Woman Wins Disability Payout for WiFi ‘Sensitivity’

Newser) – Electromagnetic radiation has been around since the universe first formed; it is, in its “most familiar form,” light, reports the World Health Organization. But as cellphone towers and gadgets proliferate, electromagnetic radiation has increased, and some claim a sensitivity to it. One woman in France is now getting roughly $900 a month from the government in disability pay, reports the BBC. Marine Richard, 39, who says she’s had to move to a barn without electricity in a remote region of France to escape electromagnetic waves, calls the decision a “breakthrough” for those who experience electromagnetic hypersensitivity. But the court in Toulouse—which ruled last month that her symptoms stopped her from working—did not go so far as to call EHS an illness, reports Yahoo News UK.

Though people like Richard have claimed a range of adverse health symptoms, from headaches and nausea to loss of libido and depression, the WHO reports that “scientific evidence does not support a link” between the electromagnetic fields and the symptoms; that “scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals”; and that anxiety about exposure could be causing these health problems. In the US, the parents of a 12-year-old boy at a Massachusetts school filed a lawsuit on Aug. 12 claiming that their son has been dealing with headaches, chest pains, nosebleeds, nausea, dizziness, and rashes since the school installed a new wireless network in 2013, reports ABC News. The family is asking for $250,000 in damages. (West Virginia is home to a town for those who say they’ve been sickened by WiFi.)

source: http://www.newser.com/story/212006/woman-wins-disability-payout-for-wifi-sensitivity.html

Yahoo Story

Toulouse (France) (AFP) – A French court has awarded a disability grant to a woman claiming to suffer from a debilitating allergy to electromagnetic radiation from everyday gadgets such as cellphones.

The applicant, Marine Richard, 39, hailed the ruling as a “breakthrough” for people afflicted by Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS).

The condition is not recognised as a medical disorder in most countries, including France, but sufferers insist that exposure to mobile phones, wifi routers, televisions and other gadgets cause them anything from mild discomfort to life-ruining disability.

Scientific studies have found no evidence linking electromagnetic exposure to the symptoms — tingling, headaches, fatigue, nausea, or palpitations.

Richard, a former radio documentary producer, has opted for a reclusive life in the mountains of southwest France, in a renovated barn without electricity, and drinking water from the well.

In a ruling last month, a court in the southern city of Toulouse decided she can claim a disability allowance — about 800 euros ($912) per month for an adult — for a period of three years.

The ruling accepted that her symptoms prevented Richard from working, but stopped short of recognising EHS as an illness.

Her lawyer Alice Terrasse said the ruling could set a legal precedent for “thousands of people” concerned.

“It’s a breakthrough,” added Richard.

The World Health Organisation lists EHS as a condition, but says there is “no scientific basis” for linking the symptoms to electromagnetic exposure.

Sweden and Germany have classified it as an occupational disease.

Double-blind scientific trials, where neither the patient or researcher was aware whether they had been exposed to electromagnetic waves, have refuted any link to the symptoms, and many experts ascribe the condition to a phobia.

Some believe it might be triggered by the so-called “nocebo” effect — the placebo effect in reverse — when people feel unwell because they believe they have been exposed to something harmful.


BBC Story

A French woman has won a disability grant after telling a court she suffers from an allergy to electromagnetic radiation from gadgets.

Marine Richard, 39, was told she may claim €800 (£580) per month for three years as a result.

She said it was a “breakthrough” for people affected by electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS).

The condition is recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO), though it says the causes are unclear.

Ms Richard had resorted to living in a remote area in the mountains of south-west France – in a barn that has no electricity.

She said she had been affected by everyday gadgets such as phones.

Typical symptoms reported by those who say they suffer from EHS include headaches, fatigue, nausea and palpitations.

The disability allowance was granted by a court in Toulouse, though the ruling did not formally recognise EHS as an illness.

School sued

In a case in the US, the parents of a 12-year-old boy who they say is hypersensitive to his boarding school’s WiFi have decided to file a lawsuit against the establishment.

The parents say their son, a day pupil, has been diagnosed with EHS.

They say he began suffering from headaches, nosebleeds and nausea after the Fay School installed new WiFi in 2013.

The school asked the communications technology firm Isotrope to assess the electromagnetic emissions on campus.

“Isotrope found that the combined levels of access point emissions, broadcast radio and television signals, and other RFE emissions on campus comply with federal and state safety limits by a wide margin,” the school said in a statement.

The statement also quoted from the Isotrope report, which said that levels of emissions both in the school and on the grounds “were substantially less than one ten-thousandth (1/10,000th) of the applicable safety limits (federal and state)”.

Understanding electromagnetic fields

By Philippa Roxby, BBC News Health Reporter

Electromagnetic fields are all around us but most cannot be seen.

In recent years a lot of research has been carried out into man-made sources of these fields, such as electrical power supplies and appliances in the home.

X-ray machines, TV and radio transmitters, mobile phones, WiFi and microwave ovens are all everyday sources of electromagnetic waves.

Those who are sensitive to them talk of experiencing headaches, sleeplessness, ear pain when using a mobile phone, skin tingling and problems with concentration and memory.

For them, the only solution at present is to avoid objects that emit radiation in the home – not easy in the modern world.

In the UK, electromagnetic hypersensitivity is not a recognised condition.

That’s because Public Health England says there is no scientific evidence that electromagnetic fields damage people’s health.

The WHO agrees and believes more research on long-term health effects needs to be done.

Difficult case

Although some countries, notably Sweden and the US, have officially recognised EHS as a condition, there is still much debate over whether a legal case on the condition would be worthwhile in certain other states.

In the UK, for example, members of the public who are worried about exposure to mobile phone masts tend to challenge their construction on a planning basis, according to research group Powerwatch.

