January  23, 2012.  In October 2011, Moses Znaimer, President of Zoomer Media,  invited me to give a talk at the Zoomer Life Conference in Toronto. Below is short video  based on that presentation.

In this video I present information about the harmful effects of electrosmog and the beneficial effects of devices that generate pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF).  In Europe these PEMF devices are much more popular than they are in North America.  They are used to treat pain, to enhance healing of bone fractures, to treat depression and other psychological disorders, to promote circulation and functioning of the immune system.

Click here to view the video on YouTube.

In order to better understand how electromagnetic energy affects living organisms, it is important to consider a broad range of exposures and both the harmful and beneficial effects documented in the literature.

Fortunately we have some excellent doctors, scientists, and engineers who have been working with PEMFs for decades and who are willing to share their understanding of this technology.  The work of Dr. Rainer Klopp in Germany is particularly enlightening and is mentioned in the video, as is the work of Dr. Thomas Rau at the Swiss Paracelsus Clinic, Dr. Jeff Daskalakis at the University of Toronto, Dr. Jeff Marrongelle at the  Bioenergimed Metabolic Institute in Pennsylvania, and Dr. Roland Drolet in Quebec.  The devices mentioned in this video include those that promote bone healing; transcranial magnetic stimulation for depression; Rhumart for rheumatism and arthritis; and iMRS and BEMER for a host of symptoms.  Many devices are now available and I expect these devices will become more popular here in North America as well.

Various shielding products to reduce electrosmog exposure are also mentioned in this video.

Please note that our research in the area of PEMF is at an early stage. Inclusion of a product in this video does not necessarily imply endorsement.

Click here to watch Dr Oz on PEMF Therapy and Pain Relief.

January 7, 2012.  In 2010, we published a paper that showed radiation from a cordless phone at 2.4 GHz affects the heart. Click here for a copy of that publication and here to watch the youtube video.

We heard from many people who acknowledged that they experience heart palpitations in certain environments and are unable to use mobile phones and be near cell phone antennas and Wi-Fi routers.  We also learned that some students in schools with Wi-Fi experience a racing heart. Cardiologist, Dr. Stephen Sinatra, believes that those who have undiagnosed heart conditions may be particularly vulnerable to radio frequency radiation.

In the past we were concerned about the radiation from a microwave oven affecting heart monitors.  Those heart monitors have been improved and are now shielded against radio frequency radiation. Our hearts are NOT shielded and our exposure to radio frequency radiation includes not only microwave ovens but mobile phones, cell phone antennas, wireless routers, smart meters, wireless computer games, blue tooth, and wireless baby monitors.

Our study was criticized and the claim was made that our results were due to electromagnetic interference (EMI).

EMI refers to disruption of an electronic circuit with an electromagnetic signal. A common example is the static you hear as you drive under high voltage transmission lines with your radio tuned to an AM station.  The static on the radio is EMI.

In our experiment the radiation from the cordless phone may have affected the receiver, placed near the heart, creating spurious results.  If this were the case, the signal would interfere each time but that did not happen. We were convinced our results were real (i.e. that we were recording changes in the heart rather than changes in the equipment)  but the criticism of EMI was worth testing.

Was there a critical distance where the radiation from the cordless phone interfered with the equipment we were using?

So we designed an experiment to test for EMI.  The results are in our new video.  Click here to watch the video.

NOTE:  There is an error in our previous video (2010).  We refer to the cordless phone as a DECT phone.  Technically DECT phones radiate between 1880 and 1930 MHz and the phone we used provides a signal at 2400 MHz.  We do have DECT phones in North America but they operate at a different frequency than those in Europe.  DECT 6.0 phones in U.S. and Canada operate at 1.9 GHz.

January 5, 2012.  With growing concern about climate change, the carbon budget, depletion of fossil fuels, air pollution from dirty coal, radiation from nuclear power plants, and the need for a secure energy supply, more attention and funding are being diverted to renewable energy. Among the various types of renewable energy, wind has received a lot of attention, in part, due to opposition from communities earmarked for wind turbines and from communities that have experienced wind turbines firsthand.

Some people who live near wind turbines report difficulty sleeping and various symptoms of ill health and attribute these problems to noise and shadow flicker—two elements they can perceive. Indeed the U.S. National Research Council (Risser et al., 2007) identify noise and shadow flicker as the two key impacts of wind turbines on human health and well-being.

However, it is much more complicated then that.  In addition to noise and shadow flicker, infra-sound (low frequency vibrations that we cannot hear), dirty electricity, and ground current can all contribute to ill health near wind turbines.  Since sensitivity to sound vibrations and electromagnetic waves varies from person to person, not everyone in the same home responds the same way.

With a growing interest in renewable forms of energy, the technology has to be not only energy efficient but also human friendly.

