From previous posts it is obvious by now that electromagnetic radiation causes damage to the cell membrane and cell structure. This is where the damage begins. Our efforts need to be concentrated on restoring health and mitigating further damage. Three separate areas need to be addressed. This three-step process follows the public health paragidm which is the gold standard in addressing major public health problems.
Here are the three steps that should ALWAYS be followed in addressing the electropollution problem:
1. Measures need to be undertaken to reduce the exposure to electromagnetic radiation. If you're cleaning up a polluted lake you've got to stop the continual influx of toxic waste before you can clean it up. Same goes for your body. We've got to reduce the exposure.
2. We need to take measures to strengthen the body so it can resist the negative impact from electromagnetic radiation. One way we do this is by strengthening the body's biofield.
3. We must begin process to repair the damage that has already been done.
These interventions follow the model established through the Public Health Paradigm.
We'll focus the next several posts on addressing these topics in enough detail to provide an understanding of how to begin the process of protection, exposure reduction and repair of damage.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
High Voltage Power Lines Are Cancer Risk
In a study published in the Internal Medicine Journal researchers from the University of Tasmania and Britian's Bristol University reported some disturbing findings for people living near high-voltage power lines. In reviewing a database of 850 people diagnosed with lymphatic and bone marrow cancers between 1972 and 1980 the researchers found those living near these high-power lines for an extended period of time may increase the risk of leukemia, lymphoma and related conditions later in life.
It was found that those who lived within 328 yards of a power line up to age 5 were five times more likely to develop cancer. Those who lived that close to a power line at any point in their first 15 years of life were three times more likely to develop cancer as an adult.
Electromagnetic fields do indeed have biological consequences on the human body. Those fields are especially a potential risk to young children and teenagers whose body's are in a growth and development stage. The effects on the immune system seem to be the most serious and the most obvious. From studies like these we understand that it takes many many years before a condition such as cancer becomes diagnosed. When decades have passed it then becomes very difficult to connect the cancer, or any other disease, back to a previous exposure to electromagnetic radiation in childhood. Consequently, we don't establish a causal relationship and therefore the problem never gets addressed or corrected.
It was found that those who lived within 328 yards of a power line up to age 5 were five times more likely to develop cancer. Those who lived that close to a power line at any point in their first 15 years of life were three times more likely to develop cancer as an adult.
Electromagnetic fields do indeed have biological consequences on the human body. Those fields are especially a potential risk to young children and teenagers whose body's are in a growth and development stage. The effects on the immune system seem to be the most serious and the most obvious. From studies like these we understand that it takes many many years before a condition such as cancer becomes diagnosed. When decades have passed it then becomes very difficult to connect the cancer, or any other disease, back to a previous exposure to electromagnetic radiation in childhood. Consequently, we don't establish a causal relationship and therefore the problem never gets addressed or corrected.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Cell Phones And Kids
The average age of new cell phone users is now 10 years old. The age drops every year. Analysts are forecasting that the the market of children nine and under will increase to 9 million users by 2010, representing $1.6 billion in revenue to the cell phone industry.
The "tweener" market, children between eight and 12 years of age, is the next big target market for the cell phone industry. In fact, Disney and Sprint have already teamed up to market cell phones to the eight to 12 year-old category. You've probably already seen the commercials on TV.
How young will these cell phone "targets" become? What is the risk to a population that will grow up with far more exposure to electromagnetic radiation than their parents or grandparents? What is the risk to children whose skull bones are softer and thinner meaning easier penetration of cell phone radiation into the head? How does cell phone radiation affect developing nervous systems and immature immune systems? We don't know the answers to these questions. But we should be asking them.
While the FDA and the United States government look the other way health agencies in other countries are more concerned for their young people. In France, the Minister of Health is urging parents to limit their children's cell phone calls to no more than six minutes. Health ministries in Great Britian and Russia are also advising parents to take precautions. The United Kingdom bans cell phone use in children under eight.
Talking on a mobile phone just 500 minutes a month increases the probability of brain cancer by 300%. Yet teenagers today talk an average of 2600 minutes per month. And 81% of young people between 15 and 20 years of age sleep with their cell phone on.