“The health issue is close to a no-win in this country at the moment,” Graham Lamburn, its technical manager, told the BBC.

“You really need to win on things like ‘it’s devalued my property because it’s outside my window’ or ‘there’s an irregularity in the way it’s been put through with planning’.”

Electrosensitivty UK (ES-UK), a charity that campaigns for wider recognition of EHS, said it welcomed the French court’s decision.

“Several people in the UK have been diagnosed with electrosensitivity and received help for the disability but any financial allowance usually refers to a different name for the condition or a related condition,” it said in a statement.



“Media Blackout On Smart Meter Dangers” Wins Project Censored Award

smart meter

James Tracy’s story, “Health Impact of RF Radiation: Media Blackout on Smart Meter Dangers,” published at Memory Hole Blog and by Professor Michel Chossudovsky, editor of Global Research, in January 2014, was nominated by student researchers and faculty evaluators working with Project Censored at San Francisco State University and Sonoma State University in spring 2014.

The story was voted into Censored’s Top 25 at Number 14 out of a field of over 230 nominations, alongside a related article, “Two Important New Papers Show Mobile Phone Use Does Cause an Increase in Brain Tumours,” first appearing at power watch.uk.org. Both stories were featured in Project Censored’s 2015 yearbook, Censored 2015: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2013-2014, published in October 2014.

Story nominations by Tracy’s undergrad students at [censored] University for 2014 also received recognition from Project Censored judges (here, here, here, and here).

Tracy won a Project Censored award in 2013 for the story, “Wireless Technology: A Looming Health Crisis,” published at Memory Hole and Global Research, also voted Number 14, and featured in Censored 2014: Fearless Speech in Fateful Times.

Tracy’s original January 21, 2014 article is reposted below.

Health Impact of RF Radiation: Media Blackout on Smart Meter Dangers

By James F. Tracy

Major power utilities continue to deploy “smart” electrical meters on businesses and private residences throughout the United States and Canada. Yet those in North America and elsewhere remain in the dark on the negative health effects of such devices that systematically blast their homes with radio-frequency (RF) radiation on a minute-by-minute, round-the-clock basis.

In 2009 the Obama administration partnered with utilities by allocating $3.4 billion in federal stimulus funds toward building a nationwide “smart grid,” where smart meters figure centrally.[1] The project is part of President Obama’s “Climate Action Plan” that under United Nations auspices seeks to reduce US carbon emissions 20% by the year 2020.[2]

There is more than ample research available that has associated negative health effects of RF radiation emitted by smart meters [3] for regulatory authorities to place restrictions on power utilities and compel them to abide by the precautionary principle. Such restrictions would require power providers to refrain from wide scale installation of smart meters until a sufficient body of scientific research demonstrating the safety of such devices has been produced and rigorously evaluated.

Yet in the US and elsewhere the imperative of having a “smart grid,” the prospect of a carbon trading scheme, lax (and in at least some cases corrupt) state and federal regulatory bodies, and the sheer power of the utilities combine to jeopardize the long term health of the entire population.

In a purportedly democratic society news outlets play a decisive role in such an impending health crisis. By failing to report on the dubious health research of smart meters and the fact that the public is being involuntarily subjected to such technology, news media are a key factor in the citizenry’s continued ignorance and inaction.

In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer 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 cellphone use.”[4] Despite this warning from a well-recognized source, the utilities stubbornly insist that all residences must be equipped with a smart meter issuing dangerous electropollution.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ceased studying the health effects of radiofrequency radiation when the Senate Appropriations Committee cut the department’s funding and forbade it from further research into the area.[5] Thereafter RF limits were codified as mere “guidelines” based on the EPA’s tentative findings and are presently overseen by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

These weakly enforced standards are predicated on the alleged “thermal effect” of RF to which the FCC subscribes. In other words, if the energy emitted from a wireless antenna or device is not powerful enough to heat the skin or flesh then no danger is posed to human health.[6]

smart_meterTo this day power utilities cling to this severely outmoded and unscientific standard when confronted with the formidable body of research linking RF to cancer, destruction of DNA, and other negative health effects. News media seldom question the FCC policy when it is cited by utilities and regulators alike to underline the supposed overall safety of smart meters.[7]

An electronic LexisNexis search of newspaper articles referencing “smart meters” appearing between May 31, 2011, the date WHO classified RF a Class 2B carcinogen, and June 19, 2014, yields close to 839 pieces published in English language papers. Yet for the same time span only one tenth of the sample (82 articles) mentions “smart meters” and “carcinogen” or “carcinogenic” in the same report. Of these, 65 of the articles appeared in Canadian, and to a much lesser degree Australian or UK papers. Note that each sample includes guest editorials and letters to the editor penned by concerned citizens.

Using parameters from the date May 31, 2011, the date WHO declared RF a Class 2B carcinogen, to January 19, 2014, of 93 newspaper articles referencing “smart meter” and “World Health Organization,” 76 were published in Canadian, and to a much lesser degree UK, Australian, Malaysian or New Zealand outlets.

As the above suggests, the extremely limited awareness especially in the US of the potential health consequences of exposure to the continual RF emitted by smart meters is primarily because the issue is being blacked out in the press. When such dangers are reported, they are tempered by the refrain of the FCC’s “thermal effect” policy, which in light of the abundant countervailing research amounts to disinformation.

In December 2013 I contacted the reporter at the local metro-daily Palm Beach Post covering the state power utility, Florida Power and Light, and its smart meter policy to remind her of the bevy of public health and medical research documenting the likely consequences of sustained RF exposure. I also directed her to the WHO statement classifying RF as potentially carcinogenic.