A paper on wind turbines by Magda Havas and David Colling’s  has just been published.   Abstract is below.  For a copy of the paper click here.

December 4, 2011. A growing number of schools are having wireless routers installed across North America despite the fact that many of these schools already have ethernet connections and students are able to access the internet.

I have been asked to give lectures on this topic to many different groups. For those who would like information about Wi-Fi in schools and whether or not it is safe, please watch this video. Click here for video and here for pdf.

Some students, in schools with Wi-Fi, are complaining about ill health that includes headaches, dizziness, nausea, weakness and heart palpitations. Exposure in one school has exceeded Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 guideline but no one in Municipal, Provincial or Federal Health Departments/Ministries is responding.

Teachers concerned about exposure are told to keep quiet and not to speak publicly against School Board Policy.

Parents don’t know if their children are attending schools that have wireless routers as they have NOT been consulted about this and are NOT required to give consent for their children to be exposed to microwave radiation.

Some School Boards are measuring the microwave radiation in the classroom but the measurements are deeply flawed as those doing the monitoring are unqualified and are taking measurements inappropriately. The routers in some schools are hidden behind ceiling tiles and the technicians don’t know where these are.

We are heading for a health tsunami if we expose young children to pulsed microwave radiation generated by Wi-Fi routers in the classroom for the duration of their school education.

The World Health Organization in May 2011 classified this form of radiation as a possible human carcinogen, but this has not affected School Board policy. They can’t get Wi-Fi into schools fast enough.

Those of us who have been studying this issue for decades are perplexed that those responsible for the education of the next generation are so out of touch with reality and are so irresponsible in the decisions they are making that will affect the lives of many young people and their teachers. They are undemocratic in their conduct and, when all else fails, they resort to bullying tactics.  Are these the type of people we want making policy decisions and educating our children and grandchildren?

If you care about the health of students and their teachers, please watch and share this video.  Click here to watch video and click here if your prefer to read it as a pdf.

For more information about Wi-Fi in schools, visit the following websites:

www.safeschool.ca
www.citizensforsafetechnology.org
www.centerforsaferwireless.org
www.emfeffectsonkids.com
www.wiredchild.org

December 5, 2011. Dr. Oz recently aired a special show on the pain-relieving effects of pulsed electromagnetic  field (PEMF) therapy that sent shock ways across North America.  According to the experts, people can get relief from chronic pain without pills and without surgery.

PEMF technology has been around for decades and has been used to heal bone fractures, treat psychological disorders like depression, reduce swelling and pain, promote blood circulation, and stimulate the immune system. Doctors, psychiatrists, chiropractors, naturopaths, and veterinarians use PEMF devices in their practice.  Often this equipment is large, expensive and quite powerful. These devices include the Diapulse, Magnapulse, Magnacharge, Ondamed, Pulsed Energy Replenisher 2000, and various devices for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.  Today, different types of PEMF devices are available for the public to use in the privacy of their own home.

I’m not referring to TENS (Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation) but rather to mats, pads, probes, cylinders, and rings that generate magnetic fields that are pulsed using different waveforms at various frequencies and intensities.  The products, available to the public, are pulsed at low frequencies (not microwave frequencies) and are relatively easy to use.

The PEMF devices tend to use earth frequencies known as Tesla-Shumann resonance (around 8 Hz) and their harmonics (multiples of the 8 Hz frequency) that are believed to have healing properties.

NASA has been testing the effect of PEMF as a countermeasure for bone loss and muscular degeneration encountered by astronauts on long space missions.  NASA scientists have  a patent for a device that uses square wave magnetic fields to enhance the rate of healing of mammalian body parts. Click here for patent information.

A few years ago, I became interested in these devices and purchased an MRS 2000 system from Switzerland, a BEMER  from Lichtenstein; and a Rhumart from Quebec with the aim of testing them to see if the claims manufacturers made were valid, and if people who are electrically sensitive can use them.

As a scientist who has been interested in the harmful effects of electromagnetic energy, I believe it is important to understand the beneficial effects of this energy as well.  Ultimately these two avenues can help us better understand the mechanisms of action of electromagnetic fields, which in turn, can be put to good use both in the field of health and in the field of exposure guidelines.

My studies are still in their infancy but I will share some of what I have learned so far.

Blood Cells & the MRS 2000

One of the claims made by those who sell the MRS 2000 or the iMRS (Intelligent Magnetic Resonance Stimulation) system is that this technology helps blood circulation by keeping blood cells from sticking together.   I wanted to know if this claim was true, so I tested myself.

I did a live blood analysis after I worked on a computer. Then tested my blood after using the MRS 2000 mat for 8 minutes on a sensitive setting (low intensity) and found–to my surprise–that my blood cells looked much healthier. They were no longer sticking together.  See slides 1 and 2 below.  I repeated this several times and found virtually identical results.  This was encouraging.

