. Doctors Lai and Singh were the research team that discovered how Radio Frequency microwaves could cause DNA breaks (a precursor to Cancer). An industry media strategy was immediately devised to “war-game” the science as “it could throw previous notions of RF safety into question”.

The Industry Charade Continues Even Now

In November 2015 the “Wall Street Journal” reported on a case that is pending in the courts over cell phone radiation and brain cancer. Representatives for Motorola and the other defendants referred questions to the CTIA (the wireless industry trade group), which said in a typical industry statement: “peer-reviewed scientific evidence has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose a public health risk for adults or children.”

However, in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, cellphone manufacturers and wireless carriers specifically acknowledge the risk posed by health-related lawsuits. “We may incur significant expenses in defending these lawsuits,” Verizon wrote in its 2015 annual filing. “In addition, we may be required to pay significant awards or settlements.”

It has come to Thorner’s attention that brain tumors developed in each of the 5 engineers who tested cell phones.   At least 4 of the 5 have since died. “Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette” was written by Robert C. Kane, Ph.D., one of the engineers who lost his life to a brain tumor.

Dr. Kane’s book, published in 2001, “is a historical accounting of the research that has been available for forty years and has been neglected or buried by an industry that will place its absolute need to sell products above the health and well-being of its own customers. What you will find here is a litany of hundreds of research studies from the 1950s through the mid-1990s… alarming in their findings of radiation exposure, DNA damage, chromosome damage, tissue damage, radiation absorption, cataract formation, tumor formation, memory loss, motor skills degradation, and more.”

As one of the developers of cellular phones, R.C. Kane knows that “RF and microwave energy can be readily absorbed within the human body and that excessive energy absorption leads to tissue damage and death.” Plus “the frequency range most efficient at depositing Radio Frequency Radiation energy deep into muscle and brain tissue was assigned to cellular phones”(the same frequency emitted by smart meters).

Following are two quotes from Dr. Kane’s book, “Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette”:

“In 1994, work by various researchers found “that a substantial amount of the Radio Frequency Radiation is deposited into the user’s brain and converted to heat. These researchers have reported that from 50 percent to more than 90 percent of the radio frequency energy is absorbed by the user.”

“That energy absorption leads to a dangerous temperature increase. Most of the temperature rise associated with the energy absorption takes place in the first 60 to 90 seconds of exposure.” The wireless industry has suggested that users ‘concerned about the effects of radiation should make short calls to reduce the hazards of operation’. From what the research data indicates, a short call would need to be much less than one minute. In other words, based on these research findings and the industry’s warnings cell phones should not be used.”

According to Dr. Kane:  “it is known that RF energy absorption causes heating in tissue that has three primary effects: (1) tissue destruction and death; (2) inhibition of normal cell growth through depression of enzyme activity; and (3) increase in membrane permeability. Since the human brain has little, if any, sensory capability, damage or trauma occurring internally will not be felt until the effects, such as heating, are so severe that they work their way outward. So, by the time a person, exposed to radio frequency radiation, feels pain at the skin that skin is irreversibly damaged, as is the deeper tissue beneath the skin.”

The Industry Creates its Own “Belief System”

In addressing the industry agenda, Dr. Kane had this to say:

“Business as usual amounts to utilizing their substantial resources to employ the various media to broadcast the industry ‘belief system’ that renounces or buries unfavorable scientific findings. A solid body of evidence confirms that: (1) cell phones expose operators to dangerous and highly damaging levels of radio frequency energy absorption; (2) the manufacturers, service providers, government, and scientists have been aware of the hazards; and (3) the manufacturers, service providers, and government have not warned the public.”

This appropriate warning came from Dr. Carlo, spotlighted earlier as head of the WTR:

“When you put the science together, we come to the irrefutable conclusion that there is a major health crisis coming, probably already underway. Not just cancer, but also learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, autism, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and psychological and behavioral problems—all mediated by the same mechanism (RFR).”

“That is why we are so worried. Time is running out.”

Source/Fonte:

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2015/12/thorner-cell-phone-dangers-industry-denies-truth-part-2.html

Notizie dal mondo • • • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

THORNER: CELL PHONE DANGERS: PUBLIC DECEPTION TRUMPS PUBLIC HEALTH (PART 1)

2 december 2015 – “illinoisreview.typepad.com”, by Nancy Thorner

 

phone

 

When trying to promote the safety of a product, industry will often compare the safety of their new product to other products already considered safe. Such is the case with ‘smart meters’, often compared to cell phones, despite much evidence that smart meters pose a risk to health, invade one’s privacy, and are potential fire hazards. Might cell phones, those ubiquitous, beloved objects of necessity in today’s society be anything other than safe? 

“Cell phones cause cancer” declared attorney Jimmy Gonzalez, in front of the Pembroke Pines, Florida City Council.  “It should become crystal clear that cell phones do cause cancer and that the American people are not being properly warned about cell phones.”  

What followed in Pembroke Pines was a cell phone radiation resolution adopted in November 2012 that expressed the city’s “urgent concerns arising from recent medical science reports which advise of the possible and adverse health effects delivered upon those who use cell phones, including, but not limited to, cancer, as a result of the [non-ionizing] radiation emitted by cell phones”.

Recently, the city council in Berkeley, California voted unanimously 9-0 on a Cell Phone Radiation “Right-To-Know Ordinance” that requires wireless retailers to warn customers of possible radiation exposure when purchasing cell phones.  Cell phones sold in Berkeley will now come with a warning notice explaining the dangers of high radio frequency (RF) exposure.

Berkeley is the first city in the nation to have passed a cell phone radiation ordinance since San Francisco was forced to disband a similar ordinance after a two-year court battle with the CTIA (The Wireless Association). San Francisco made the tough decision after it was apparent that an ongoing court case with the CTIA could cost the city $500,000.

Research Suppressed on Health Effects

The CTIA when arguing against the “Right-To-Know Ordinance”, made the claim that consumers would be scared if a warning notice of the dangers of high RF exposure were printed on the package or readily visible at the time of purchase. This is the same information that is printed in the product manual.

It is worth mentioning that the current FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, was once the former CEO of the CTIA and suppressed research on the health effects of cell phone radiation. In a document authored by Richard Conrad, Ph.D., Conrad states:

“Telecom lobbyists manipulate public opinion by making false proclamations through the press.  Their chief lobbyist, ‘fixer’ and generator of spin was Tom Wheeler, who is now the Chairman of the FCC – a classic example of the fox guarding the henhouse – hence the public remains without protection from non-thermal effects.  Business as usual in Washington, but in this case causing unnecessary death, disability and suffering, lack of optimum productivity, and increased health care costs.”

Sadly, Florida attorney Jimmy Gonzalez, mentioned above in his declaration that “cell phones cause cancer”, succumbed to three DIFFERENT cell phone induced cancers. ALL were caused by cell phone radiation exposure.  Each cancer developed exactly where his cell phone was held close to his body.  It was a life destroyed by a tradition of wireless profits superseding the lives of people.

The recent tragic death of “Beau” Biden, the son of Vice President Biden and former attorney general of Delaware, has once again focused attention on what seems to have been the cause of Beau’s death.  Scroll down in this article, which talks about Beau Biden’s brain cancer, where you will find a list of 23 deaths under the heading Political Brain Tumor Stats.  Little more needs to be said. May all rest in peace and may the truth be revealed. 

“Mobilize” is a movie that gives us another look at the potential dangers of cell phones. Here is an excellent rule of thumb to consider: if a study is mentioned in the media or elsewhere that does not find evidence of cell phone radiation creating health effects, check it out to ascertain if the study was industry-funded and is being used as damage control to offset independent studies that do find health effects.

Children and Cell Phone Use

What about the effects of cell phone use on children since it is now the in thing for a child to have his/her own cellphone? NBC News reported how children were being exposed to an exponentially greater amount of radio frequency than any adult will ever be in a lifetime. Dr. Devra Davis, Ph.D., writes:

“Compared with adults, research on children shows that microwave radiation is absorbed twice as much into their brain, up to triple in their brain’s hippocampus and hypothalamus and up to ten times as much into the bone marrow of the skull.  Frightening is that half of the world’s four billion cell phone users are under twenty.” 

Dr. Davis has written an eye-opening book titled “Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family.” Her book reveals the following:

Cell phone radiation is a national emergency. Emerging evidence is raising significant questions about health risks from cell phone and wireless radiation. Given the size of the potential impact, there is inadequate awareness, research, and regulation. Health experts have long been frozen out of policy-making decisions about cell phones; federal regulatory standards are set by the cell phone industry itself. Cell phone manufacturers have borrowed the playbook of the tobacco industry.

“Consumer Reports” weighs in

Even “Consumer Reports” in the September 2015 edition weighed in on the need to take precautions with cell phone use and issued “A Call for Clarity”, in which clear answers were deemed necessary as to the following substantial issues raised regarding cell phone usage:  

  • 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.

At a time when scientists and the bio-medical community are calling for stronger EMF/RF guidelines, and fifteen countries have issued precautionary health warnings about cell phone radiation and recommendations on how to reduce risks, the wireless industry in the U.S. has opposed precautionary warnings.

Another resource conveying a similar message on institutional neglect is a book by Investigative Journalist, Norm Alster, “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by IndustriesPresumablyRegulates”, in which Alster explores how the serious health risks of wireless technology are being ignored by regulators and standard setting bodies.

How did we get to this point without a major health alert?

Ann Louise Gittleman, a “New York Times” best-selling author, wrote a book on cell phone concerns titled, “Zapped, Why Your Cell Phone Shouldn’t Be Your Alarm Clock and 1,268 Ways to Outsmart the Hazards of Electronic Pollution”. Before “Zapped” was published, Ms. Gittleman in an article titled, “Accidental Conspiracy”, explained how we got to this point without a health warning.  She wrote:

When it comes to public health, we depend upon our federal and local governments and the media to keep us safe. But what happens when these institutions miss the truth, when they fail to warn us? An unwilling Government, a silent media, an aggressive trillion dollar wireless industry: this is a perfect formula for disaster. Now we will experience the harsh reality and the cruel irony of why millions are suffering ill health at the hands of friendly fire from the very institutions we depend upon to protect us.

This question is often asked in many different situations when information vital to judging a situation is hard to come by:  What did they know and when did they know it?  Ms. Gittlemen likewise tackles that question in, “Accidental Conspiracy” by providing the following revelation:

In 1990 forty scientists at the EPA raised the alarm. They had serious concerns about the carcinogenic effects of electromagnetic fields and low-level Radio Frequency (RF) microwave radiation. They released a draft resolution proposing the classification of RF-EMF fields as a probable human carcinogen. The 393 page report titled, ‘An Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)’ raised tremendous controversy with the Federal government and industry groups. The EPA resolution was ultimately silenced by officials in the White House, apparently on the basis that such a classification of RF/EMF as a carcinogen would scare the American public.

Another 21 years would pass, with rampant proliferation of wireless devices, until in May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) categorized “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless cell phone use”. 

Lennart Hardell  (who was part of the World Health Organization committee) and Michael Carlberg later co-published an article (November 2013), entitled,“Using the Hill Viewpoints from 1965 for Evaluating Strengths of Evidence of the Risk for Brain Tumors Associated with Use of Mobile Phones.”   Based on Hill’s viewpoints and his discussion on how these issues should be used, the conclusion of Hardell’s and Carlberg’s review is that “glioma and acoustic neuroma are caused by RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones.” 

Should IARC puts RF-EMF emissions in Group 1?

According to the “Preamble” of the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer): “The classification of RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones should be Group 1, i.e., ‘the agent is carcinogenic to humans’, and urgent revision of current guidelines for exposure is needed.”