To the Post’s credit a subsequent story highlighting Florida Power and Light’s “opt out” policy referenced the WHO statement. Yet the piece appeared deep in the business section of the paper, and the WHO warning was accompanied by the Florida Public Service Commission’s familiar rejoinder.

In 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields such as those emitted by cellular phones, microwaves and smart meters as possibly carcinogenic to humans.

The PSC has said its authority does not extend to health issues related to meters. Smart meters are certified for compliance with radio frequency emission standards by the Federal Communications Commission, and the FCC has deemed that meters in compliance with the standards do not have adverse health impacts.[8]

While one or more hidden agendas likely exist to keep the public unaware of the health dangers associated with RF and smart meters (again, think carbon trading, in addition to the social control possibilities via energy rationing and surveillance soon to be realized through the “smart grid,”) a more immediate cause for such censorship is simply profit and continued media monopoly control of public opinion and discourse.

The telecommunications industry whose services are largely predicated on RF has recently exhibited the largest growth in advertising outlays, which are surely recognized in bottom line terms by the news and media industries.[9] With potential continued revenue growth on this scale, raising questions and relaying information that can safeguard public health and allow citizens to ask intelligent questions concerning the health of themselves and their loved ones simply constitutes poor business practice.


[1] “President Obama Announces $3.4 Billion Investment to Spur Transition to Smart Energy Grid,” The White House, October 27, 2009.

[2] Ed King, “Obama Promises to Cut Carbon Pollution in Climate Action Plan,” Responding to Climate Change, June 26, 2013.

[3] See, for example, the American Association of Environmental Medicine EMF-RF Reference List (PDF) and AAEM’s April 12, 2012 Press Advisory (PDF).

[4] World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, “IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic,” May 31, 2011.

[5] Susan Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams,” San Diego Reader, May 18, 2011,

[6] FCC Office of Engineering and Technology, http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety. See also James F. Tracy “Wireless Technology and the Accelerated Toxification of America,” memoryholeblog.com, July 7, 2012.

[7] When this author obtained documents through a public records request from the Florida Public Service Commission on Florida Power and Light’s smart meter campaign–a very simple and routine endeavor for any journalist–it was evident that no human health impact studies on statewide smart meter deployment were ever considered. The PSC merely accepted FPL’s rationale and related public relations literature.

[8] Susan Salisbury, “Media Opt-Out Fee to Be Considered, PSC Staff Proposes Enrollment, Monthly Cost for Device For Device Foes,” Palm Beach Post, January 3, 2014, B4.

[9] “Ad Spend By Sector: Consumer Goods and Telecom Take the Cake in 2012,” Nielsen.com, April 25, 2013.

Professor James F. Tracy is an Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University. James Tracy’s work on media history, politics and culture has appeared in a wide variety of academic journals, edited volumes, and alternative news and opinion outlets. James is editor of Union for Democratic Communication’s Journal Democratic Communiqué and a contributor to Project Censored’s forthcoming publication Censored 2013: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012. Additional writings and information are accessible at memoryholeblog.com.

Sources: http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/media-blackout-on-smart-meter-dangers-wins-project-censored-award/



Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study

The scientists were right — your cell phone can give you cancer.

There have long been whispers of a cancer connection from your cell — and a new study backs up the claims.

“These data are a clear sign of the real risks this kind of radiation poses for human health,” study author Igor Yakymenko said.

Yakymenko’s meta-study — basically a study of hundreds of other studies — reveals many findings of previous researchers into how radiofrequency from your phone can damage DNA.

That damage can add up over time and cause a variety of health problems, like cancer, headaches, fatigue and even skin problems.

For example, using your phone for just 20 minutes a day for five years increased the risk of one type of brain tumor threefold, and using the phone an hour a day for four years upped the risk of some tumors three to five times, Yakymenko said.

But even though the risk of brain and related cancers is low — in 2012, there were 6.4 cases per 100,000 U.S. adults — Yakymenko says we should be on alert because ailments can take up to 30 years to develop.

“(Our) data were obtained on adults who used cell phones mostly up to 10 years as adults,” he said. “The situation can dramatically differ for children who use cells phone in childhood, when their biology much more sensitive to hazardous factors, and will use it over the life.”

To minimize your risk, use your phone less and go hands-free to keep the frequency away from your head, Yakymenko said.

source: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/cellphone-radiation-cancer-study-article-1.2308509

Brain Tumor Rates Are Rising in the US: The Role of Cell Phone & Cordless Phone Use

May 7, 2015

Hardell and Carlberg (2015) recently reported that brain tumor rates have been increasing in Sweden based upon the Swedish National Inpatient Registry data.

What about brain tumor rates in the United States?

Using national tumor registry data, a recent study found that the overall incidence of meningioma, the most common non-malignant brain tumor, has significantly increased in the United States in recent years (Dolecek et al., 2015). The age-adjusted incidence rate for meningioma significantly increased from about 6.3 per 100,000 in 2004 to about 7.8 per 100,000 in 2009. Brain tumor incidence increased for all age groups except youth (0-19 years of age).

The incidence of glioma, the most common malignant brain tumor, has also been increasing in recent years in the United States, although not across-the-board. The National Cancer Institute reported that glioma incidence in the frontal lobe increased among young adults 20-29 years of age (Inskip et al., 2010). The incidence of glioblastoma multiforme, a highly cancerous glioma, increased in the frontal and temporal lobes, and in the cerebellum among adults of all ages in the U.S. (Zada et al., 2012).