Figure 1.  Photographs of a live blood sample before (slide 1) and after (slide 2) an MRS 2000 treatment.

Because my blood looked so unhealthy after working on a computer I did some more testing, which showed that my blood becomes clumped after I am exposed to electrosmog from computers and cordless phones.  Fortunately the “clumping” doesn’t last long once I remove myself from the radiation. Click here for video.

One night I bashed my shin against some furniture and knew that in the morning I would have a large bruise.  The skin was cut but not bleeding.  I used the MRS 2000 probe set at high for 8 minutes and went to bed.  The next morning there was no bruise, no swelling, and no pain, just the remnants of the cut.

Microcirculation of the Blood and the BEMER 3000

Dr. Klopp, at the Institute for Microcirculation in Germany, tested the effect of the BEMER 3000 (Bio-Electro-Magnetric Energy Resonance) and took some amazing in situ videos.  He found that blood circulation after using the BEMER is much improved as seen in the video below.

He also found that white blood cells behave differently.  Instead of flowing quickly through the vessels, they seem to move more slowly along the inside of the blood vessel and from there can easily migrate into the tissue if an infection is detected. What these two videos indicate is that the BEMER promotes blood circulation and the immune system.

Pain Relief and Rhumart

A few months ago, I visited a colleague, Dr. Jeff Marrongelle, in Pennsylvania and showed him the Rhumart, a device designed by Dr. Roland Drolet in Quebec that is named after the first two illness it was tested on–rheumatism and arthritis.  Dr. Marrongelle tested the Rhumart on several patients, all of whom responded positively after a short treatment.

Here is the result for Patient A, who complained of chronic back pain.

Two large rings were used that treat the entire body.  After a 10-minute session on the Rhumart, Patient A claimed to have an 80% reduction in back pain.

We tested this patent before and after his Rhumart treatment with an interstitial scan (ES Teck) that identifies abnormalities in the body based on the conductivity and resistance to a weak direct current.  The following two diagrams show the before and after scans.

It is clear that the inflammation of the nerves along parts of his spinal cord (shown in red) disappeared after the 10-minute treatment giving us an objective measure of the subjective pain relief Patient A experienced. Two weeks later the pain had not returned.  Such a rapid, long-lasting response to chronic pain is amazing! 

Issues and Concerns

One concern is that there might be adverse long-term effects of PEMF devices. To date, I have not found any studies documenting this for PEMF although I am still at the early stages of my inquiry.   If anyone reading this knows of some studies, then please let me know.

Some doctors recommend that PEMFs not be used on people who have cancer because they may stimulate the growth of cancer cells, while others report that PEMF therapy lessens the side-effects and enhances the effectiveness of chemotherapeutic drugs.  And still others report that growth of certain types of  cancer cells may be reduced with exposure to very low levels of electromagnetic fields modulated at tumor specific frequencies between 100 Hz and 21 kHz.  This type of treatment has been tested on liver cancer, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer with promising results. So, the relationship between PEMFs and cancer is quite complex and needs further investigation.

Some people who are electrically sensitive are unable to use the devices but others seem to do quite well.  The reason for this is not known and requires further study.

I will continue to do research in this area and will provide updates periodically on this website. My research has taken me to Europe and parts of North America where physicians are using this technology in their clinics. We plan to provide that information to the public in the form of a video documentary in 2012.

Thank you Dr. Oz for making people aware of this technology.  Perhaps doctors using these device in their clinics and scientists testing the mechanism involved will begin to share their results with people suffering from chronic pain, poor circulation, immune deficiencies and other ailments that might be helped with PEMF therapy.  Energy medicine, in its various forms, may very well be the medicine of the future.

*****

Disclaimer:  I do not sell these devices and do not receive any financial benefit from the manufacturers.  My sole interest is to better understand how PEMFs affect the body and to share that information with those who are interested.

October 25, 2011.  Open Letter to the Honourable Aglukkaq (Federal Minister of Health) and Ms Pieterson (Director General,  Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate)

Dear Honourable Aglukkaq and Ms Pieterson,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my letter, dated October 8, 2011.

It seems that we disagree on many issues related to the health effects of radio frequency (RF) radiation.  But we are making progress.  We agree on the following three points, that:

(1)  proximity–how close the transmitter is to the body;
(2)  duration of exposure; and
(3)  age (hence sensitivity) of the person exposed

are all important when it comes to the amount of  RF radiation absorbed by the human body.

I come to this conclusion based on information you provided in your October 24, 2011 letter (see below) and based on the statement from the October 4^th 2011 document entitled, “Health Canada offers practical advice on safe cell phone use: regarding cell phone use.” Click here for pdf.