With mounting evidence that RF radiation is definitely carcinogenic and the fact that exposure to our population is increasing at an exponential rate, the potential consequences are catastrophic. 

Part 2 will cover mounting evidence that is intended to wake up public perception over its oft-stated rhetoric that cell phone use is perfectly safe.  The main concern being highlighted: RF and EMF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function. 

Also documented are claims pointing to how some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings, having repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including children.

Source/Fonte:

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2015/12/thorner-cell-phone-dangers-public-deception-trumps-public-health-part-1.html#more

Notizie dall'Italia • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

Queste lampadine causano mal di testa, ansia e anche il cancro. Ecco cosa fare

[Qualcosa che molti probabilmente ancora ignorano…]

21 dicembre 2015- “www.dionidream.com”, di Dioni aka Riccardo Lautizi

lampadine risparmio energetico

Ci hanno detto che erano più ecologiche e che ci avrebbero fatto risparmiare sulla bolletta, ma hanno danneggiato la nostra salute. Le nuove lampadine a risparmio energetico possono essere davvero pericolose. Diversi studi hanno messo in guardia sul loro uso quotidiano e il pericolo maggiore è se si rompono tanto che la stessa Environmental Protection Agency ha creato un protocollo di emergenza da seguire in caso di rottura della lampadina proprio a causa del gas velenoso rilasciato. Vediamo cosa fare e perché sono così dannose.

Le informazioni riportate riguardano lelampadine fluorescenti compatte (CFL) e non le lampadine a LED.

E’ stata riscontrata una correlazione tra le lampadine a risparmio energetico e i seguenti disturbi:

  • Vertigini
  • Cefalea a grappolo
  • Emicrania
  • Crisi epilettiche
  • Affaticamento
  • Difficoltà nella concentrazione
  • Ansia
  • Dermatite
  • Eczema
  • Autismo
  • Epilessia
  • Cancro

Quindi queste lampadine in casa fanno male, ma ancora di più se si rompono! Secondo uno studio, condotto dai ricercatori del Fraunhofer Wilhelm Klauditz Institute per l’Autorità Federale Ambientale in Germania: se rotte, queste lampadine rilasciano 20 volte la concentrazione massima accettabile di mercurio nell’aria.

Il mercurio, come ho trattato in molti miei articoli, è il metallo pesante più pericoloso per l’uomo e tossico a qualunque concentrazione. Diversi studi scientifici mostrano come essodanneggia irrimediabilmente il cervelloe il sistema nervoso causando una miriadi di malattie gravi, ed inoltre depositandosi negli organi e ghiandole danneggia tutto il sistema ormonale e linfatico.

Perché le lampadine a risparmio energetico sono pericolose per la nostra salute?

  •  Le lampadine a risparmio energetico contengono da 3 a 5 mg di mercurio.  Il mercurio è una potente neurotossina particolarmente pericolosa per i bambini e le donne in gravidanza. Questa sostanza è particolarmente tossica per il cervello, il sistema nervoso, il fegato e i reni. Può anche danneggiare il sistema cardiovascolare, immunitario e riproduttivo. Intossicazioni di mercurio possono causare perdita di memoria, cancro e Alzheimer.
  • Le lampadine a risparmio energetico possono causare il cancro. Un nuovo studio effettuato da Peter Braun presso il Germany’s Alab Laboratory ha evidenziato che questo tipo di lampadine contiene degli agenti cancerogeno-tossici in grado di causare il cancro:
    • Naftalene, un composto cristallino bianco volatile, prodotto dalla distillazione di catrame di carbone, utilizzato in naftalina e come materia prima per la produzione chimica.
    • Stirene, un idrocarburo insaturo liquido, ottenuto come sottoprodotto del petrolio.
    • Fenolo, un leggermente acido cristallino bianco tossico solido, ottenuto da catrame di carbone e utilizzato nella produzione chimica.
  • Le lampadine a risparmio energetico emettono raggi UV superiori alla norma. La Health Protection Agency (HPA) ha condotto uno studio e osservato che aumentano il rischio di cancro alla pelle soprattutto per chi lavora ore e ore vicino alle fonti di luce. È ufficialmente riconosciuta la pericolosità dei raggi UV per la nostra pelle e per gli occhi. Le radiazioni di queste attaccano direttamente il nostro sistema immunitario e impedisce la formazione adeguata di vitamina D.
  • Le lampadine a risparmio energetico generano potenti campi elettromagnetici a poca distanza dalla sorgente, fino ad un metro di distanza. Il centro indipendente di ricerche francese (CRIIREM) sconsiglia pertanto di utilizzare lampadine a basso consumo energetico a brevi distanze, come ad esempio per illuminare i comodini delle camere da letto o le scrivanie.
  • Il campo elettromagnetico generato da queste lampadine va in risonanza nei cavi elettrici generando “elettricità sporca” in tutta l’abitazione. Uno studio pubblicato nel giugno del 2008 dall’American Journal of Industrial Medicinesegnalava che questa elettricità sporca aumenta di 5 volte il rischio di contrarre il cancro. Rimuovi l’elettricità sporca con il Filtro Vivar Gs.
  • Danneggiano la ghiandola pineale. Lo studio pubblicato su Chronobiology International, a cura del professor Abraham Haim, afferma che lo spettro luminoso di queste lampadine, essendo simile alla luce del giorno, interrompe la produzione di melatonina da parte dell’organismo. Cosa che invece non facevano le vecchie lampade a incandescenza. Gli effetti sono enormi dall’insonniaall’invecchiamento precoce, dalla depressione ad un aumento esponenziale del rischio di cancro, essendo la melatonina un potente antiossidante anticancro.

COSA FARE

  • Per prima cosa evita di avere queste lampadine in casa cercando le vecchielampadine ad incandescenza oppure quelle nuove a LED (che però alla lunga stancano gli occhi e possono danneggiare la retina).  Sebbene siano state messe fuori produzione si possono ancora acquistare le vecchie lampadine online o nei negozi che hanno delle rimanenze di magazzino.
  • Se avete a casa le lampadine a risparmio energetico e si rompono devi stare molto attento nella pulizia e seguire questa procedura messa a punto dall’Environmental Protection Agency.

PULIZIA DI UNA LAMPADINA ROTTA – PROTOCOLLO EPA

  • Far evacuare la stanza se ci sono persone e animali domestici.
  • Arieggiare la stanza per 5-10 minuti aprendo la finestra o la porta a contatto con l’ambiente all’aperto.
  • Spegnere l’impianto di riscaldamento o di condizionamento dell’aria.
  • Non utilizzare l’aspirapolvere. L’aspirazione non è raccomandata perché potrebbe diffondere le particelle di mercurio presenti nella polvere.
  • Indossa i guanti, una mascherina e degli occhiali protettivi.
  • Raccogli i pezzi più grandi con le mani e i frammenti più piccoli con l’aiuto del nastro adesivo.
  • Riponi i frammenti della lampadina in contenitori ermetici, come vasi di vetro o sacchetti di plastica sigillabili.
  • Pulisci le superfici con un panno umido. Poi getta tutto ciò che avete utilizzato per la pulizia, inclusi il panno e i guanti.
  • Se la rottura avviene su un tappetino, eliminalo e rimuovi almeno la parte contaminata.
  • Chiamate il centro locale per la raccolta differenziata se hai dei dubbi sul da farsi. Porta i rifiuti presso la Piattaforma Ecologica del tuo Comune, in modo che siano smaltiti in modo corretto.
  • Come misura preventiva, sarebbe bene non utilizzare le lampadine al mercurio in aree a rischio di rottura e incidenti.
  • Lavati subito le mani quando hai terminato.

Una vecchia lampada ad incandescenza ci da sicuramente una luce più calda e gradevole delle nuove fredde luci a risparmio energetico. Potete acquistare su internet o in alcuni negozi che hanno rimanenze, ancora le lampadine ad incandescenza. Ecco un link dove potete comprarle online.

Fonte:

http://www.dionidream.com/queste-lampadine-causano-mal-di-testa-ansia-e-anche-il-cancro-ecco-cosa-fare/

Notizie dal mondo • • • • • • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

Parents of Colliers Wood Willows Pre-School nursery children fear radiation sickness, burns and cancer from proposed phone mast

9 December 2015 – “www.wimbledonguardian.co.uk”, by Craig Richard

Dozens of parents and neighbours of a recreation ground have signed a petition opposing a 15metre phone mast next to a nursery over health fears.

Wimbledon Guardian:

Children enjoying the outdoors play area at Willows Pre-School in Colliers Wood

Plans for the mast to be built in the recreation ground next to Willows Pre-School in Colliers Wood is in pre-planning stages.

More than 80 concerned parents of children aged between two and five have signed a petition against what they say is the potential threat of non-ionising radiation from the mast.

But their local councillor believes all available research suggests there is no long-term risk from the same kind of radiation that is emitted by the sun, mobile phones and computers.

Non-ionising radiation energises electrons, but cannot removed them from an atom or molecule.

It is commonly found in microwaves, infrared and radio waves.

Exposure can cause burns, radiation sickness, cancer, and genetic damage.

Wimbledon Guardian:

Children from the Willows Pre-School in Colliers Wood enjoy a day out

Dr Kevin Rigley, owner and manager of Willows Pre-School at Colliers Wood recreation ground, objects to the erection of a mobile phone mast near the nursery on potential health risks.

He said: “It is a relatively new technology and all of the studies have been a short time frame. We don’t know what the long-term implications are.

“The fact that they do not know means they should err on the side of caution.”

Colliers Wood councillor Nick Draper played down parents’ fears and said the average person willingly exposes themselves to more concentrated forms of non-ionising radiation every day.

Coun Draper said: “The radiation that comes from a phone mast is a much, much less concentrated version of the radiation that comes out of phones themselves and out of computer screens.

“I was contacted by a parent using a mobile phone asking me to sign.

“If everyone signing the petition does so on the basis that they do not use any mobile phone or computer technology, I would be happy to sign.”

Coun Andrew Judge said “We’re aware residents in Colliers Wood have complained about not being able to get a mobile phone signal and this proposal from O2 and Vodafone would help address that.

“Due to Government rules, phone masts that are 15m or below do not need planning permission.

“However we would need to be assured that there will be no visual intrusion on the park.”

Wimbledon Guardian:

The proposed site of the telecommunications mast as laid out in letters posted to residents by Pegasus Group

Bristol developers Pegasus Group is consulting residents over the “integrated telecommunications” mast, and posted letters explaining the initial pre-planning application.

It read: “The proposal will be fully compliant with standards set down by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection – an independent scientific organisation whose aim is to provide guidance and advice on the health implications of telecommunications development.”

The petition can be signed at change.org

Source/Fonte:

Parents_of_nursery_children_fear_radiation_sickness__burns_and_cancer_from_proposed_phone_mast

Notizie dall'Italia • • • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

Elettrosmog, tribunale francese sancisce l’invalidità civile

[Citiamo:
«E’ fisiologico che interessi economici, l’inerzia del mondo accademico e i tanti passaggi burocratici ostacolino il fluire delle conoscenze scientifiche, anche quando ne va della salute pubblica. I nostri risultati su benzene, formaldeide e stirene, ad esempio sono stati recepiti dopo oltre 20 anni dalla pubblicazione dei dati. Tutti ostacoli che sono sempre esistiti, che vanno combattuti giornalmente, ma che non ci hanno mai fermato».
Come quando, nel 2011, la dottoressa, in qualità di esperta di Mtbe, un additivo cancerogeno della benzina verde, mise a tacere gli avvocati della Exxon Mobil Corporation, in seguito condannata a risarcire 160 famiglie di Jacksonville (Maryland, USA) con la cifra di 1,5 miliardi di dollari per aver inquinato dolosamente le falde acquifere di un quartiere residenziale attraverso una falla nella cisterna di un distributore di benzina.]