Risk of meningioma from cell phone and cordless phone use

A new study by Carlberg and Hardell (2015) adds to the growing body of evidence that heavy use of wireless phones (i.e., cell phones and cordless phones) is associated with increased risk of meningioma in Sweden. Heavy cordless phone users (defined as more than 1,436 hours of lifetime use) had a 1.7-fold greater risk of meningioma (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.3-2.2). The heaviest cordless phone users (defined as more than 3,358 hours of lifetime use) had a two-fold greater risk of meningioma (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.4 – 2.8). The heaviest cell phone users had a 1.5-fold greater risk of meningioma (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 0.99 – 2.1).

Two earlier case-control studies conducted in other nations have found significant evidence of increased risk for meningioma among heavy cell phone users:

(1) In France, Coureau et al. (2014) found a two and a half-fold greater risk of meningioma for heavy cell phone users (defined as 896 or more hours of lifetime use) (OR = 2.57; 95% CI = 1.02 to 6.44).

(2) In Australia, Canada, France, Israel and New Zealand, Cardis et al. (2011) found a two-fold greater risk of meningioma for heavy cell phone users (defined as 3,124 or more hours of lifetime use) (OR = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.93).

The two prior studies did not assess cordless phone use so it’s likely they underestimate the meningioma risk from cell phone use.

Thus, we now have three independent, case-control studies which find that wireless phone use is a risk factor for meningioma.

Risk of glioma from cell phone and cordless phone use

Three independent, case-control studies have found that long-term use of cell phones increases risk for glioma (Interphone Study Group, 2010; Hardell et al, 2013; Coureau et al, 2014). The only research to examine cordless phone use also found increased glioma risk with long-term use (Hardell et al, 2013). These studies include data from 13 nations: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and the UK. After ten years of wireless phone use (i.e., cell phone plus cordless phone use), the risk of glioma doubles and after 25 years, the risk triples (Hardell et al, 2013).

Although the U.S. does not conduct research on wireless phone use and tumor risk in humans and does not participate in any of the international studies, there is no reason to believe that Americans are immune to these potential effects of wireless phone use.

In sum, the peer-reviewed research on brain tumor risk and wireless phone use strongly suggests that we should exercise precaution and keep cell phones and cordless phones away from our heads. Moreover, the research calls into question the adequacy of national standards and international guidelines that limit our exposure to radiation from wireless phones.

Aug 5, 2015

Cancer registries are developed to collect data on malignant tumors and often do not collect data on non-malignant (sometimes called benign) tumors. Since about half of primary brain tumors are non-malignant, these tumors are may not be monitored by public health surveillance systems (e.g., Canada).

The U.S has a Central Brain Tumor Registry (CBTRUS): “a resource for gathering and disseminating current epidemiologic data on all primary brain tumors, benign and malignant, for the purposes of accurately describing their incidence and survival patterns, evaluating diagnosis and treatment, facilitating etiologic studies, establishing awareness of the disease, and ultimately, for the prevention of all brain tumors.” However, “CBTRUS makes no representations or warranties, and gives no other assurances or guarantees, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the data presented.”
There is a good reason for the disclaimer on the CBTRUS home page. Tumor registries are useful in monitoring disease incidence only to the extent that all procedures are well implemented. Registries are highly dependent upon reporting agencies (e.g., hospitals) to do an accurate and complete job in reporting tumors to the registry.
Registry data typically suffer from various problems:

“Users must be aware of diverse issues that influence collection and interpretation of cancer registry data, such as multiple cancer diagnoses, duplicate reports, reporting delays, misclassification of race/ethnicity, and pitfalls in estimations of cancer incidence rates.” (Izqierdo, JN, Schoenbach, VJ. The potential and limitations of data from population-based state cancer registries. AmJ Public Health. 2000;90:695-698. URL: http://1.usa.gov/1IHO8FM)

These shortcomings of cancer registries are not just hypothetical. For example, Hardell and Carlberg (2015) recently reported that brain cancer rates have been increasing in Sweden based upon the Swedish National Inpatient Registry but not according to the Swedish Cancer Registry. Based upon their results they “postulate(d) that a large part of brain tumours of unknown type are never reported to the Cancer Register … We conclude that the Swedish Cancer Register is not reliable …”

Parliamentary report warns cellphones, Wi-Fi a serious health issue

A parliamentary committee has waded into the murky scientific debate over cellphones, warning that the ubiquitous devices may cause cancer, infertility, or learning disabilities and urging parents to shield their children from unnecessary exposure.

But several leading Canadian health experts say that cellphones and Wi-Fi devices pose less risk to humans than run-of-the-mill fevers.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, in a report released this week, urges the federal government to launch a public awareness campaign about the possible hazards and safe use of wireless technologies. The 10-member panel also wants the government to consider funding research into potential links between radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic radiation exposure and cancer, genetic damage, infertility, development and behaviour problems, and possible harmful effects to the eyes and brain.

It wants federal workplaces to recognize employees who have “electromagnetic hypersensitivity” and is urging the Canadian Medical Association and other medical bodies to update guidelines on the treatment and diagnosis of the highly controversial condition.

The Conservative-dominated committee also says more efforts should be made to reduce exposure in children under 14.

“The committee agrees that the potential risks of exposure to RF fields are a serious public health issue that needs to be brought to the attention of Canadians so that they have the knowledge to use wireless devices responsibly,” reads the report.

But experts say there is no evidence of any harmful effects from RF exposure.

“Right now, we are literally bathing in radiation coming from everywhere — Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cellular towers, in addition to the usual radio and television broadcasts,” said Natalia Nikolova, Canada Research Chair in high-frequency electromagnetics at McMaster University in Hamilton. “I’m not worried at all about short-term exposures, because I can assure you there is no harm.”

And B.C.’s top health officer, Dr. Perry Kendall, says there is no scientific evidence that current standards for wireless exposure present a health risk to either children or adults, and he suggested the parliamentary report had been influenced by an advocacy group that disagrees with the findings of a report by the Royal Society of Canada.