In the Oct 24^th letter Ms Pieterson stated:

Unlike cellular phones, where the transmitter is held close to the head and much of the absorbed RF energy is deposited in a localized area, RF energy from wireless devices such as Wi-Fi is typically transmitted at a greater distance from the human body [indicating that proximity is important].

In the October 4, 2011 document, Health Canada stated the following:

The department also encourages parents to reduce their children’s RF exposure from cell phones since children are typically more sensitive to a variety of environmental agents [indicating that age/sensitivity of person exposed is important].

The advice to consumers was:

• Limit the length of cell phone calls
• Replace cell phone calls with text messages or use “hands-free” devices
• Encourage children under the age of 18 to limit their cell phone usage [indicating that age and duration of exposure are important]

By the way, activists have been advocating this for years.  Even cell phone manufacturers recommend keeping the phone away from the body.  However, I digress.

Surely what applies to cell phones also applies to wireless baby monitors!

A wireless baby monitor consists of two parts, the part that is placed near the infant or child and the part that is kept with the caregiver. The most popular baby monitors in North America use DECT technology (1.8 to 1.9 GHz) or operate at 2.4 GHz, the same frequency used for microwave ovens, cordless phones, and Wi-Fi routers.  These DECT baby monitors–just like the DECT cordless phones and Wi-Fi routers–constantly emit RF radiation. This includes both the transmitter near the infant and the transmitter with the caregiver.

Let’s look at the first important factor that affects absorption–proximity to the body.

October 8, 2011.  On October 4, 2011, Health Canada issued a warning for those under the age of 18 to limit their cell phone use. Click here for document.  This warning comes 5 months (May 31, 2011) after the World Health Organization classified radio frequency radiation as a possible human carcinogen and it comes more than a year after cell phone providers issued warnings about the use of cell phones in their user manuals.

If Health Canada truly cared about the health of Canadians, this is what they would do.

1.  They would issue a warning (similar to that Council of Europe) that wireless routers be replaced with wired routers for internet access in schools, at home, and at work. No one should be exposed for hours each day to pulsed microwave radiation generated by Wi-Fi routers.  For places that need to have wireless routers, they should use the patent issued to Swisscom for their “on demand” routers that radiate only when in use.

2.  They would issue an immediate ban on wireless baby monitors that emit radio frequency radiation 24/7  and would insist that only “voice activated” baby monitors be sold in Canada. These are available in Europe. Click here for more information.

3.  They would issue an immediate ban on cordless phones that emit radiation 24/7 and insist that only ECO DECT plus phones (or those that emit radiaton only when in use) be sold in Canada.  These are common in Europe and are now available in North America.

4.  They would ask cell phone providers who have installed cell phone antennas on top of buildings or on the side of buildings to ensure that the radiation does not leak through to the roof or the walls and that nearby buildings are not within the line of radiation.  Shielding on the roof or wall can eliminate exposure to occupants.  This should be done by the cell phone provider.  Levels should not exceed those recommended in Switzerland for “sensitive places.”

5.  They would request independent monitoring of antennas placed on or near school property and they would ensure that levels not exceed those recommended in Switzerland for “sensitive places.”

6.  They would remove the ban on incandescent light bulbs and insist that compact fluorescent light bulbs be designed so they do not emit UV radiation, dirty electricity or radio frequency radiation and that the bulbs are shatter-proof so that the mercury is not released into the environment during accidental breakage.

7.  They would reconsider the deployment of wireless smart meters and determine ways to send the information along wires instead.

8.  They would identify and enforce certain places that remain wireless-free (similar to smoke-free environments).  This is particularly important in public places (schools, hospitals, hotels, restaurants, libraries) and on public transit (buses, trains, airplanes).

9.  They would reduce their exposure  guidelines and base these new guidelines on biological effects rather than just thermal effects.

10.  They would establish health clinics to deal with the growing number of people complaining about electrohypersensitivity and provide educational packages for doctors and other health care professionals.

If Health Canada truly cared about the Health of Canadians, they could be leaders in this field be adopting the recommendations above.

August, 31, 2011.

Steve,

I am a long-time Apple user. My first Apple computer was the Apple 512k that I used as a “portable” computer for several years. You opened the world of technology to so many people who could intuitively use a Mac with no need for instructions. I use it for my teaching (as a university professor) and my research (on electrosmog and electrosensitivity). For that I thank you. Your products, since those early computers, are marvellous but I have some serious concerns about the wireless components.

I work with people who have become electrically sensitive and become ill when exposed to radio frequency radiation. The US government is unwilling to acknowledge how dangerous this technology is so it is up to industry leaders and innovators, like yourself and your company, to lead the way.

Have your scientists been honest with you about the dangers of RF radiation or have they tried to shield you from this information? This is what the science is showing and it is likely to get a lot worse so please consider innovations that allow users to connect as safely as possible.