23 novembre, 2015 – “www.pressenza.com”, di Massimo Nardi

E-smog

Storica sentenza a Tolosa: il giudice ha riconosciuto una pensione di invalidità per “ipersensibilità elettromagnetica” ad una donna di 39 anni, che percepirà, per i prossimi tre anni, 800 euro al mese. Degli effetti dei campi elettromagnetici sull’uomo ne abbiamo parlato con la Dottoressa Fiorella Belpoggi, Direttore del Centro di Ricerca sul Cancro “Cesare Maltoni” dell’Istituto Ramazzini di Bologna.

Il Tribunale di Tolosa ha riconosciuto una pensione di invalidità per “ipersensibilità elettromagnetica” ad una donna di 39 anni. E’ il primo caso giuridico in materia e rappresenterà indubbiamente un precedente da qui in avanti. Marine Richard, questo il nome della donna, si è vista riconoscere dal giudice un deficit funzionale dell’85% e un indennizzo di 800 euro al mese per tre anni, eventualmente rinnovabile. Lei, ex documentarista e drammaturga, ha dovuto abbandonare la società per rifugiarsi in una casa sui Pirenei, vivendo così isolata, lontano dal wi-fi e da tutti i campi elettromagnetici, causa primaria dei suoi continui mal di testa, formicolii, insonnia.
La nuova casa rappresenta una vera e propria “zona bianca”, un luogo vergine o quasi, esposto a limitati livelli elettromagnetici. Ricordiamo che numerose pubblicazioni scientifiche recenti hanno dimostrato che i campi elettromagnetici non ionizzanti (EMF) influiscono sugli organismi viventi a livelli ben inferiori a molte linee guida sia nazionali che internazionali. Gli EMF includono le apparecchiature che emettono radiazione a radiofrequenza (RFR), quali i cellulari, i telefoni cordless e le loro stazioni base, il wi-fi, le antenne di trasmissione, gli smart-meter e i monitor per neonati, oltre alle apparecchiature elettriche e alle infrastrutture utilizzate nel trasporto e consegna di elettricità che generano un campo elettromagnetico a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF EMF).
Il caso Richard ci riporta all’Appello di 190 scienziati all’ONU, in cui si chiedeva, tra le altre cose, la creazione di zone bianche nella nostra società. Tra i firmatari c’è anche la Dottoressa Fiorella Belpoggi, Direttore Centro di Ricerca sul Cancro Cesare Maltoni dell’Istituto Ramazzini di Bologna, con cui abbiamo approfondito l’argomento.

Dottoressa Belpoggi, quali sono gli effetti dell’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici non ionizzanti (EMF) sull’uomo?
«Gli effetti sono tanti e sono stati pubblicati oltre 21.000 articoli sull’argomento. Noi al Centro di Ricerca sul Cancro Cesare Maltoni dell’Istituto Ramazzini ci siamo occupati degli effetti cancerogeni dei campi elettromagnetici a diverse frequenze, da soli o in associazione con altri cancerogeni quali radiazioni ionizzanti e formaldeide. L’Agenzia Internazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro (IARC) ha classificato I campi magnetici a bassa frequenza e a radiofrequenza come possibile cancerogeno umano (Gruppo 2B), di cui fanno parte 288 agenti».

E sugli animali? In particolare gli esperimenti fatti sui ratti dimostrano risultati inquietanti.
«Sono stati fatti molti studi, ma molti sono risultati limitati nel design sperimentale e nella loro predittività per l’uomo. L’Istituto Ramazzini ha deciso di effettuare un mega-esperimento sui campi elettromagnetici che fosse dirimente, sia per i cittadini che per le agenzie regolatorie, circa la cancerogenicità dei campi magnetici a bassa frequenza (50 Hz) e delle radiofrequenze (1,8 GHz), da sole o in associazione ad altri cancerogeni chimici o fisici. I primi dati che abbiamo pubblicato mostrano un aumento statisticamente significativo di tumori mammari dovuto all’associazione tra campi elettromagnetici e radiazioni a bassissime dosi (10 rad).

Nonostante la pubblicazione di molti dossier che dimostrano effetti negativi, dati alla mano, la comunità scientifica è ancora molto divisa. Perché secondo lei? Dobbiamo pensare che molti scienziati sono sul libro paga di governi e industrie?
«E’ fisiologico che interessi economici, l’inerzia del mondo accademico e i tanti passaggi burocratici ostacolino il fluire delle conoscenze scientifiche, anche quando ne va della salute pubblica. I nostri risultati su benzene, formaldeide e stirene, ad esempio sono stati recepiti dopo oltre 20 anni dalla pubblicazione dei dati. Tutti ostacoli che sono sempre esistiti, che vanno combattuti giornalmente, ma che non ci hanno mai fermato».
Come quando, nel 2011, la dottoressa, in qualità di esperta di Mtbe, un additivo cancerogeno della benzina verde, mise a tacere gli avvocati della Exxon Mobil Corporation, in seguito condannata a risarcire 160 famiglie di Jacksonville (Maryland, USA) con la cifra di 1,5 miliardi di dollari per aver inquinato dolosamente le falde acquifere di un quartiere residenziale attraverso una falla nella cisterna di un distributore di benzina.

In passato abbiamo parlato del libro di Martin Blank, “Overpowered: What science tells us about the dangers of cell phones and other wifi-age devices”, in cui l’autore analizza ed espone gli studi che correlano i cellulari e le alterazioni biologiche negli esseri viventi. E’ una tesi plausibile?
«Martin Blank, come Lennart Hardell, David Gee e tanti altri membri del Collegium Ramazzini (un‘accademia indipendente con 180 membri da tutti il mondo) sono stati tra i primi ad evidenziare i rischi correlati ai campi magnetici. A partire dal Prof. Cesare Maltoni, che già 20 anni fa ne cominciò a denunciare i rischi».

Nell’appello all’Onu, in cui lei è anche firmataria, 190 scienziati chiedono l’abbassamento dei limiti quantitativi all’esposizione. In Italia, per esempio, la regolamentazione è stabilita dal Decreto Ministeriale n.381 del 10 settembre 1998, e dalla Legge quadro sulla protezione dalle esposizioni a campi elettrici, magnetici ed elettromagnetici”, datata 22 febbraio 2001. Ma, nella maggior parte dei casi, sono leggi disattese e mancano i controlli. Perchè? Politica assente?
«La lassità dei controlli nel nostro Paese non è certo un problema ascrivibile al solo ambito ambientale, ma parlando solo dei cattivi esempi si finisce per dimenticare e non valorizzare adeguatamente chi il proprio lavoro lo fa e bene. E nel nostro paese sono tanti».

Un punto su cui gli scienziati fanno leva è l’impegno da parte dei cittadini, sia come controllori sia come soggetti comportamentali. Cosa ne pensa? E’ l’unico modo che hanno per difendersi?
«La solidarietà tra uomini e donne consapevoli, siano essi cittadini, scienziati o politici, è la miglior difesa».

Lista agenti patogeni IARC

Risultato studio sui ratti

Fonte:

http://www.pressenza.com/it/2015/11/elettrosmog-tribunale-francese-sancisce-linvalidita-civile/

Informazioni Notizie dal mondo Ricerca scientifica • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

International EMF Scientist Appeal: Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure / Appello Internazionale: Gli scienziati chiedono protezione dall’esposizione ai Campi Elettromagnetici non ionizzanti

[Appello internazionale di oltre 200 scienziati di 40 nazioni al Segretario Generale dell’ONU Ban Ki-moon, per chiedere protezione dalla esposizione ai Campi Elettromagnetici, soprattutto quelli in Alta Frequenza generati dalle Radiofrequenze/Microonde emesse dai dispositivi Wireless (vd. telefoni cellulari e cordless, Stazioni Radio Base della telefonia mobile, Wi-Fi, antenne radio-televisive, smart meter, baby monitor, ecc.), ma anche quelli in Frequenza Estremamente Bassa generati dalle apparecchiature elettriche e dagli apparati utilizzati per il trasporto della corrente elettrica (vd. tralicci dell’alta tensione).

La versione in Italiano segue quella in lingua originale.]

International EMF Scientist Appeal

To:    His Excellency Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations; Honorable Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization; Honorable Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the U.N. Environmental Programme; U.N. Member Nations

International Appeal

Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure

We are scientists engaged in the study of biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF). Based upon peer-reviewed, published research, we have serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices. These include–but are not limited to–radiofrequency radiation (RFR) emitting devices, such as cellular and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters, and baby monitors as well as electric devices and infra-structures used in the delivery of electricity that generate extremely-low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF).

Scientific basis for our common concerns

Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.

These findings justify our appeal to the United Nations (UN) and, all member States in the world, to encourage the World Health Organization (WHO) to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks, particularly risk to children and fetal development. By not taking action, the WHO is failing to fulfill its role as the preeminent international public health agency.

Inadequate non-ionizing EMF international guidelines

The various agencies setting safety standards have failed to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF.

The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) established in 1998 the “Guidelines For Limiting Exposure To Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)”[1]. These guidelines are accepted by the WHO and numerous countries around the world. The WHO is calling for all nations to adopt the ICNIRP guidelines to encourage international harmonization of standards. In 2009, the ICNIRP released a statement saying that it was reaffirming its 1998 guidelines, as in their opinion, the scientific literature published since that time “has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields[2]. ICNIRP continues to the present day to make these assertions, in spite of growing scientific evidence to the contrary. It is our opinion that, because the ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure and low-intensity effects, they are insufficient to protect public health.

The WHO adopted the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classification of extremely low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF) in 2002[3] and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in 2011[4]. This classification states that EMF is a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B). Despite both IARC findings, the WHO continues to maintain that there is insufficient evidence to justify lowering these quantitative exposure limits.

Since there is controversy about a rationale for setting standards to avoid adverse health effects, we recommend that the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) convene and fund an independent multidisciplinary committee to explore the pros and cons of alternatives to current practices that could substantially lower human exposures to RF and ELF fields. The deliberations of this group should be conducted in a transparent and impartial way. Although it is essential that industry be involved and cooperate in this process, industry should not be allowed to bias its processes or conclusions. This group should provide their analysis to the UN and the WHO to guide precautionary action.

Collectively we also request that:

  1. children and pregnant women be protected;
  2. guidelines and regulatory standards be strengthened;
  3. manufacturers be encouraged to develop safer technology;
  4. utilities responsible for the generation, transmission, distribution, and monitoring of electricity maintain adequate power quality and ensure proper electrical wiring to minimize harmful ground current;
  5. the public be fully informed about the potential health risks from electromagnetic energy and taught harm reduction strategies;
  6. medical professionals be educated about the biological effects of electromagnetic energy and be provided training on treatment of patients with electromagnetic sensitivity;
  7. governments fund training and research on electromagnetic fields and health that is independent of industry and mandate industry cooperation with researchers;
  8. media disclose experts’ financial relationships with industry when citing their opinions regarding health and safety aspects of EMF-emitting technologies; and
  9. white-zones (radiation-free areas) be established.

1) http://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPemfgdl.pdf
2) http://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPStatementEMF.pdf
3) http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol80/
4) http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/


Release date: May 11, 2015
This version’s date: October 15, 2015.

All inquiries, including those from qualified scientists who request that their name be added to the Appeal, may be made by contacting Elizabeth Kelley, M.A., Director, EMFscientist.org, at info@EMFscientist.org.

Note: the signatories to this appeal have signed as individuals, giving their professional affiliations, but this does not necessarily mean that this represents the views of their employers or the professional organizations they are affiliated with.