“They were reviewing a report that had been undertaken by the Royal Society of Canada, which basically found that there was no convincing evidence, again, for the health concerns that were being raised,” said Kendall. “It is sometimes a public policy challenge when you get advocacy groups that are convinced about something going before a political body that doesn’t have the background,” he said. “So the European parliament and a number of other parliaments have gone against the scientific evidence and have made recommendations or have changed standards.

“I think most of the scientists who look at this wouldn’t agree there is a compelling rationale for it.”

Dr. Patricia Daly, the chief medical health officer at Vancouver Coastal Health, also reviewed the recommendations in the report and still has no concerns about Wi-Fi expansion in public places including schools, community centres and health care facilities.

The parliamentary committee heard testimony from witnesses over three days of hearings who cited studies linking RF exposure with up to four-fold increases in cancer, as well as a doubling of the risk of glioma, a rare and deadly brain tumour, after just two years exposure to cellphones. Witnesses cited reports of women who developed unusual breast cancers in the same position they kept cellphones tucked into their bras, and of testicular cancers among police officers who had used radar guns to detect speeders, but who “very seldom turned off the guns and just kept them in their laps.” Some linked cellphone exposure to increased risks of autism; others said it damages the number and motility of live sperm.

The health committee concluded that there isn’t enough evidence to support further lowering Health Canada’s “Code 6” safety limits on radio frequency exposure. But it wants the federal government, provinces and territories to collaborate on collecting data relating to wireless device use and cancer.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Cancer Research (IACR) has classified RF exposure as a possible human carcinogen. James McNamee, a Health Canada official and member of the IACR, told the health committee some studies found effects on human health, while others didn’t, and that “it was impossible to make a causal association at this time.”

Nikolova, of McMaster, understands parents are concerned. Cellphone and Wi-Fi usage is increasing every year, and by younger and younger children, she said.

However, “most of the work published around the world points to the lack of harmful effects,” she said.

According to Nikola, the only proven effect on humans is heating. A cellphone can warm the body by a fraction of a degree, she said, which is lower than a fever, “and certainly your body can handle that in the short term and recover.”

Something may be happening at the cellular level, she said, “but nobody can prove it.

“Of course the public says, ‘If you can’t prove it, it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.’ And of course, it may exist, and scientists around the world are working on it. But, so far, there is no proof that there are any changes at the cellular level.”

B.C.’s Kendall said there is a danger that people who believe they are suffering electromagnetic hypersensitivity (also known as EHS) may have some other underlying condition that they aren’t getting treated by doctors because they have made their own diagnosis.

He said if people are worried, they can do things to reduce their exposure, such as using a speakerphone or texting instead of holding a cellphone to their head to talk.

Kerry Crofton, who has a PhD in psychology and is the co-founder and executive director of Doctors for Safer Schools, welcomed the report’s recommendations. She said while it won’t change current standards, it draws attention to the issue.

“The good news is that this is on the radar screen at all,” she said. “Because when we talk to parents and we try and caution them about letting their young children on iPads, etc., understandably their response is if it weren’t safe it wouldn’t be so prevalent, so it must be safe.”

Crofton, author of A Wellness Guide for the Digital Age, said the main symptoms of EHS are vertigo, insomnia, ringing in the ears, headaches and cardio symptoms such as tachycardia.

In a telephone interview from her home in Victoria where she talks on a wired phone and connects to the Internet via a wired connection to her computer, Crofton said people should turn off their Wi-Fi at night, not carry their cellphones on their bodies and not keep their cellphone turned on by their bed at night.

Crofton said the report is calling on health authorities to “do their job.”

There are a number of public Wi-Fi hotspots, with Shaw offering 60,000 across B.C. and Alberta. Telus operates 8,000 hot spots, with 1,800 in downtown Vancouver and about 3,700 across Metro Vancouver.

Shawn Hall, a spokesman for Telus said “all Telus sites comply with Safety Code 6 guidelines, and the wireless technology we use is low-powered, typically emitting signals that are significantly lower than Health Canada’s safe levels.”

source: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Parliamentary+report+warns+cellphones+serious+health+issue/11147056/story.html

EMF Radiation: a New Cause of Breast Cancer?

11th February 2014

By Vidya Frazier

Guest Writer for Wake Up World

According to an increasing pool of research, exposure to EMF radiation may be a contributor to rising rates of breast cancer. Scientists studying a number of possible environmental causes for the disease found that perhaps the most significant factor is the extensive amount of electromagnetic radiation from wireless devices, cell towers, and WiFi in our environment today.

Breast Cancer Epidemic

The statistics on breast cancer are alarming. The American Cancer Society states that 1 in 8 women in the US will develop breast cancer over the course of their lifetime. The chance of dying from breast cancer is about 1 in 36; death rates are higher than any other type of cancer for women, except for lung cancer. A number of men also continue to develop breast cancer.

Breast Cancer and Melatonin

So what is the connection between EMF radiation and breast cancer? It’s somewhat complicated. It’s necessary first to understand the role that melatonin, a hormone secreted by the pineal gland, plays in the body.

Perhaps melatonin’s most commonly-known function is regulating circadian rhythms in the body which govern the waking/sleep cycle. But melatonin is also a powerful scavenger of free radicals, helping to facilitate proper DNA synthesis and cell division—thereby helping to prevent cancer.

The surprising function of melatonin that scientists are now focusing on is how it interacts with breast cancer cells. They are finding that a low level of melatonin in the body stimulates the growth of certain breast cancer cells, whereas a high level inhibits their growth.

Women with breast cancer have as little as 1/10 the amount of melatonin in their bodies that healthy women have. (See studies by Soule 1973, Lippman 1977, Wilson 1992, Cos 1998, and Black 2005.)