The pulsed radio frequencies have been associated with various types of cancers including–but not limited to–gliomas (brain), acoustic neuromas (ear), uveal melanomas (eyes), and parotid (salivary gland) tumors that appear, often on the same side of the head exposed to a cell phone, after 10 years of moderate to heavy use. Kids are at a greater risk because they don’t have a developed immune system and their cells are dividing rapidly. Exposure to the radiation generated by cell phones and wireless computers are linked to deformed sperm that swim slowly and die quickly. This–in turn–is contributing to problems with declining fertility for couples wanting to get pregnant. Cell phone users complain of headaches, skin problems, brain fog, depression, anxiety, ringing in the ear. Those who live near cell phone antennas have similar complaints including difficulty sleeping, body pain, nausea, and dizziness.  The risk of cancers, for those living near these antennas, is increasing.

Radiation affects the immune system and can lead to secondary ailments. It places stress on the body as shown by heat shock protein research. It increases the permeability of the blood brain barrier allowing potentially toxic substances to enter the brain. I could go on but I think you get the point. By allowing apps on smart phones that enable people to measure their exposure to radiation, you will help raise their awareness and allow them to make more informed choices about when and how they use their smart phones, wireless computers, ipads, etc. We are not going to give up our smart phones, just like we are not going to give up our cars, but learning how to drive safely and having seat belts and other innovations that protect the occupant and those on the road are as vital for the car driver as they are for the billions of mobile phone users.

The two most important aspects of a quality life are having loving friends and good health. With your many innovations you enable friends to keep in touch . . . now enable them to do so safely without sacrificing their health.

Very sorry to hear about your recent resignation and your on-going health problems. May your health improve and may you take this message seriously and instruct the many brilliant staff working for Apple who can make a difference to do so . . . for the good of humanity.

-magda

June 11, 2011.   Below are some of the key resolutions/appeals released by expert scientific groups around the world since 1998, regarding the biological and health effects of both low frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) associated with electricity and radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic radiation (EMR) generated by wireless devices.

Anyone who reads these cannot be left with the illusion (or delusion) that this form of energy is without adverse biological and health consequences at levels well below existing guidelines.  Children are particularly vulnerable.   It is irresponsible of governments to maintain the status quo in light of thousands of studies that have been published and statements by these experts.

Here are the resolutions/appeals/reports  in reverse chronological order:

18.  May 31, 2011: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and World Health Organization (WHO) reclassified radio frequency electromagnetic fields as a Class 2B carcinogen (possibly carcinogen to humans).  This applies to all forms of radio frequency radiation (and not just cell phones as some inaccurately claim).  Click here for press release.  Final report will be published in the July 1^st issue of The Lancet Oncology.

17.  May 2011: The Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe (PACE) released Resolution 1815 on the Potential Dangers of Electromagnetic Fields and their effect on the Environment. This document has some excellent recommendations regarding cell phones, cordless phones, wireless baby monitors, WiFi, WLAN, WiMax, power lines, relay antenna base stations; with special concerns expressed for the protection of children and those who are electrosensitive.  Click here for document.

16.  May 2011: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) and Electrohypersensitivity (EHS),  Summary of meeting at the WHO headquarters Geneva, May 13, 2011. Click here for report.  Some statements from this meeting are quoted below:

We need to include these illnesses [MCS and EHS] in the WHO International Classification of Diseases (ICD), because what makes it more difficult for legal recognition is precisely the lack of code for these diseases in the ICD.

The adverse reactions to chemicals or electromagnetic radiation vary in duration according to each patient, and the manifestations differ too. When the patient is again exposed, symptoms usually worsen or result in the appearance of new symptoms.

The process of these diseases (MCS and EHS) is chronic and the patient’s situation is exacerbated if he/she lives in a toxic environment, such as near Tarragona petrochemical industry or subjected to electromagnetic radiation: emissions in the neighborhood, mobile phone antennas , etc. The patient has to avoid re-exposure.

We are facing very high numbers of people already diagnosed . . . between 12% and 15% of the population has some kind of disturbance in the presence of a chemical substance.  In the EHS, figures of affected people are between 3 and 6% of the population, but these numbers are growing continuously.

Each country can recognize these diseases and include them in their ICE, independently of WHO, since according to the WHO countries have sovereignty on this issue.

15.  April 2011: The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (RNCNIRP) released their Resolution entitled “Electromagnetic fields from Mobile Phones:  Health Effect on Children and Teenagers”.  Click here for report.

The Committee presents some startling statistics [references provided in original document].

In April 2008, the RNCNIRP reviewed the short-term and long-term effects of mobile phone use for children. In particular, it reviewed possible decrease of intellectual abilities and cognition together with possible increases in susceptibility to epileptic fits, “acquired dementia” and degeneration of cerebral nervous structures. The results of clinical studies have shown that chronic exposure to RF EMF may lead to borderline psychosomatic disorders. In 2010, a number of papers published in Russian and foreign peer-reviewed journals showed a response to RF EMF exposure from the immune system.