Signatories

Armenia

Prof. Sinerik Ayrapetyan, Ph.D., UNESCO Chair – Life Sciences International Postgraduate Educational Center, Armenia

Australia

Dr. Priyanka Bandara, Ph.D., Independent Environmental Health Educator/Researcher, Australia; Advisor, Environmental Health Trust and Doctors for Safer Schools

Dr. Bruce Hocking, MD, MBBS, FAFOEM (RACP), FRACGP, FARPS, specialist in occupational medicine; Victoria, Australia

Dr. Gautam (Vini) Khurana, Ph.D., F.R.A.C.S., Director, C.N.S. Neurosurgery, Australia

Dr. Don Maisch, Ph.D., Australia

Dr. Elena Pirogova, Ph.D., Biomed Eng., B. Eng (Hon) Chem. Eng., Engineering & Health College; RMIT University, Australia

Dr.Mary Redmayne, Ph.D., Department of Epidemiology & Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Australia

Dr. Charles Teo, BM, BS, MBBS, Member of the Order of Australia,Director, Centre for Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery at Prince of Wales Hospital, NSW, Australia

Austria

Dr. Michael Kundi, MD, University of Vienna, Austria

Dr. Gerd Oberfeld, MD, Public Health Department, Salzburg Government, Austria

Dr. Bernhard Pollner, MD, Pollner Research, Austria

Prof. Dr. Hugo W. Rüdiger, MD, Austria

Bahrain

Dr. Amer Kamal, MD, Physiology Department, College of Medicine, Arabian Gulf University, Bahrain

Belgium

Prof. Marie-Claire Cammaerts, Ph.D., Free University of Brussels, Faculty of Science, Brussels, Belgium

Brazil

Vânia Araújo Condessa, MSc., Electrical Engineer, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Prof. Dr. João Eduardo de Araujo, MD, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil

Dr.Francisco de Assis Ferreira Tejo, D. Sc., Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande, State of Paraíba, Brazil

Prof. Alvaro deSalles, Ph.D., Federal University of Rio Grande Del Sol, Brazil

Prof. Adilza Dode, Ph.D., MSc. Engineering Sciences, Minas Methodist University, Brazil

Dr.Daiana Condessa Dode, MD, Federal University of Medicine, Brazil

Michael Condessa Dode, Systems Analyst, MRE Engenharia Ltda, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Prof. Orlando Furtado Vieira Filho, PhD, Cellular&Molecular Biology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Canada

Dr. Magda Havas, Ph.D., Environmental and Resource Studies, Centre for Health Studies, Trent University, Canada

Dr. Paul Héroux, Ph.D., Director, Occupational Health Program, McGill University; InvitroPlus Labs, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Canada

Dr. Tom Hutchinson, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Environmental and Resource Studies, Trent University, Canada

Prof. Ying Li, Ph.D., InVitroPlus Labs, Dept. of Surgery, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Canada

James McKay M.Sc, Ecologist, City of London; Planning Services, Environmental and Parks Planning, London, Canada

Dr. Anthony B. Miller, MD, FRCP, Professor Emeritus, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada

Prof. Klaus-Peter Ossenkopp, Ph.D., Department of Psychology (Neuroscience), University of Western Ontario, Canada

Dr. Malcolm Paterson, Ph.D. Molecular Oncologist (ret.), British Columbia, Canada

Prof. Michael A. Persinger, Ph.D., Behavioural Neuroscience and Biomolecular Sciences, Laurentian University, Canada

China

Prof. Huai Chiang, Bioelectromagnetics Key Laboratory, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, China

Prof. Yuqing Duan, Ph.D., Food & Bioengineering, Jiangsu University, China

Dr.Kaijun Liu, Ph.D., Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China

Prof. Xiaodong Liu, Director, Key Lab of Radiation Biology, Ministry of Health of China; Associate Dean, School of Public Health, Jilin University, China

Prof. Wenjun Sun, Ph.D., Bioelectromagnetics Key Lab, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, China

Prof. Minglian Wang, Ph.D., College of Life Science & Bioengineering, Beijing University of Technology, China

Prof. Qun Wang, Ph.D., College of Materials Science & Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, China

Prof. Haihiu Zhang, Ph.D., School of Food & BioEngineering, Jiangsu University, China

Prof. Jianbao Zhang, Associate Dean, Life Science and Technology School, Xi’an Jiaotong University, China

Prof. Hui-yan Zhao, Director of STSCRW, College of Plant Protection, Northwest A & F University, Yangling Shaanxi, China

Prof. J. Zhao, Department of Chest Surgery, Cancer Center of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China

Croatia

Ivancica Trosic, Ph.D., Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health, Croatia

Egypt

Prof. Dr. Abu Bakr Abdel Fatth El-Bediwi, Ph.D., Physics Dept., Faculty of Science, Mansoura University, Egypt

Prof. Dr. Emad Fawzy Eskander, Ph.D., Medical Division, Hormones Department, National Research Center, Egypt

Prof. Dr. Heba Salah El Din Aboul Ezz, Ph.D., Physiology, Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt

Prof. Dr. Nasr Radwan, Ph.D., Neurophysiology, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt

Estonia

Dr. Hiie Hinrikus, Ph.D., D.Sc, Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia

Mr. Tarmo Koppel, Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia

Finland

Dr. Mikko Ahonen, Ph.D, University of Tampere, Finland

Dr. Marjukka Hagström, LL.M., M.Soc.Sc, Principal Researcher, Radio and EMC Laboratory, Finland

Prof. Dr. Osmo Hänninen, Ph.D., Dept. of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine,   University of Eastern Finland, Finland; Editor-In-Chief, Pathophysiology

Dariusz Leszczynski, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor of Biochemistry, University of Helsinki, Finland; Member of the IARC Working Group that classified cell phone radiation as possible carcinogen

Dr. Georgiy Ostroumov, Ph.D., (in the field of RF EMF), independent researcher, Finland

France

Prof. Dr. Dominique Belpomme, MD, MPH, Professor in Oncology, Paris V Descartes University, ECERI Executive Director

Dr. Pierre Le Ruz, Ph.D., Criirem, Le Mans, France

Georgia

Prof. Besarion Partsvania, Ph.D., Head of Bio-cybernetics Department of Georgian Technical University, Georgia

Germany

Prof. Dr. Franz Adlkofer, MD, Chairman, Pandora Foundation, Germany

Prof. Dr. Hynek Burda, Ph.D., University of Duisburg-Essen,Germany

Dr. Horst Eger, MD, Electromagnetic Fields in Medicine, Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, Bavaria, Germany

Dr. rer. nat. Lebrecht von Klitzing, Ph.D., Head, Institute of Environ. Physics; Ex-Head, Clinical Research, Fribourg Medical University, Germany

Dr.Sc. Florian M. König, Ph.D., Florian König Enterprises (FKE) GmbH, Munich, Germany

Dr. Ulrich Warnke, Ph.D., Bionik-Institut, University of Saarlandes, Germany

Greece

Dr.Adamantia F. Fragopoulou, M.Sc., Ph.D., Department of Cell Biology & Biophysics, Biology Faculty, University of Athens, Greece

Dr. Christos Georgiou, Ph.D., Biology Department, University of Patras, Greece

Prof. Emeritus Lukas H. Margaritis, Ph.D., Depts. Cell Biology, Radiobiology & Biophysics, Biology Faculty, Univ. of Athens, Greece

Dr. Aikaterini Skouroliakou, M.Sc., Ph.D., Department of Energy Technology Engineering, Technological Educational Institute of Athens, Greece

Dr. Stelios A Zinelis, MD, Hellenic Cancer Society-Kefalonia, Greece

Iceland

Dr. Ceon Ramon, Ph.D., Affiliate Professor, University of Washington, USA; Professor, Reykjavik University, Iceland

India

Prof. Dr. B. D. Banerjee, Ph.D., Fmr. Head, Environmental Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, University College of Medical Sciences, University of Delhi, India

Prof. Jitendra Behari, Ph.D., Ex-Dean, Jawaharlal Nehru University; presently, Emeritus Professor, Amity University, India

Prof. Dr. Madhukar Shivajirao Dama, Institute of Wildlife Veterinary Research, India

Associate Prof. Dr Amarjot Dhami, PhD., Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India

Dr. Kavindra K. Kesari, MBA, Ph.D., Resident Environmental Scientist, University of Eastern Finland, Finland; Assistant Professor, Jaipur National University, India

Prof. Girish Kumar, Ph.D., Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India

Dr. Pabrita Mandal Ph.D.,Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India

Prof. Rashmi Mathur, Ph.D., Head, Department of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Sivani Saravanamuttu, M.Sc., M.Phil., Dept. Advanced Zoology and Biotechnology, Loyola College, Chennai, India

Prof. N.N. Sareesh, Ph.D., Melaka Manipal Medical College, Manipal University, India

Dr. R.S. Sharma, MD, Sr. Deputy Director General, Scientist – G & Chief Coordinator – EMF Project, Indian Council of Medical Research, Dept. of Health Research, Ministry/Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India

Prof. Dr. Dorairaj Sudarsanam, M.Sc., M.Ed., Ph.D., Fellow – National Academy of Biological Sciences, Prof. of Zoology, Biotechnology & Bioinformatics, Dept. Advanced   Zoology & Biotechnology, Loyola College, Chennai, So India

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Prof. Dr. Soheila Abdi, Ph.D., Physics, Islamic Azad University of Safadasht, Tehran, Iran

Prof. G.A. Jelodar, D.V.M., Ph.D., Physiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Shiraz University, Iran

Prof. Hamid Mobasheri, Ph.D., Head, BRC; Head, Membrane Biophysics & Macromolecules Lab; Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Tehran, Iran

Prof.  Seyed Mohammad Mahdavi, PhD., Dept of Biology, Science and Research, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Prof. S.M.J. Mortazavi, Ph.D., Head, Medical Physics & Engineering; Chair, NIER Protection Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Prof. Amirnader Emami Razavi, Ph.D., Clinical Biochem., National Tumor Bank, Cancer Institute, Tehran Univ. Medical Sciences, Iran

Dr. Masood Sepehrimanesh, Ph.D., ​Gastroenterohepatology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Prof. Dr. Mohammad Shabani, Ph.D., Neurophysiology, Kerman Neuroscience Research Center, Iran

Israel

Michael Peleg, M.Sc., radio communications engineer and researcher, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Israel

Dr. Yael Stein, MD, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Hadassah Medical Center, Israel

Dr. Danny Wolf, MD, Pediatrician and General Practitioner, Sherutey Briut Clalit, Shron Shomron district, Israel

Dr. Ronni Wolf, MD, Assoc. Clinical Professor, Head of Dermatology Unit, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel

Italy

Prof. Sergio Adamo, Ph.D., La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

Prof. Fernanda Amicarelli,Ph.D., Applied Biology, Dept. of Health, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Italy

Dr. Pasquale Avino, Ph.D., INAIL Research Section, Rome, Italy

Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi, Ph.D., FIATP, Director, Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, Ramazzini Institute, Italy

Prof. Emanuele Calabro, Department of Physics and Earth Sciences, University of Messina, Italy

Prof. Franco Cervellati, Ph.D., Department of Life Science and Biotechnology, Section of General Physiology, University of Ferrara, Italy

Vale Crocetta, Ph.D. Candidate, Biomolecular and Pharmaceuthical Sciences, “G. d’Annunzio” University of Chieti, Italy

Prof. Giovanni Di Bonaventura, PhD, School of Medicine, “G. d’Annunzio” University of Chieti-Pescara, Italia

Prof. Stefano Falone, Ph.D., Researcher in Applied Biology, Dept. of Health, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Italy

Prof. Dr. Speridione Garbisa, ret. Senior Scholar, Dept. Biomedical Sciences, University of Padova, Italy