Breast cancer has been shown to be 60% more common among such groups as nurses, night shift workers and long-haul airline attendants. These are people who don’t sleep regularly at night, and so their pineal gland has a hard time producing enough melatonin for healthy functioning. For this reason, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has officially stated that night shift work is a probable “human carcinogen”. (See Boston Nurses Study 1997, Scandinavian Airlines Study 2010, and Hansen 2001).

EMF Radiation Inhibits the Production of Melatonin

The information about the lack of melatonin as a cause of breast cancer has actually been around for a while. What scientists are now focusing on is the question of what causes the lack of melatonin in the body. A number of factors appear to affect the production of this hormone, including light, sleep patterns, drugs, alcohol, exercise, caffeine, and other hormones (in particular, estrogen).

But it’s the role of EMF radiation that’s currently drawing interest, as it’s clear that the production of melatonin in the body is diminished with EMF exposure. Studies have shown that breast cancer cells actually proliferate when exposed to EMFs.

How does this happen? EMF radiation disrupts cell-signaling systems which determine how the cells respond to their environment. When manmade EMFs enter the body, cells respond to them as they would to an “enemy” threatening them: they harden their outer walls.

This in turn holds all toxins, including free radicals, inside the cells—and also prevents nutrients from entering. If the assault from EMF exposure is continuous, cells eventually die. This makes the tissue or organ susceptible to the proliferation of malignant cancer cells.

Certain sources of EMF radiation seem to have a very direct correlation to breast cancer.   Cell phone radiation, in particular, has drawn special interest, particularly if the cell phone is carried close to a woman’s breasts.

However, even low levels of EMF exposure caused by electricity and appliances, have been shown to restrict the production of melatonin in the body. For example, if someone sleeps next to a digital clock or cordless phone,  enough continuous EMF radiation is emitted  to seriously suppress melatonin production.

How to Protect Yourself from EMF Radiation

If you’re someone already suffering from breast cancer, it’s clear you should steer clear of EMF exposure as much as possible and consider getting EMF protection products for any wireless devices you have and for the electricity in your home. EMFs may well be inhibiting your recovery.

If you’re simply concerned about possible future effects of EMF exposure on your health (especially if you have a job that keeps you awake at night or breast cancer is in your family), follow these same precautionary steps. You might also consider taking melatonin as a supplement and strengthening your immune system with antioxidant nutrients, such as green tea, selenium and Vitamins A, C and E.


ï‚·   Schoenfeld ER, O’Leary ES, Henderson K, et al. Electromagnetic fields and breast cancer on Long Island: A case-control study. American Journal of Epidemiology 2003; 158: 47–58.

ï‚·   London SJ, Pagoda JM, Hwang KL et al. Residential magnetic field exposure and breast cancer risk: A nested case-control study from a multi-ethnic cohort in Los Angeles, California. American Journal of Epidemiology 2003; 158: 969–980.

ï‚·   Davis S, Mirick DK, Stevens RG. Residential magnetic fields and the risk of breast cancer. American Journal of Epidemiology 2002; 155: 446–454.

ï‚·   Kabat GC, O’Leary ES, Schoenfeld ER, et al. Electric blanket use and breast cancer on Long Island. Epidemiology 2003; 14(5): 514–520.

ï‚·   Kliukiene J, Tynes T, Andersen A. Residential and occupational exposures to 50-Hz magnetic fields and breast cancer in women: A population-based study. American Journal of Epidemiology 2004; 159(9): 852–861.

ï‚·   Zhu K, Hunter S, Payne-Wilks K, et al. Use of electric bedding devices and risk of breast cancer in African-American women. American Journal of Epidemiology 2003; 158: 798–806.

ï‚·   Tynes T, Haldorsen T. Residential and occupational exposure to 50 Hz magnetic fields and hematological cancers in Norway. Cancer Causes & Control 2003; 14: 715–720.

ï‚·   Labreche F, Goldberg MS, Valois M-F, et al. Occupational exposures to extremely low frequency magnetic fields and postmenopausal breast cancer. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2003; 44: 643–652.

Previous article by Vidya:

About the author:

Vidya Frazier, psychotherapist and writer, has done extensive research on the effects of environmental influences on health. As someone with the condition known as Electromagnetic Sensitivity, she has especially focused on the health effects of electromagnetic pollution and has found that using EMF protection products is extremely effective.

Source: http://wakeup-world.com/2014/02/11/emf-radiation-a-new-cause-of-breast-cancer/

Scientists write to UN, WHO to reduce emission norms

MUMBAI: Nearly 200 scientists from across the world, including 12 from India, have petitioned the United Nations (UN) and World Health (WHO) to reduce cell tower emission levels fearing health hazards to those living in the vicinity of mobile towers.

At present, the WHO has classified radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) as “possibly carcinogenic” to humans. The scientists now demand that this be replaced by the words “probably carcinogenic”.

“We are more concerned about the adverse health effects resulting from exposure to high EMF levels and have therefore requested the UN and WHO to reduce the present-day emission levels. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) is a global body which usually fixes the norms which are then accepted by various countries. We want the ICNIRP to revise its global norms and reduce the radiation levels furthermore,” Prof Girish Kumar from IIT Bombay told TOI: Kumar is a signatory to the petition.

Sources in the cellular industry countered this, saying that India had already reduced its emission levels to one-tenth of the global norms. “If we reduce it furthermore, it will result in low power output from the existing cell tower antenna and this may lead to call drops or weak signals.” asked an operator, requesting anonymity. “To cater to the mobile population, we may have to increase the number of cell towers. Will this be accepted by the public?” he asked.