. . .  since 2000 there has been a steady growth in the incidence of childhood diseases identified by RNCNIRP as “possible diseases” from mobile phone use.  Of particular concern is the morbidity increase among young people aged 15 to 19 years (it is very likely that most of them are mobile phone users for a long period of time). Compared to 2009, the number of CNS [central nervous system] disorders among 15 to 17 year-old has grown by 85%, the number of individuals with epilepsy or epileptic syndrome has grown by 36%, the number of “mental retardation” cases has grown by 11%, and the number of blood disorders and immune status disorders has grown by 82%.  In group of children aged less than 14 years there was a 64% growth in the number of blood disorders and immune status disorders, and 58% growth in nervous disorders. The number of patients aged 15 to 17 years old having consultations and treatment due to CNS disorders has grown by 72%.

Because of this the RNCNIRP considers it important to conduct a scientific study to determine whether the growth in morbidity resulted from EMF exposure from mobile phone use or whether it was caused by other factors.

14.  2010: Seletun Statement, Norway:  The International Electromagnetic Field Alliance (IEMFA) released their report entitled Scientific Panel on Electromagnetic Field Health Risks: Consensus Points, Recommendations, and Rationales following a scientific meeting at Seletun Norway November 2009.  The summary/abstract is provided below. Click here for publication.  Click here for report and short video of Dr. Olle Johansson.

Summary: In November, 2009, a scientific panel met in Seletun, Norway, for three days of intensive discussion on existing scientific evidence and public health implications of the unprecedented global exposures to artificial electromagnetic fields (EMF). EMF exposures (static to 300 GHz) result from the use of electric power and from wireless telecommunications technologies for voice and data transmission, energy, security, military and radar use in weather and transportation. The Scientific Panel recognizes that the body of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to protection of public health; the growth and development of the fetus, and of children; and argues for strong preventative actions. New, biologically-based public exposure standards are urgently needed to protect public health worldwide.

Conclusions in this report build upon prior scientific and public health reports and resolutions documenting the following consensus points:

a) Low-intensity (non-thermal) bioeffects and adverse health effects are demonstrated at levels significantly below existing exposure standards.

b) ICNIRP and IEEE/FCC public safety limits are inadequate and obsolete with respect to prolonged, low-intensity exposures.

13.  2009: EU Parliament Electromagnetic Report and Resolution entitled: European Parliament Resolution on health concerns associated with electromagnetic fields, was adopted February 17, 2009 with 29 recommendations. Click here for report.

12.  2009: Porto Alegre Resolution, Brazil.  Scientists and doctors recognize electrohypersensitivity and are concerned that exposure to electromagnetic fields may increase the risk of cancer and chronic diseases; that exposure levels established by international agencies (IEEE, ICNIRP, ICES) are obsolete; and that wireless technology places at risk the health of children, teens, pregnant women and others who are vulnerable.  Click here for document.

11.  2008: Venice Resolution, Italy.  International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS) Scientists recognize biological effects at non-thermal levels, that standards are inadequate, that electro-sensitivity exists and that there is a need to research mechanisms.  Click here for Venice Resolution.

Three key statements are provided below:

We take exception to the claim of the wireless communication industry that there is no credible scientific evidence to conclude there a risk. Recent epidemiological evidence is stronger than before, which is a further reason to justify precautions be taken to lower exposure standards in accordance with the Precautionary Principle.

We recognize the growing public health problem known as electrohypersensitivity; that this adverse health condition can be quite disabling; and, that this condition requires further urgent investigation and recognition.

We strongly advise limited use of cell phones, and other similar devices, by young children and teenagers, and we call upon governments to apply the Precautionary Principle as an interim measure while more biologically relevant standards are developed to protect against, not only the absorption of electromagnetic energy by the head, but also adverse effects of the signals on biochemistry, physiology and electrical biorhythms.

10.  2007: BioInitiative Report, USA.  In response to statements that there are no scientific studies showing adverse biological effects of low level electromagnetic fields and radio frequency radiation, a group of researchers produced the BioInitiative Report that documents 2000 studies showing biological effects of extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic fields and radio frequency (RF) radiation and calling for biologically based exposure guidelines. This document was criticized for not having been peer-reviewed even though most of the studies cited in this document were peer-reviewed. Click here for pdf.

Since then some of the BioInitiative papers as well as ones by other authors have appeared in a special issue of the peer-reviewd journal Pathophysiology (Volume 16 Issues 2-3, 2009). The papers in this journal document EMF effects on DNA,  EMF effects on the brain, EMF in the environment, and science as a guide to public policy.  Click here for abstracts.