Dr. Settimio Grimaldi, Ph.D., Associate Scientist, National Research Council, Italy

Prof. Livio Giuliani, Ph.D., Director of Research, Italian Health National Service, Rome-Florence-Bozen; Spokesman, ICEMS – International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety, Italy

Prof. Dr. Angelo Levis, MD, Dept. Medical Sciences, Padua University, Italy

Prof. Salvatore Magazù, Ph.D., Department of Physics and Science, Messina University, Italy

Dr. Fiorenzo Marinelli, Ph.D., Researcher, Molecular Genetic Institute of the National Research Council, Italy

Dr. Arianna Pompilio, PhD, Dept. Medical, Oral & Biotechnological Sciences. “G. D’Annunzio” University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy

Prof. Raoul Saggini, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy

Dr. Morando Soffritti, MD, Honorary President, National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer and Environmental Diseases B. Ramazzini, Bologna, Italy

Prof. Massimo Sperini, Ph.D., Center for Inter-University Research on Sustainable Development, Rome, Italy

Japan

Prof. Tsuyoshi Hondou, Ph.D., Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University, Japan

Prof. Hidetake Miyata, Ph.D., Department of Physics, Tohoku University, Japan

Jordan

Prof. Mohammed S. H. Al Salameh, Department of Electrical Engineering, American University of Madaba, Madaba,

Kazakhstan

Dr. Timur Saliev, MD, Ph.D., Life Sciences, Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan; Institute Medical Science/Technology, University of Dundee, UK

New Zealand

Dr. Bruce Rapley, BSc, MPhil, Ph.D., Principal Consulting Scientist, Atkinson & Rapley Consulting Ltd., New Zealand

Nigeria

Dr. Idowu Ayisat Obe, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria

Prof. Olatunde Michael Oni , Ph.D, Professor of Radiation & Health Physics, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria

Oman

Prof. Najam Siddiqi, MBBS, Ph.D., Human Structure, Oman Medical College, Oman

Poland

Dr. Pawel Bodera, Pharm. D., Department of Microwave Safety, Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Poland

Prof. Dr. Stanislaw Szmigielski, MD, Ph.D., Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Poland

Republic of China

Prof. Dr. Tsun-Jen Cheng, MD, Sc.D., National Taiwan University, Republic of China

Russian Federation

Prof. Vladimir N. Binhi, Ph.D., A.M.Prokhorov General Physics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences; M.V.Lomonosov, Moscow State University

Dr. Oleg Grigoriev, DSc., Ph.D., Deputy Chairman, The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Russian Federation

Prof. Yury Grigoryev, MD, Chairman, Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Russian Federation

Dr. Anton Merkulov, Ph.D., Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Moscow, Russian Federation

Dr. Maxim Trushin, PhD., Kazan Federal University, Russia

Serbia

Dr. Snezana Raus Balind, Ph.D., Research Associate, Institute for Biological Research “Sinisa Stankovic”, Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Danica Dimitrijevic, Ph.D., Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Dr. Sladjana Spasic, Ph.D., Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Slovak Republic

Dr. Igor Belyaev, Ph.D., Dr.Sc., Cancer Research Institute, Slovak Academy of Science, Bratislava, Slovak Republic

South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Young Hwan Ahn, MD, Ph.D, Ajou University Medical School, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Kwon-Seok Chae, Ph.D., Molecular-ElectroMagnetic Biology Lab, Kyungpook National University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Dr. Yoon-Myoung Gimm, Ph.D., School of Electronics and Electrical Engineering, Dankook University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Dr. Myung Chan Gye, Ph.D., Hanyang University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Dr. Mina Ha, MD, Dankook University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Seung-Cheol Hong, MD, Inje University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Dong Hyun Kim, Ph.D., Dept. of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Incheon St. Mary’s Hospital, Catholic University of Korea, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Hak-Rim Kim, Dept.of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, Dankook University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Myeung Ju Kim, MD, Ph.D., Department of Anatomy, Dankook University College of Medicine, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Jae Seon Lee, MD,  Department of Molecular Medicine, NHA University College of Medicine, Incheon 22212, South Korea

Prof. Yun-Sil Lee, Ph.D., Ewha Woman’s University, South Korea

Prof. Dr. Yoon-Won Kim, MD, Ph.D., Hallym University School of Medicine, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Jung Keog Park, Ph.D., Life Science & Biotech; Dir., Research Instit.of Biotechnology, Dongguk University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Sungman Park, Ph.D., Institute of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Hallym University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Kiwon Song,Ph.D., Dept. of Chemistry, Yonsei University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Spain

Prof. Dr. Miguel Alcaraz, MD, Ph.D., Radiology and Physical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Murcia, Spain

Dr. Alfonso Balmori, Ph.D., Biologist, Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Castilla y León, Spain

Prof. J.L. Bardasano, D.Sc, University of Alcalá, Department of Medical Specialties, Madrid, Spain

Dr. Claudio Gómez-Perretta, MD, Ph.D., La Fe University Hospital, Valencia, Spain

Prof. Dr. Miguel López-Lázaro, PhD.,  Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology, University of Seville, Spain

Prof. Dr. Elena Lopez Martin, Ph.D., Human Anatomy, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Prof. Enrique A. Navarro, Ph.D., Department of Applied Physics and Electromagnetics, University of Valencia, Spain

Sweden

Dr. Michael Carlberg, MSc, Örebro University Hospital, Sweden

Dr. Lennart Hardell, MD, Ph.D., University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden

Prof. Olle Johansson, Ph.D., Experimental Dermatology Unit, Dept. of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Sweden

Dr. Bertil R. Persson, Ph.D., MD, Lund University, Sweden

Senior Prof. Dr. Leif Salford, MD. Department of Neurosurgery, Director, Rausing Laboratory, Lund University, Sweden

Dr. Fredrik Söderqvist, Ph.D., Ctr. for Clinical Research, Uppsala University, Västerås, Sweden

Switzerland

Dr. nat. phil. Daniel Favre, Association Romande Alert, Switzerland

Taiwan (Republic of China)

Prof. Dr. Tsun-Jen Cheng, MD, Sc.D., National Taiwan University, Republic of China

Turkey

Prof. Dr. Mehmet Zülküf Akdağ, Ph.D., Department of Biophysics, Medical School of Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Halil Ibrahim Atasoy MD, Faculty of Medicine, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey

Prof. Ayse G. Canseven (Kursun), Ph.D., Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Dept. of Biophysics, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Salih Celik, Ph.D., Fmr. Head, Turkish Biophysical Society; Head, Biophysics Dept; Medical Faculty, Dicle Univ., Turkey

Prof. Dr. Suleyman Dasdag, Ph.D., Dept. of Biophysics, Medical School of Dicle University, Turkey

Prof. Omar Elmas, MD, Ph.D., Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physiology, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Ali H. Eriş, MD, faculty, Radiation Oncology Department,  BAV University Medical School, Turkey

Dr. Arzu Firlarer, M.Sc. Ph.D., Occupational Health & Safety Department, Baskent University, Turkey

Prof. Suleyman Kaplan, Ph.D., Deputy Chancellor; Dir. Health Services; Head, Dept. Histology & Embryology, Turkey

Dr. Mustafa Nazıroğlu, Ph.D., Biophysics Dept, Medical Faculty, Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Ersan Odacı, MD, Ph.D., Karadeniz Technical University, Medical Faculty, Trabzon, Turkey

Dr. Elcin Ozgur, Ph.D., Biophysics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Turkey

Dr. Cemil Sert, Ph.D., Department of Biophysics of Medicine Faculty, Harran University, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Nesrin Seyhan, B.Sc., Ph.D., Medical Faculty of Gazi University; Chair, Biophysics Dept; Director GNRK Ctr.; Panel Mbr, NATO STO HFM; Scientific Secretariat Member, ICEMS; Advisory Committee Member, WHO EMF, Turkey

Dr. Bahriye Sirav (Aral), ABD, Gazi University Faculty of Medicine, Dept of Biophysics, Turkey

Ukraine

Dr. Oleg Banyra, MD, 2nd Municipal Polyclinic, St. Paraskeva Medical Centre, Ukraine

Prof. Victor Martynyuk, PhD., ECS “Institute of Biology”, Head of Biophysics Dept, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev, Ukraine

Prof. Igor Yakymenko, Ph.D., D.Sc., Instit. Experimental Pathology, Oncology & Radiobiology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

United Kingdom

Mr. Roger Coghill, MA,C Biol, MI Biol, MA Environ Mgt; Member, Institute of Biology; Member, UK SAGE Committee on EMF precautions, UK

David Gee, Associate Fellow, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University, UK

Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy BSc Ph.D., Lecturer in Biology (retired), Imperial College, London, UK

Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, Ph.D., Institute of Science in Society, UK

Dr. Gerard J. Hyland, Institute of Biophysics. Neuss, Germany, UK

Dr. Isaac Jamieson, Ph.D., Biosustainable Design, UK

Prof. Michael J. O’Carroll, Emeritus Professor, former Pro Vice-Chancellor, Sunderland University, UK.

Alasdair Phillips, Electrical Engineer, UK

Dr. Syed Ghulam Sarwar Shah, M.Sc., Ph.D., Public Health Consultant, Honorary Research Fellow, Brunel University London, UK

Dr. Sarah Starkey, Ph.D., UK

USA

Dr. Martin Blank, Ph.D., Columbia University, USA

Prof. Jim Burch, MS, Ph.D., Dept.of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, USA

Prof. David O. Carpenter, MD, Director, Institute for Health and the Environment, University of New York at Albany, USA

Prof. Simona Carrubba, Ph.D., Biophysics, Daemen College, Women & Children’s Hospital of Buffalo Neurology Dept., USA

Dr. Zoreh Davanipour, D.V.M., Ph.D., Friends Research Institute, USA

Dr. Devra Davis, Ph.D., MPH, President, Environmental Health Trust; Fellow, American College of Epidemiology, USA

Prof. Om P. Gandhi, Ph.D., Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Utah, USA

Prof. Beatrice Golomb, MD, Ph.D., University of California at San Diego School of Medicine, USA

Dr.Martha R. Herbert, MD, Ph.D., Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, USA

Dr. Donald Hillman, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Michigan State University, USA

Elizabeth Kelley, MA, Fmr. Managing Secretariat, ICEMS, Italy; Director, EMFscientist.org, USA

Dr. Henry Lai, Ph.D., University of Washington, USA

Blake Levitt, medical/science journalist, former New York Times contributor, EMF researcher and author, USA

Dr. Albert M. Manville, II, Ph.D. and C.W.B., Adj. Professor, Johns Hopkins University’s Krieger Graduate School of Arts & Sciences; Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, USA

Dr. Andrew Marino, J.D., Ph.D., Retired Professor, LSU Health Sciences Center, USA

Dr.Marko Markov, Ph.D., President, Research International, Buffalo, New York, USA

Jeffrey L. Marrongelle, DC, CCN, President/Managing Partner of BioEnergiMed LLC, USA

Dr. Samuel Milham, MD, MPH, USA

Lloyd Morgan, Environmental Health Trust, USA

Dr. Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, USA

Dr. Martin L. Pall,Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Biochemistry & Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University, USA

Dr. Jerry L. Phillips, Ph.D. University of Colorado, USA

Dr. William J. Rea, M.D., Environmental Health Center, Dallas, Texas, USA

Camilla Rees, CEO, Electromagnetichealth.org; CEO, Wide Angle Health, LLC, USA

Prof. Narenda P. Singh, MD, University of Washington, USA

Prof. Eugene Sobel, Ph.D., Retired, School of Medicine, University of Southern California, USA

David Stetzer, Stetzer Electric, Inc., Blair, Wisconsin, USA

Dr. Lisa Tully, Ph.D., Energy Medicine Research Institute, Boulder, CO, USA

Concerned Scientists who have published peer reviewed papers in related fields

Michele Casciani, MA, Environmental Science, President/Chief Executive Officer, Salvator Mundi International Hospital, Rome, Italy
Enrico Corsetti, Engineer, Research Director, Salvator Mundi International Hospital, Rome, Italy
Prof. Dr. Karl Hecht, MD, former Director, Institute of Pathophysiology, Charité, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Xin Li, PhD candidate MSc, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stevens Institute of Technology, New Jersey, USA
Dr. Robin Maytum, PhD, Senior Lecturer in Biological Science, University of Bedfordshire, Luton, UK
Prof. Dr. Raúl A. Montenegro, Ph.D, Evolutionary Biology, National University of Cordoba; President, FUNAM; Recognitions: Scientific Investigation Award from University of Buenos Aires, UNEP ‘Global 500’ Award (Brussels, Belgium), the Nuclear Free Future Award (Salzburg, Austria), and Alternative Nobel Prize (Right Livelihood Award, Sweden), Argentina.
Georgiy Ostroumov, Ph.D. (in the field of RF EMF), independent researcher, Finland
Claudio Poggi, Electronics Engineer, Research Director, Sistemi s.r.l., (TN), Genoa, Italy
Dr. Hugo Schooneveld, PhD, Biologist, Neuroscientist, Adviser to the Dutch EHS Foundation, Netherlands

 

SEPARATORE AIE x sito

[IT]

Appello Internazionale

A: Onorevole Mr, Ban Ki-moon, Segretario Generale delle Nazioni Unite; Onorevole Dr. Margaret Chan, Direttore Generale dell’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità; Stati membri delle Nazioni Unite.