Are we volunteering our kids to be participants in a giant experiment whose results won't fully be known for many more years?
Whatever happened to the principle of "prove it's safe first BEFORE I use it?" We do this for pharmaceutical drugs (or at least we're supposed to). For some reason, mobile phones have been given a free pass from proving safety first. It seems now the only course of action is to wait until long-term studies prove them harmful. Or until enough children get sick that someone makes the connection. Then precautionary action can be taken. Unfortunately, for many it will be too late. Just ask the tobacco users and those exposed to asbestos.
In the meantime, limit your kids use of ANY kind of wireless technology and take measures to reduce their exposure to the wireless products they do use by using and applying some of the cutting-edge technology and products now available in the marketplace. Some of these products work very well and some don't. So always look for good solid scientific studies and then read them. Due diligence is essential. Contact me if you need some help.
The "tweener" market, children between eight and 12 years of age, is the next big target market for the cell phone industry. In fact, Disney and Sprint have already teamed up to market cell phones to the eight to 12 year-old category. You've probably already seen the commercials on TV.
How young will these cell phone "targets" become? What is the risk to a population that will grow up with far more exposure to electromagnetic radiation than their parents or grandparents? What is the risk to children whose skull bones are softer and thinner meaning easier penetration of cell phone radiation into the head? How does cell phone radiation affect developing nervous systems and immature immune systems? We don't know the answers to these questions. But we should be asking them.
While the FDA and the United States government look the other way health agencies in other countries are more concerned for their young people. In France, the Minister of Health is urging parents to limit their children's cell phone calls to no more than six minutes. Health ministries in Great Britian and Russia are also advising parents to take precautions. The United Kingdom bans cell phone use in children under eight.
Talking on a mobile phone just 500 minutes a month increases the probability of brain cancer by 300%. Yet teenagers today talk an average of 2600 minutes per month. And 81% of young people between 15 and 20 years of age sleep with their cell phone on.
Are we volunteering our kids to be participants in a giant experiment whose results won't fully be known for many more years?
Whatever happened to the principle of "prove it's safe first BEFORE I use it?" We do this for pharmaceutical drugs (or at least we're supposed to). For some reason, mobile phones have been given a free pass from proving safety first. It seems now the only course of action is to wait until long-term studies prove them harmful. Or until enough children get sick that someone makes the connection. Then precautionary action can be taken. Unfortunately, for many it will be too late. Just ask the tobacco users and those exposed to asbestos.
In the meantime, limit your kids use of ANY kind of wireless technology and take measures to reduce their exposure to the wireless products they do use by using and applying some of the cutting-edge technology and products now available in the marketplace. Some of these products work very well and some don't. So always look for good solid scientific studies and then read them. Due diligence is essential. Contact me if you need some help.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Signal Bars On Your Cell Phone Display
Here's something interesting. Take a look at the signal bars on your cell phone. Obviously, the more bars the better the signal. Of course, if you think this through this could mean that you're fairly close to a cell phone tower. That's not a good thing. After all, who wants to live close to a cell phone tower? However, the farther away the nearest base station is the more power is needed to carry the signal to make the connection. Therefore, the fewer number of bars on your phone the worse off you are because more power is being generated by your cell phone to maintain the connection. When more power is generated from your phone there is greater exposure to the head from the near-field plume. The near-field plume extends out a distance of 6-8 inches in all directions from the phone's antenna. So, in reality, the intensity of the plume determines how much tissue really gets exposed. But, keep in mind, the near-field plume is not the primary source of damage by cell phones. The information-carrying radio wave (ICRW) is the primary cause of damage. This subject has been discussed elsewhere on this blog. Because the ICRW, and not the radiation intensity, is the main source of damage, many of the products and devices on the market today that profess protection from the radiation really don't provide adequate protection, if any. This is mainly because many of the technologies being sold today don't address or provide protection from the information-carrying radio wave. Always look at and read carefully the scientific studies on the product you are considering. You should always expect independent peer-reviewed published studies proving the technology works. Good testimonials and theory don't cut it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