Anti-radiation activist Prakash Munshi, who has also filed a PIL in court, welcomed the move by scientists. “It indicates that the radiation risks from cell towers is a global issue. Why should we have cell towers in gardens and facing our apartments? I am not against cell phones or towers, but there should be improved technology to reduce health hazards. Our court petition is also filed by victims of cell tower radiation and deals with concerns about health,” he said.

Scientists pointed out that present-day EMF was affecting living organisims. “Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, 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. We want the UN and WHO to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks,” their petition states.

Source: http://snip.ly/zYlu

Smart Meter Lawsuits

Screen Shot 2015-06-04 at 5.37.44 PMSummary of Selected Smart Meter Lawsuits

This information was obtained with permission from smartmeterlawsuits.blogspot.com. It is in the process of being updated- please bear with us and if you have any information to add please e-mail us.

Links on how to file your own lawsuits or complaint:
Medical Request not to have a Smart Meter


HEALTH —Southern California Edison
Plantiff claimed negative health effects after smart meter was installed (Legal Documents).
\SUCCESS!!! The judge ordered the Utilities company pay for health damages or remove the meter! (Settlement Documents

Privacy, Constitutional Violations, Security Risks–Kauai, Hawaii
Adam Asquith filed for a Federal Injunction against the instillation of smart meters (Court Filing DocumentsNews Story.
SUCCESS!  The Utilities Company offered a settlement (Settlement Document) and agreed NOT to install a smart meter on the plaintiff’s property. (News report)

Mark Naea, a neighbor of Adam Asquith (who won his case against smart meters) filed a formal complaint (Legal Document) that he should not have to pay the court fees and file a separate case to get the opt-out option that was court awarded to his neighbor.
SUCCESS!!! The Public Utilities Commission ordered (Legal Document) Kauai Island Utility Cooperative(KIUC) to address  his complaint.

A legal complaint objecting to multiple aspects of smart meters. Overview
SUCCESS!!  The court ruled that the Utilities company DID NOT adequately address health and safety concerns and now must do so. Bangor Daily News

Update6/4/15: After a 3 year PUC investigation into the health and safety of smart meters following the Supreme Court remand mentioned previously, the Commission ruled smart meters were basically safe enough. There was no vote held by the two commissioners and one of them recognized RF could probably cause adverse health effects and thought no cost opt outs [using a smart meter with transmitter disabled] should be available when suggested by a physician. Because the opinion made little sense and Central Maine Power never met their statutory burden to show safety was ensured with smart meters, opponents have appealed the decision, once more to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. At this point, appellants brief has been filed, appellee’s brief is due June 30th and then opponents have 14 days to file a response. After this, oral arguments will be scheduled. More information and updates on the case can be found here.


Complaint that the PUC (Public Utilities Commission) did not address safety, Constitutional Privacy and health concerns. (New Story on Outcome)
SUCCESS! The Supreme Judicial Court findings are that they did not properly address these problems (health and safety) and MUST do so. The Court not agree the Privacy concerns were not addressed.


On July 9, 2010, Larry Nikkel died in a fire believed to be caused by smart meter.

Smart Meters have been “mandated” in British Columbia, however Plantiff contests that the wireless component is part of the mandate.(Press Release) (News story) (Formal Letter of Complaint – legal Document) (Letter of Complaint- scroll down)
Status: Appeal to be heard in October

HEALTH –Central California
Lawsuit filed against the CPUC (Central Public Utilities Commission) for ignoring evidence of harmful health effects of Smart Meters. (Latest updateLink on story
Status:Newly filed.

A top PG&E executive was caught spying and attempting to infiltrate a nonprofit to gather information about a forthcoming lawsuit. (Coverage of case) Curious and curiouser. (Legal Order to investigate)

Filed by an Electro-magnetic consulting firm,Wilner and Associates this Class Action Lawsuit list multiple ten grievances and is seeking $10,000 per customer who has experienced negative health effects. (Story) (Case Filing)

Residents have filed a federal lawsuit (News article) seeking an injunction to instillation (Court Documents)
Up to date info on the case
Status:Discovery phase of the case

Cases “Loss” (aka opportunity to learn so we win the next round)


According to the lawsuit, the Don Baker, plaintiff, is an engineer and was an AMI smart grid project manager.  He alleges the smart meters were not properly tested, and were seriously flawed. He found that the Sensus iConA had a “tendency to drastically overheat, and melt or burn”.  He was asked to keep quiet and was eventually terminated for failing to do so.

Status: The fire issue was not the focus of the case, it was misuse of Federal Funds.The District Attorney chose not to pursue the case, not based on the fire hazard claims, but claiming Federal Money was not misused. (case documents)


A class action lawsuit (Case documents) filed against Texan Utilities company Oncor. (News Story, Video)
Status: Case Dismissed (One analysis of why it failed)

(7/14) OVERCHARGING Bakersfield California
Initially an individual case alleging overcharging  of smart meters (Initial Filing), this turned into a class action lawsuit (News report).
Status: Initially SUCCESS! Then overturned.emfsafetynetwork.org

Source: http://stopsmartmeters.org/smart-meter-lawsuits/

A Shot Letter To My Representatives

This is a draft of a letter that I have been sending around to my representatives.


I am writing this letter concerning the Government Mandated Smart Meters and the forced installation. For the past few years our power companies “mine being Inland Power & Light”, have been installing a new power meter called a “Smart Meter”, the meters communicate on a wireless signal like a cell phone, these smart meters have been shown to produce RF radiation, and independent studies have shown that these RF frequencies are much higher then the power companie[s] are claiming, there have been numerous reports of people suffering health effects after the installation of these meters, after said meters were removed and the analog meters were reinstalled their health improved. According to Cancer.org these smart meters also have the potential to cause problems for people who are all ready at risk , “concern has been voiced that cells in the body that have been damaged by exposure to some other substance might somehow be more likely to become cancerous when exposed to RF waves http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/smart-meters I am one of these people, I am a disabled American, I have a disease called Neurofibromatosis, which causes me to have tumors all over my body, mainly the head, face neck and chest, these tumors have the potential to turn cancerous, and I have no desire to test their product.