Appello Internazionale:

Gli scienziati chiedono protezione dall’esposizione ai Campi Elettromagnetici non ionizzanti

Siamo scienziati impegnati nello studio degli effetti biologici e sanitari dei campi elettromagnetici non ionizzanti (EMF). Basandoci sulle ricerche pubblicate da riviste peer-reviwed, siamo seriamente preoccupati riguardo all’esposizione ubiquitaria e sempre più in aumento agli EMF generati da apparecchiature elettriche e wireless. Queste includono – ma non si limitano – le apparecchiature che emettono radiazione a radiofrequenza (RFR), quali i cellulari, i telefoni cordless e le loro stazioni base, il Wi-Fi, le antenne di trasmissione, gli smart-meter e i monitor per neonati oltre alle apparecchiature elettriche e alle infrastrutture utilizzate nel trasporto e consegna di elettricità che generano un campo elettromagnetico a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF EMF).

Basi scientifiche per la nostra comune preoccupazione

Numerose pubblicazioni scientifiche recenti hanno mostrato che i EMF influiscono gli organismi viventi a livelli ben inferiori a molte linee guida sia nazionali che internazionali. Gli effetti includono l’aumentato rischio di tumori, lo stress cellulare, l’aumento di radicali liberi dannosi, danno genetico, modifiche strutturali e funzionali del sistema riproduttivo, deficit di apprendimento e di memoria, disturbi neurologici, e impatti negativi sul generale benessere degli esseri umani. Il danno va molto oltre la razza umana, visto che ci sono sempre più in aumento le prove degli effetti dannosi sia sulla vita delle piante che su quella degli animali. Queste scoperte giustificano il nostro appello alle Nazioni Unite (UN) e, a tutti gli Stati Membri nel mondo, per incoraggiare l’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità (OMS) ad esercitare una forte leadership nella promozione dello sviluppo di linee guida più protettive nei confronti dei EMF, incoraggiando misure precauzionali, ed educando il pubblico riguardo ai rischi per la salute, particolarmente al rischio per lo sviluppo dei bambini e del feto. Con un mancato intervento. L’OMS viene a mancare all’adempimento del suo ruolo quale preminente ente internazionale di salute pubblica.

Linee guida per gli EMF non ionizzanti inadeguate

I vari enti che fissano norme di sicurezza hanno fallito nell’imporre linee guida sufficienti a proteggere il pubblico in generale, e i bambini in modo particolare che sono più vulnerabili agli effetti degli EMF.

La Commissione Internazionale sulla Protezione dalle Radiazioni Non-Ionizzanti (ICNIRP) ha stabilito nel 1998 le “Linee guida per limitare l’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici, magnetici, elettrici variabili nel tempo (fino a 300 GHZ)”.1 Queste linee guida sono state accettate dall’OMS e da molti paesi in tutto il mondo. L’OMS sta chiedendo a tutte le nazioni di adottare le linee guida dell’ICNIRP per incoraggiare l’armonizzazione internazionale degli standard. Nel 2009, l’ICNIRP ha rilasciato una dichiarazione dicendo che stava riaffermando le proprie linee guida del 1998, perché secondo la loro opinione, la letteratura scientifica pubblicata fino ad allora “non aveva fornito prova di alcun effetto negativo al di sotto dei limiti stabiliti e non si rendeva necessaria una revisione immediata della sua guida per la limitazione dell’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici ad alta frequenza.2 La nostra opinione è che, poiché le linee guida ICNIRP non considerano l’esposizione a lungo termine e gli effetti a bassa intensità, esse sono insufficienti a proteggere la salute pubblica.

L’OMS ha adottato la classificazione dell’Agenzia Internazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro (IARC) del campo elettromagnetico a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF EMF) nel 2002 e della radiazione a radiofrequenza (RFR) nel 2011. Questa classificazione dichiara che l’EMF è un possibile cancerogeno umano (Gruppo 2B). Nonostante entrambe le scoperte IARC, l’OMS continua a sostenere che non vi sono prove sufficienti per giustificare l’abbassamento di tali limiti quantitativi di esposizione.

Poiché vi è polemica circa un fondamento logico per fissare norme per evitare gli effetti negativi per la salute, si raccomanda che il Programma Ambientale delle Nazioni Unite (UNEP) convochi e finanzi un comitato multidisciplinare indipendente che esplori i pro e i contro di pratiche alternative a quelle correnti che possano abbassare sostanzialmente l’esposizione umana alle RF e ai campi ELF. Le decisioni di questo gruppo dovrebbero essere prese in modo trasparente e imparziale. Nonostante sia essenziale che l’industria venga coinvolta e cooperi in questo processo, non dovrebbe essere permesso all’industria di influenzare il processo decisionale del gruppo o le conclusioni raggiunte. Questo gruppo dovrebbe fornire le proprie analisi alle Nazioni Unite e all’OMS per guidare l’azione precauzionale.

Collettivamente chiediamo anche che:

1. Vengano protetti i bambini e le donne incinta;
2. Si rinforzino le linee guida e gli standard regolamentari;
3. I produttori vengano incoraggiati a sviluppare tecnologia più sicura;
4. I servizi di utilità pubblica (società dell’energia elettrica, telefonia, etc.) responsabili della produzione, trasmissione, distribuzione, e monitoraggio del mantenimento dell’elettricità, mantengano di un’adeguata qualità della corrente elettrica e assicurino cavi elettrici appropriati per minimizzare i danni prodotti dalla corrente a terra;
5. Il pubblico venga pienamente informato riguardo ai rischi potenziali per la salute derivanti dall’energia elettromagnetica e vengano loro insegnate le strategie per la riduzione del danno;
6. Ai professionisti del campo medico si provveda un’educazione adeguata riguardo agli effetti biologici dell’energia elettromagnetica e sia provvista una formazione al trattamento di pazienti che soffrono di elettrosensibilità;
7. I governi finanzino formazione e ricerca sui campi elettromagnetici e la salute che sia indipendente dall’industria e impongano la cooperazione tra industria e ricercatori;
8. I mass media rivelino i rapporti tra gli esperti della finanza con l’industria quando citano le loro opinioni riguardo gli aspetti sulla salute e la sicurezza delle tecnologie di emissione di EMF; e
9. Vengano stabilite delle zone-bianche (aree libere da radiazioni).

Data proposta di sottomissione: 23 Ottobre 2014
Domande possono essere poste a Elizabeth Kelley, M.A., Directore, EMFscientist.org, a:
info@EMFscientist.org

Le firme seguono secondo la nazione….
Nota: i firmatari hanno firmato come individui, dando la loro affiliazione professionale, ma questo non necessariamente significa che questo rappresenti la visione dei loro datori di lavoro o delle organizzazioni professionali alle quali sono affiliati.
Magda Havas, Ph.D, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario Canada
Martin Blank, Ph.D, Columbia University, USA
Elizabeth Kelley, MA, Electromagnetic Safety Alliance, Arizona, USA
Henry Lai, Ph.D, University of Washington, USA
Joel M. Moskovitz, Ph.D, University of California at Berkeley, USA

1.http://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPemfgdl.pdf
2.http://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPStatementEMF.pdf
3 http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol80/
4 http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/

Source/Fonte:

https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal

PDF della versione in Italiano dell’Appello scaricabile al seguente link:

https://emfscientist.org/images/docs/transl/Italian_EMF_Scientist_Appello_2015.pdf

Video dal mondo • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

Smart phone radiation concerns – Devra Davis speaks about the health risks associated with mobile phone use in a television interview

November 24, 2015

http://www.9jumpin.com.au/show/today/today-takeaway/2015/november/mobile-phone-radiation/

HEALTH CONCERNS
Experts say chronic mobile phone use increases cancer risks.

Notizie dal mondo Notizie dalla Associazione • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

UNDARK AND THE RADIUM GIRLS – LA VERNICE UNDARK E LE RAGAZZE DEL RADIO…La storia è destinata a ripetersi?

[Cambiano le tecnologie, cambiano le abitudini di vita, ma la natura dell’essere umano rimane la stessa, portandolo ad incorrere nei medesimi errori.

A seguire riportiamo la triste vicenda delle “Radium Girls” (“Le Ragazze del Radio”), che circa un secolo fa subirono danni gravissimi in seguito all’esposizione ad una vernice radioattiva.

Leggendola saltano subito all’occhio le inquietanti similitudini con ciò che sta accadendo attualmente con la telefonia mobile e le tecnologie wireless: si sa che fanno male (gli studi che lo hanno dimostrato sono numerosissimi), ma chi fa business con queste tecnologie cerca di fare controinformazione e promuoverne l’uso, l’esposizione delle persone procede inesorabilmente ed alla fine ci si troverà a contare le vittime.

Un secolo fa sono state delle povere operaie indifese a farne le spese, ma loro:
1) avevano necessità di lavorare,
2) sono state colpite in modo circoscritto perché erano le uniche ad aver subìto una esposizione così intensa,
3) non potevano tutelarsi in alcun modo perché all’epoca non era facile reperire informazioni.
Nel caso della tecnologia Wireless la situazione è ben diversa:
1) viene maggiormente utilizzata a scopo ludico,
2) danneggia non solo l’utilizzatore ma anche chi si trovi in prossimità delle onnipresenti fonti di emissione elettromagnetica, configurando quindi il rischio di un danno su scala estremamente ampia,
3) le informazioni sulla sua pericolosità sono reperibili online e, nell’era dell’informazione, essere disinformati può rivelarsi un peccato MORTALE.

La traduzione in Italiano segue la versione in lingua originale.]

Written by Alan Bellows, copyright © 28 December 2006.

RG

 

In 1922, a bank teller named Grace Fryer became concerned when her teeth began to loosen and fall out for no discernible reason. Her troubles were compounded when her jaw became swollen and inflamed, so she sought the assistance of a doctor in diagnosing the inexplicable symptoms. Using a primitive X-ray machine, the physician discovered serious bone decay, the likes of which he had never seen. Her jawbone was honeycombed with small holes, in a random pattern reminiscent of moth-eaten fabric.