9.  2006: Benevento Resolution, Italy.  The International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS) organized a conference entitled:  The Precautionary EMF Approach: Rationale, Legislation and Implementation. Scientists at this conference signed the Benevento Resolution (click here for pdf)  that consists of 7 major statements. Among those statements are the following:

1.  . . . there are adverse health effects from occupational and public exposures to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields, or EMF, at current exposure levels. What is needed, but not yet realized, is a comprehensive, independent and transparent examination of the evidence pointing to this emerging, potential public health issue.

4.  Arguments that weak (low intensity) EMF cannot affect biological systems do not represent the current spectrum of scientific opinion.

6.  We encourage governments to adopt a framework of guidelines for public and occupational EMF exposure that reflect the Precautionary Principle– as some nations have already done.

8.  2005: Helsinki Appeal, Finland. Physicians and researchers presented the Helsinki Appeal to the European Parliament.  Click here for document. They state that:

The present safety standards of ICNIRP (International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) do not recognize the biological effects caused by non-ionizing radiation except those induced by the thermal effect. In the light of recent scientific information, the standards recommended by ICNIRP have become obsolete and should be rejected. Especially children and other persons at risk should be taken into account when re-evaluating the limits regarding the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields and radiation.  Call for new safety standards, reject International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines.

7. 2005: Irish Doctors’ Environmental Association (IDEA), Ireland. Members of IDEA wrote a position paper on electromagnetic radiation. Doctors recognize electrohypersensitivity (EHS) is increasing and request advice from government on how to treat EHS.  Click here for document. Below is a quote from this document.

The Irish Doctors’ Environmental Association believes that the Irish Government should urgently review the information currently available internationally on the topic of the thermal and non-thermal effects of exposure to electro-magnetic radiation with a view to immediately initiating appropriate research into the adverse health effects of exposure to all forms of non-ionising radiation in this country, and into the forms of treatment available elsewhere. Before the results of this research are available, an epidemiological database should be initiated of individuals suffering from symptoms thought to be related to exposure to non-ionising radiation. Those claiming to be suffering from the effects of exposure to electro-magnetic radiation should have their claims investigated in a sensitive and thorough way, and appropriate treatment provided by the State.

The strictest possible safety regulations should be established for the installation of masts and transmitters, and for the acceptable levels of potential exposure of individuals to electro-magnetic radiation.

6.  2002. Catania Resolution, Italy.  This resolution was signed by scientists at the international conference “State of the Research on Electromagnetic Fields-Scientific and Legal Issues”.  Click here for resolution. Three of their statements are provided below:

1. Epidemiological and in vivo and in vitro experimental evidence demonstrates the existence of electromagnetic field (EMF) induced effects, some of which can be adverse to health.

4. The weight of evidence calls for preventive strategies based on the precautionary principle. At times the precautionary principle may involve prudent avoidance and prudent use.

5. We are aware that there are gaps in knowledge on biological and physical effects, and health risks related to EMF, which require additional independent research.

5.  2002 : Freiburg Appeal, Germany. Physicians request tougher guidelines for radio frequency exposure.  This document was endorsed by thousands of healthcare practitioners.  Click here for pdf.  Below is a quote from this report.

We have observed, in recent years, a dramatic rise in severe and chronic diseases among our patients, especially:

· Learning, concentration, and behavioural disorders (e.g. attention deficit disorder, ADD)
· Extreme fluctuations in blood pressure, ever harder to influence with medications
· Heart rhythm disorders
· Heart attacks and strokes among an increasingly younger population
· Brain-degenerative diseases (e.g. Alzheimer–s) and epilepsy
· Cancerous afflictions: leukemia, brain tumors

Moreover, we have observed an ever-increasing occurrence of various disorders, often misdiagnosed in patients as psychosomatic:

· Headaches, migraines
· Chronic exhaustion
· Inner agitation
· Sleeplessness, daytime sleepiness
· Tinnitus
· Susceptibility to infection
· Nervous and connective tissue pains, for which the usual causes do not explain even the most conspicuous symptoms

Since the living environment and lifestyles of our patients are familiar to us, we can see especially after carefully-directed inquiry a clear temporal and spatial correlation between the appearance of disease and exposure to pulsed high -frequency microwave radiation (HFMR), such as:

· Installation of a mobile telephone sending station in the near vicinity
· Intensive mobile telephone use
· Installation of a digital cordless (DECT) telephone at home or in the neighbourhood

We can no longer believe this to be purely coincidence, for:

· Too often do we observe a marked concentration of particular illnesses in correspondingly HFMR-polluted areas or apartments;
· Too often does a long-term disease or affliction improve or disappear in a relatively short time after reduction or elimination of HFMR pollution in the patient’s environment;
· Too often are our observations confirmed by on-site measurements of HFMR of unusual intensity.