There has also been numbers reports of smart meters Exploding and causing house fires. You can find more info here http://emfsafetynetwork.org/smart-meters/smart-meter-fires-and-explosions/ . Parts of Canada and United States have already been removing them “SaskPower to remove 105,000 smart meters following fires http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/saskpower-to-remove-105-000-smart-meters-following-fires-1.2723046 ” “PG&E Begins Removing ‘Smart’ Meters Due to Health Effects” http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/11/01/pge-begins-removing-smart-meters-due-to-health-effects/ only to name two, there are many more reports.

Despite these reports the power company is demanding that they will put a meter on anyway but they will not turn it on if I pay them a $25 a month opt-out extortion fee. That said meter is still not safe weather or not their wireless transmitter is turned on or off.

If the public where informed the outcry would be loud, the people have not been informed about the concerns and possible dangers. Smart meters have not been proven safe and should not be forced onto the public. There is enough evidence shown that should cause an immediate halt to all smart meter installations. I request a public service announcement on this issue, I am very concerned that there has not already been one.

The public must be informed and action needs to be taken now before this becomes a crisis.

The man that is in charge of this at Inland Power & Light Is Gene (Please Contact Inland Power & light)

Inlandpower & Light has been harassing me, I have informed Inland power by registered letter, letting them know that I do no accept their new meters, we have also made several phone calls. They are demanding to remove my analog meter and install a Smart Meter anyway claiming they will not turn it on if I pay them the $25 a month extortion opt-out fee. There is no reason for them to remove my analog meter, it does not effect them in anyway shape or forum, I have always read my own meter for the past 12 years since we have lived here, and there is no reason to charge the $25 a month opt-out fee. In other parts of the U.S and Canada residents are having their analog meter reinstalled.

For the record I will not accept a smart meter at my place of residence in any way shape or forum. I reserve the right to protect myself and my family from harm.

These people are harassing me and I request my government back me up and stop Inland power from forcing me and the public into having a potential health hazard.

I want a representative to call Inlandpower & Light in my behalf and tell them to stop harassing me now!

Thank you

Robert M——


More info at TakeBackYourPower.net

P.S A draft of this letter has been sent to Inland Power & Light…

Using a cell phone for an hour a day increases cancer risk by 500%, study shows

by David Gutierrez, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Studies are increasingly showing that cellular phone use can lead to chronic health problems, including cancer and neurodegenerative disorders. Now a new study in the journal Electromagnetic Biology & Medicine has suggested a biological mechanism that might explain how these health problems develop.

The study was conducted by researchers from Indiana University, the University of Eastern Finland, the University of Campinas in Brazil, and the Institute of Experimental Pathology, Oncology and Radiobiology in Kiev, Ukraine.

The researchers found that exposure to the radiofrequency radiation (RFR) used by cell phones and other wireless devices causes a metabolic imbalance known as oxidative stress.

“These data are a clear sign of the real risks this kind of radiation poses for human health,” co-author Igor Yakymenko said.

Enormous increases in tumor risk

Health researchers roughly classify radiation into two categories: ionizing and non-ionizing. Ionizing radiation, which includes X-rays, is a variety known to cause DNA damage and cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, including RFR, is believed to be too weak to directly damage cells. Nevertheless, evidence is emerging that RFR does indeed increase the risk of cancer.

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer officially classified RFR as a “possible carcinogen.” This came a year after the international Interphone study found that people who used a cell phone for ten years were 40 percent more likely to develop brain tumors. The risk was 400 percent higher among those who started using phones before the age of 20. Decade-long cell phone users were also more likely to develop parotid gland tumors and 300 percent more likely to develop acoustic nerve tumors.

The industry-funded Interphone study has been openly criticized for selecting data in a way that was designed to minimize the apparent risk of cell phone use.

For the new study, the researchers reviewed prior studies into cell phone risk. They found that just an hour of cell phone use per day for four years was enough to increase the risk of certain tumors between three and five times. Even 20 minutes of daily use for five years was enough to triple the risk of a certain brain tumor.

The risk may be even higher, Yakymenko warned, because some cancers can take 30 years to develop. In addition, little research has been conducted into people who start using cell phones as children.

“[Our] data were obtained on adults who used cell phones mostly up to 10 years as adults,” he said. He added that the situation could be much different for children who use cell phones because their biology is more vulnerable to hazards and they will presumably use the devices throughout their lifetime.

Cell phones cause oxidative damage

One of the major problems in gaining widespread acceptance of these risks has been the fact that RFR simply does not cause the damage seen in cells exposed to ionizing radiation. In reviewing experimental studies on the metabolic effects of low-intensity RFR, the researchers found a surprising trend: regular cell phone, tablet or wireless internet RFR consistently causes oxidative stress in living cells.

Oxidative stress is a metabolic imbalance in which the production of free radicals exceeds the body’s ability to remove them with antioxidant activity. The excess free radicals produced in this situation are able to damage cells and DNA. Free radicals have been implicated as causes of many chronic diseases, including cancer, heart disease, and dementia, and they are also responsible for many of the effects of aging.

It is well known that the body reacts to aggressive environments with oxidative stress. Now it has been demonstrated that “ordinary wireless radiation” can have the same effect, the researchers said. This could explain not just cancer, but many of the other long-term health effects observed with long-term cell phone use.

Sources for this article include:

Source: http://www.naturalnews.com/z050906_cell_phones_cancer_risk_tumors.html