As a series of doctors attempted to solve Grace’s mysterious ailment, similar cases began to appear throughout her hometown of New Jersey. One dentist in particular took notice of the unusually high number of deteriorated jawbones among local women, and it took very little investigation to discover a common thread; all of the women had been employed by the same watch-painting factory at one time or another.

In 1902, twenty years prior to Grace’s mysterious ailment, inventor William J. Hammer left Paris with a curious souvenir. The famous scientists Pierre and Marie Curie had provided him with some samples of their radium salt crystals. Radioactivity was somewhat new to science, so its properties and dangers were not well understood; but the radium’s slight blue-green glow and natural warmth indicated that it was clearly a fascinating material. Hammer went on to combine his radium salt with glue and a compound called zinc sulfide which glowed in the presence of radiation. The result was glow-in-the-dark paint.

Hammer’s recipe was used by the US Radium Corporation during the First World War to produce Undark, a high-tech paint which allowed America’s infantrymen to read their wristwatches and instrument panels at night. They also marketed the pigment for non-military products such as house numbers, pistol sights, light switch plates, and glowing eyes for toy dolls. By this time the dangers of radium were better understood, but US Radium assured the public that their paint used the radioactive element in “such minute quantities that it is absolutely harmless.” While this was true of the products themselves, the amount of radium present in the dial-painting factory was much more dangerous, unbeknownst to the workers there.

US Radium employed hundreds of women at their factory in Orange, New Jersey, including Grace Fryer. Few companies at that time were willing to employ women, and the pay was much higher than most alternatives, so the company had little trouble finding employees to occupy the rows and rows of desks. They were required to paint delicate lines with fine-tipped brushes, applying the Undark to the tiny numbers and indicator hands of wristwatches. After a few strokes a brush tended to lose its shape, so the women’s managers encouraged them to use their lips and tongues to keep the tips of the camel hair brushes sharp and clean. The glowing paint was completely flavorless [note: significant is the fact that a woman, similarly to what now happens to EHS people who have problems when exposed to EMF, gave up working with the Undark paint because unlike the others she felt a sour and highly disturbing taste when she sharpened the brush with her mouth , and this saved her life!], and the supervisors assured them that rosy cheeks would be the only physical side effect to swallowing the radium-laced pigment. Cause for concern was further reduced by the fact that radium was being marketed as a medical elixir for treating all manner of ailments [note: at that time touted as a cure-all, it was later on revealed to be one of the worst carcinogens along with cigarette smoke!].

The owners and scientists at US Radium, familiar with the real hazards of radioactivity, naturally took extensive precautions to protect themselves. They knew that Undark’s key ingredient was approximately one million times more active than uranium, so company chemists often used lead screens, masks, and tongs when working with the paint. US Radium had even distributed literature to the medical community describing the “injurious effects” of radium. But inside the factory, where nearly every surface sparkled with radioluminescence, these dangers were unknown. For a lark, some of the women even painted their fingernails and teeth with radium paint on occasion, to surprise their boyfriends when the lights went out.

RG
A US Radium dial painting factory

In 1925, three years after Grace’s health problems began, a doctor suggested that her jaw problems may have had something to do with her former job at US Radium. As she began to explore the possibility, a specialist from Columbia University named Frederick Flynn asked to examine her. Flynn declared her to be in fine health. It would be some time before anyone discovered that Flynn was not a doctor, nor was he licensed to practice medicine, rather he was a toxicologist on the US Radium payroll. A “colleague” who had been present during the examination— and who had confirmed the healthy diagnosis— turned out to be one of the vice-presidents of US Radium. Many of the Undark painters had been developing serious bone-related problems, particularly in the jaw, and the company had begun a concerted effort to conceal the cause of the disease. The mysterious deaths were often blamed on syphilis to undermine the womens’ reputations, and many doctors and dentists inexplicably cooperated with the powerful company’s disinformation campaign.

In the early 1920s, US Radium hired the Harvard physiology professor Cecil Drinker to study the working conditions in the factory. Drinker’s report was grave, indicating a heavily contaminated work force, and unusual blood conditions in virtually everyone who worked there. The report which the company provided to the New Jersey Department of Labor credited Cecil Drinker as the author, however the ominous descriptions of unhealthy conditions were replaced with glowing praise, stating that “every girl is in perfect condition.” Even worse, US Radium’s president disregarded all of the advice in Drinker’s original report, making none of the recommended changes to protect the workers.

The fraudulent report was discovered by a colleague of Drinker’s named Alice Hamilton in 1925. Her letter prompted Drinker to make the information public by publishing his original report in a scientific journal. US Radium executives were furious, and threatened legal action, but Drinker published his findings nonetheless. Among other things, his report stated:

“Dust samples collected in the workroom from various locations and from chairs not used by the workers were all luminous in the dark room. Their hair, faces, hands, arms, necks, the dresses, the underclothes, even the corsets of the dial painters were luminous. One of the girls showed luminous spots on her legs and thighs. The back of another was luminous almost to the waist….”

US Radium was a defense contractor with deep pockets and influential contacts, so it took Grace Fryer two years to find a lawyer willing to take on her former employer. A young attorney from Newark named Raymond Berry filed the suit in 1927, and four other radium-injured dial painters soon joined in. They sought $250,000 each in damages.

As the legal battle ensued, New York dentist Joseph P. Knef examined the jawbone from one of the deceased dial painters named Amelia Maggia. In the last few months of her life the bone had become so decayed that Dr. Knef had been forced to remove it from his patient. Her official cause of death had been listed as syphilis, but Knef suspected otherwise. He exposed the bone to dental film for a time, and then developed it. Patterns on the film indicated an absurd level of radiation, and he confirmed the findings with an electroscope.

RG
A severe instance of “Radium jaw” from 1924

As the weeks and months were consumed by the slow-moving court system, the women’s health rapidly deteriorated. At their first appearance in court in January 1928, two were bedridden, and none could raise their arms to take the oath. Grace Fryer, still described by reporters as “pretty,” was unable to walk, required a back brace to sit up, and had lost all of her teeth. The “Radium Girls” began appearing in headlines nationwide, and the grim descriptions of their hopeless condition reached Marie Curie in Paris. “I would be only too happy to give any aid that I could,” she said, adding, “there is absolutely no means of destroying the substance once it enters the human body.”

The women proved too ill to attend the following hearing, which occurred in April. Despite strenuous objections from the women’s lawyer, the judge adjourned the case until September because several US Radium witnesses were summering in Europe, and would consequently be unavailable. Walter Lippmann, the editor of the influential New York World newspaper, wrote of the judge’s decision, calling it a “damnable travesty of justice… There is no possible excuse for such a delay. The women are dying. If ever a case called for prompt adjudication, it is the case of five crippled women who are fighting for a few miserable dollars to ease their last days on earth.” In a later editorial, he wrote, “This is a heartless proceeding. It is unmanly, unjust and cruel. This is a case which calls not for fine-spun litigation but for simple, quick, direct justice.”

The national outrage over the delay prompted the courts to reschedule the hearing for early June, but days before the trial, Raymond Berry and US Radium agreed to allow U.S. District Court Judge William Clark to mediate an out-of-court settlement. Berry and the Radium Girls accepted their opponent’s offer reluctantly, despite learning that their mediator was a US Radium Corporation stockholder. Their situation was too desperate to refuse; the women were not expected to live much longer. Each woman would receive $10,000— equivalent to about $100,000 today— and have all of their medical and legal expenses paid. They would also receive a $600 per year annuity for as long as they lived. Unsurprisingly, few of the annuity payments were collected.

The last of the famous Radium Girls died in the 1930s, and many other former factory workers died of radium poisoning without finding justice. Later medical research would determine that radium behaves much like calcium inside the body, causing it to concentrate in the teeth and bones. By shaping their brushes with their lips as instructed by their knowledgeable supervisors, the dial painters had ingested anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand microcuries of radium per year. One tenth of a microcurie is now considered to be the maximum safe exposure. Marie Curie herself died of radiation-related ailments in 1934. Because radium has a half-life of 1,600 years, her lab notebooks are said to be too highly contaminated to be safely handled even today. Radium continued to be used to illuminate watches until about 1968, but under much safer conditions.

RG
A US Radium ad for “Undark” paint

It is uncertain how many people were sickened or killed by Undark and similar radioactive pigments over the years, but US Radium alone employed an estimated 4,000 radium dial painters. Though they were not the only radium-painting business in the US, they were arguably the most evil. However one positive development did appear in the wake of the women’s legal struggle and subsequent media attention; In 1949 the US Congress passed a bill making all occupational diseases compensable, and extended the time during which workers could discover illnesses and make a claim. Thanks to the Radium Girls and their success in bringing attention to the deplorable conditions in US factories, industrial safety standards in the US were significantly tightened over the following years, an improvement which definitely spared countless others from similar fates.

[IT]

LA VERNICE UNDARK E LE RAGAZZE DEL RADIO

Nel 1922, una cassiera di banca di nome Grace Fryer si preoccupò quando i suoi denti iniziarono ad allentarsi e cadere senza apparente motivo. I suoi problemi si aggravarono quando la mascella divenne gonfia ed infiammata, così cercò l’aiuto di un medico per avere una diagnosi degli inspiegabili sintomi. Utilizzando un primitivo macchinario a raggi X, il medico scoprì un grave deterioramento delle ossa, ad un livello che non aveva mai visto. La sua mandibola aveva un aspetto a nido d’ape con piccoli fori, secondo un pattern casuale che ricordava il tessuto tarlato.

Mentre una serie di medici cercava di risolvere il misterioso disturbo di Grace, casi simili cominciarono ad apparire in tutta la sua città natale del New Jersey. Un dentista, in particolare, prese atto del numero insolitamente alto di mandibole deteriorate tra le donne locali e gli servì una indagine molto piccola per scoprire un trait d’union; tutte le donne erano state alle dipendenze della stessa fabbrica nella quale si dipingevano i quadranti degli orologi, in un periodo o in un altro.

Nel 1902, 20 anni prima della misteriosa malattia di Grace, l’inventore William J. Hammer lasciò Parigi con un curioso souvenir. I famosi scienziati Pierre e Marie Curie gli avevano fornito alcuni campioni dei loro cristalli di sale di radio. La radioattività era in qualche modo nuova alla scienza, così le sue proprietà ed i suoi pericoli non erano ben compresi; ma il lieve bagliore blu-verde del radio ed il naturale calore, indicavano che era chiaramente un materiale affascinante. Hammer combinò il suo sale di radio con colla ed un composto chiamato solfuro di zinco, che brillava in presenza di radiazioni. Il risultato fu una vernice che brillava al buio.

La ricetta di Hammer venne utilizzata dalla US Radium Corporation durante la Prima Guerra Mondiale per produrre Undark, una vernice ad alta tecnologia che permise ai fanti americani di leggere di notte i loro orologi da polso ed i cruscotti. Essa inoltre commercializzò il pigmento per prodotti non militari, come numeri civici, mirini delle pistole, placche degli interruttori della luce e occhi luminosi per bambole. In questo periodo i pericoli del radio vennero meglio compresi, ma la US Radium rassicurò il pubblico sul fatto che la loro vernice utilizzava l’elemento radioattivo in “quantità così piccole da essere assolutamente innocuo”. Mentre questo era vero per i prodotti stessi, la quantità di radio presente nella fabbrica dove si tingevano i quadranti degli orologi era molto più pericolosa, all’insaputa dei lavoratori.

La US Radium impiegò centinaia di donne nella sua fabbrica a Orange, New Jersey, tra cui Grace Fryer. Poche aziende in quel momento erano disposte ad assumere donne e la paga era molto più elevata rispetto alla maggior parte delle alternative, per cui l’azienda non ebbe grossi problemi a trovare lavoratrici per occupare le file e file di banchi. Ad esse venne chiesto di dipingere linee delicate con pennelli a punta fine, applicando la vernice Undark ai piccoli numeri e indicatori degli orologi da polso. Dopo un paio di colpi un pennello tendeva a perdere la sua forma, così i manager delle donne le incoraggiavano ad utilizzare le labbra e la lingua per mantenere affilate e pulite le punte dei pennelli di pelo di cammello. La vernice brillante era totalmente insapore [nota: significativo è il fatto che una donna, come adesso accade agli Elettrosensibili i quali sono disturbati dai CEM, rinunciò a lavorare con la vernice Undark poichè, a differenza delle altre, percepiva un sapore acre e fortemente disturbante quando arrotava le setole del pennellino con la bocca, e questo le salvò la vita!] ed i supervisori assicuravano che avere guance rosee sarebbe stato l’unico effetto collaterale dell’inghiottire il pigmento unito al radio. Ogni motivo di preoccupazione venne ulteriormente ridotto dal fatto che il radio veniva commercializzato come un elisir medico per il trattamento di tutti i tipi di disturbi [nota: all’epoca spacciato come un toccasana, esattamente come è avvenuto per il fumo di sigaretta è stato poi rivelato essere uno dei peggiori cancerogeni per l’uomo!].

I proprietari e gli scienziati alla US Radium, che avevano familiarità con i reali rischi correlati alla radioattività, naturalmente avevano preso molte precauzioni per proteggersi. Sapevano che l’ingrediente chiave della Undark era di circa un milione di volte più attivo dell’uranio, così i chimici della società spesso usavano schermi di piombo, maschere e pinze quando lavoravano con la vernice. La US Radium aveva anche distribuito letteratura per la comunità medica che descriveva gli “effetti pregiudizievoli” del radio. Ma dentro la fabbrica, dove quasi ogni superficie scintillava per la radioilluminescenza, questi pericoli erano sconosciuti. Per scherzo, alcune delle donne si erano anche occasionalmente dipinte unghie e denti con la vernice al radio, per sorprendere i loro fidanzati quando le luci si spegnevano.

Nel 1925, tre anni dopo che i problemi di salute di Grace erano iniziati, un medico suggerì che i suoi problemi alla mandibola potessero avere a che fare con il suo precedente impiego alla US Radium. Quando lei iniziò ad indagare tale possibilità, uno specialista della Columbia University di nome Frederick Flynn chiese di esaminarla. Flynn dichiarò che la donna era in buona salute. Questo un po’ di tempo prima che qualcuno scoprisse che Flynn non era un medico, né aveva la licenza per esercitare la professione medica, ma piuttosto era un tossicologo sul libro paga della US Radium. Un “collega” che era presente durante la visita– e che aveva confermato la diagnosi di buona salute– si era rivelato essere uno dei vicepresidenti della US Radium. Molte pittrici che avevano ultilizzato la Undark, avevano sviluppato gravi problemi ossei legati in particolare alla mascella e l’azienda aveva iniziato a concentrare gli sforzi per nascondere la causa della malattia. Le morti misteriose vennero spesso imputate alla sifilide per minare la reputazione delle donne e molti medici e dentisti inspiegabilmente collaborarono con la campagna di disinformazione della potente società.

Nei primi anni ’20, la US Radium assunse il fisiologo professore di Harvard Cecil Drinker per studiare le condizioni di lavoro nella fabbrica. La relazione di Drinker era grave, indicando una forza lavoro altamente contaminata ed insolite condizioni del sangue in praticamente tutti coloro che ci avevano lavorato. La relazione che la società fornì al Dipartimento del Lavoro del New Jersey accreditava Cecil Drinker come autore, ma le descrizioni inquietanti di condizioni malsane vennero sostituite con brillanti lodi, affermando che “ogni ragazza è in perfette condizioni”. Ancora peggio, il presidente della US Radium ignorò tutti i consigli nella relazione originaria di Drinker, non attuando alcuna delle modifiche consigliate per proteggere le lavoratrici.

Il rapporto fraudolento venne scoperto nel 1925 da una collega di Drinker di nome Alice Hamilton. La sua lettera spinse Drinker a rendere pubbliche le informazioni, pubblicando il suo rapporto originale in una rivista scientifica. I dirigenti della US Radium erano furiosi e minacciarono azioni legali, ma Drinker pubblicò comunque le sue scoperte. Tra le altre cose, la sua relazione affermava:

“I campioni di polvere raccolti nel laboratorio da varie posizioni e dalle sedie non utilizzate dai lavoratori, erano tutti luminosi nella stanza buia. I loro capelli, volti, mani, braccia, collo, abiti, biancheria, anche i corsetti delle pittrici dei quadranti di orologio erano luminosi. Una delle ragazze ha mostrato punti luminosi sulle sue gambe e cosce. La schiena di un’altra era luminosa quasi fino alla vita…. ”

La US Radium era un appaltatore della difesa con tasche profonde e contatti influenti, quindi servirono due anni a Grace Fryer per trovare un avvocato disposto ad occuparsi del suo ex-datore di lavoro. Un giovane avvocato da Newark di nome Raymond Berry presentò la causa nel 1927 e altre quattro pittrici di quadranti fosforescenti danneggiate dal radio presto si unirono. Chiesero 250 mila dollari ciascuna in danni.

Mentre era in corso la battaglia legale, il dentista di New York Joseph P. Knef esaminò la mandibola di una delle pittrici di quadranti morta di nome Amelia Maggia. Negli ultimi mesi della sua vita, l’osso era diventato così decaduto che il dottor Knef era stato costretto a rimuoverlo dalla sua paziente. La sua causa ufficiale di morte era stata indicata come sifilide, ma Knef sospettava altro. Espose l’osso alla pellicola dentale per una volta e poi la sviluppò. I pattern sul film indicavano un assurdo livello di radiazioni ed egli confermò i risultati con un elettroscopio.

Mentre settimane e mesi venivano dissipati da un sistema giudiziario che lavorava lentamente, la salute delle donne si era rapidamente deteriorata. Alla loro prima apparizione in tribunale nel gennaio 1928, due erano a letto e nessuna poteva alzare le braccia per fare il giuramento. Grace Fryer, descritta dai giornalisti come ancora “carina”, era incapace di camminare, necessitava di un rinforzo posteriore per sedersi e aveva perso tutti i suoi denti. Le “Radium Girls” iniziarono a comparire nei titoli a livello nazionale e le descrizioni cupe della loro condizione disperata raggiunsero Marie Curie a Parigi. “Sarei ben felice di dare qualsiasi aiuto possibile,” disse, aggiungendo, “non c’è assolutamente alcuna possibilità di distruggere la sostanza una volta che entra nel corpo umano.”

Le donne si dimostrarono troppo malate per partecipare alla successiva udienza, che avvenne nel mese di aprile. Nonostante le strenue obiezioni dell’avvocato delle donne, il giudice rinviò il caso a settembre, perché diversi testimoni della US Radium passavano l’estate in Europa e conseguentemente non sarebbero stati disponibili. Walter Lippmann, direttore dell’influente giornale New York World, scrisse della decisione del giudice, definendola una “condannabile parodia della giustizia… Non vi è alcuna possibile giustificazione per un tale ritardo. Le donne stanno morendo. Se mai un caso dovesse andare incontro ad un rapido giudizio, è il caso di cinque donne storpie che lottano per pochi miserabili dollari per facilitare i loro ultimi giorni sulla terra “. In un successivo editoriale egli scrisse: “Si tratta di un procedimento senza cuore. E’ disumano, ingiusto e crudele. Questo è un caso che non richiede un fine contenzioso, ma una semplice, veloce, diretta giustizia”.

L’indignazione nazionale per il ritardo indusse i giudici a riprogrammare l’udienza per l’inizio di giugno, ma giorni prima del processo, Raymond Berry e la US Radium accettarono di consentire al giudice distrettuale William Clark di mediare una soluzione amichevole. Berry e le “Ragazze del Radio” accettarono a malincuore l’offerta dell’avversario, nonostante avessero saputo che il loro mediatore era un azionista della US Radium Corporation. La loro situazione era troppo disperata per rifiutare; non ci si aspettava che le donne vivessero molto più a lungo. Ogni donna avrebbe ricevuto $ 10,000– pari a circa 100.000 dollari oggi– e sarebbero state pagate tutte le spese mediche e legali. Avrebbero anche ricevuto $ 600 all’anno di rendita per tutto il tempo in cui sarebbero vissute. Non sorprende che poche delle rendite annuali vennero prese.

L’ultima delle famose “Radium Girls” morì nel 1930 e molte altre ex-operaie morirono per avvelenamento da radio senza trovare giustizia. Più tardi la ricerca medica determinò che il radio si comporta come il calcio all’interno del corpo, facendo sì che si concentri in denti e ossa. Nel plasmare i loro pennelli con le labbra secondo le istruzioni dei loro ben informati supervisori, le pittrici di quadranti avevano ovunque ingerito da poche centinaia a qualche migliaio di microcurie di radio all’anno. Un decimo di microcurie è ora considerato la massima esposizione sicura. Marie Curie stessa morì di malattie legate alle radiazioni nel 1934. Poiché il radio ha un tempo di dimezzamento di 1.600 anni, i suoi quaderni di appunti di laboratorio sono ancora oggi detti essere troppo altamente contaminati per poter essere maneggiati in modo sicuro. Il radio continuò ad essere usato per illuminare gli orologi fino a circa il 1968, ma in condizioni molto più sicure.

Non è chiaro quante persone siano state fatte ammalare o siano state uccise da vernice Undark e pigmenti radioattivi simili nel corso degli anni, ma la sola US Radium impiegò secondo le stime 4.000 pittrici di quadranti al radio. Anche se non fu l’unico business della radio-pittura negli Stati Uniti, è stato probabilmente il più crudele. Tuttavia uno sviluppo positivo si è presentato a seguito della lotta legale delle donne e della successiva attenzione dei media; nel 1949 il Congresso degli Stati Uniti ha approvato una legge rendendo tutte le malattie professionali risarcibili e ha esteso il tempo durante il quale i lavoratori potevano scoprire le malattie e fare una domanda di risarcimento. Grazie alle “Radium Girls” ed al loro successo nel portare l’attenzione sulle condizioni deplorevoli nelle fabbriche degli Stati Uniti, gli standard di sicurezza industriali negli Stati Uniti andarono significativamente incontro ad un giro di vite nel corso degli anni seguenti, un miglioramento che sicuramente ha risparmiato innumerevoli altri/e da un destino simile.

Fonte:

http://www.damninteresting.com/undark-and-the-radium-girls/

Video dal mondo • • • • • • • • • By admin_ele 0 Comments

RADIATION FROM WIRELESS BASE STATIONS, WI-FI, MOBILE PHONES, DAMAGE TO HEALTH – Interview to professor Olle Johansson w/ Spanish subtitles

Interview by Fátima Solé (in English/subtitles in Spanish ) – October 21, 2015 – at Centre Atlètic Laietània- Mataró (Barcelona).

RADIATION FROM WIRELESS BASE STATIONS, WI-FI, MOBILE PHONES, DAMAGE TO HEALTH. — INTERVIEW WITH DR. OLLE JOHANSSON.

RADIACIÓN DE ANTENAS, WI-FI Y MÓVILES, DAÑOS EN LA SALUD. ENTREVISTA AL NEUROCIENTÍFICO OLLE JOHANSSON.

Pubblicato il 08 nov 2015

Transcripción del vídeo en el blog: http://laboticaescondida.blogspot.com.es/2015/11/radiacion-de-antenas-wi-fi-y-moviles.html

Fonte:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mobilfunk_newsletter/ohL5xf1jXjs