4.  2002: Salzburg Resolution, Austria. The Salzburg Resolution on Mobile Telecommunication Base Stations makes four recommendations including preliminary guidelines 0f 0.1 microW/cm2 for sum of all emissions from mobile phone stations.  This is well below the current ICNIRP guidelines and those in Canada and the US (1000 microW/cm2) and is slightly lower than guidelines in Switzerland, Italy, Russia, China (10 mciroW/cm2).   Click here for document.

3.  2000: Stewart Report, UK. The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) produced a report, Mobile Phones and Health, that is commonly referred to as the Stewart Report, named after its Chairman Sir William Stewart.  Click here for pdf.   A quote from the foreward shows how much our understanding of this issue has changed since 2000.

The report points out that the balance of evidence does not suggest mobile phone technologies put the health of the general population of the UK at risk. There is some preliminary evidence that outputs from mobile phone technologies may cause, in some cases, subtle biological effects, although, importantly, these do not necessarily mean that health is affected. There is also evidence that in some cases people’s well-being may be adversely affected by the insensitive siting of base stations. New mechanisms need to be set in place to prevent that happening.

The report goes on to state that:

1.17.  The balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures to RF radiation below NRPB and ICNIRP guidelines do not cause adverse health effects to the general population.

1.18  There is now scientific evidence, however, which suggests that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below these guidelines . . .

1.19  . . . We conclude therefore that it is not possible at present to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health effects, and that the gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach.

1.20 In the light of the above considerations we recommend that a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone technologies be adopted until much more detailed and scientifically robust information on any health effects becomes available.

2.  1998: Vienna EMF Resolution, Austria. At a Workshop on Possible Biological and Health Effects of RF Electromagnetic Fields, the scientists agreed on the following:

The participants agreed that biological effects from low-intensity exposures are scientifically established. However, the current state of scientific consensus is inadequate to derive reliable exposure standards. The existing evidence demands an increase in the research efforts on the possible health impact and on an adequate exposure and dose asses.

Base stations: How could satisfactory Public Participation be ensured?

The public should be given timely participation in the process. This should include information on technical and exposure data as well as information on the status of the health debate. Public participation in the decision (limits, siting, etc.) should be enabled.

Cellular phones: How could the situation of the users be improved?

Technical data should be made available to the users to allow comparison with respect to EMF-exposure. In order to promote prudent usage, sufficient information on the health debate should be provided. This procedure should offer opportunities for the users to manage reduction in EMF-exposure. In addition, this process could stimulate further developmentlow-intensity emission devices

Regarding legal aspects . . .

there is protection deficit in the public and private laws which is unsatisfactory. The legislator is requested to solve the conflict of interests between the industries commission on one side and the neighbours involvement and their interests on protection of life and health on the other side. Because of the constitutionally determined objectives of the state to comprehensively protect the environment, there is a demand of acting precautionary on the polititcal and legal level.

The Vienna declaration on electromagnetic fields recommended 13 detailed action items for parliament to consider.  Click here to read those items and to download pdf.

1.  1997:  Boston Physicians’ and Scientists’ Petition.  We the undersigned physicians and scientists call upon public health officials to intervene to halt the initiation of communication transmissions employing ground level, horizontally transmitted, pulsed microwaves in Boston.  This form of transmission is scheduled to begin June, 1997, by the Sprint Corporation for personal communications systems (PCS). Given the biological plausibility of negative health impacts, particularly to the human nervous system, as well as anecdotal evidence of illness and death from such exposures in cities where transmission has already been implemented, and voluminous medical studies indicating human and ecological harm from microwaves, we urge the suspension of that implementation pending full public notification of its potential hazards and the full review and determination of its safety by the scientific community.

With 97 signatures sent to ENHALE (Environmental Health Advocacy League], Box 425 Concord MA, 01742.

*****

Based on these resolutions and appeals from international groups of physicians and scientists immediate action is required to protect public health from continued increasing exposure to radio frequency radiation and electromagnetic fields.

I call on . . .

1. regulators around the world to reexamine existing guidelines for both EMF and EMR and to reduce them to the lowest possible levels to protect the public and workers.  Values above 4 milliGauss (low frequency magnetic fields); above 0.1 microW/cm2 (power density for radio frequency radiation) and above 40 GS units (dirty electricity) have been associated with adverse health effects in peer reviewed scientific publications!
2. government agencies responsibility for the location of both base stations and power lines to keep distances at least 400 meters (base stations) and 100 meters (transmission lines) from residential properties as well as school and health care facilities.
3. utilities (water, gas, electricity) to reconsider the use of wireless smart meters and provide wired options for those who are sensitive, for those who do not want to be exposed, and for those in densely populated settings.
4. manufacturers who are providing technology that uses electricity and/or emits radio frequency radiation to re-engineer their products to provide the minimum radiation possible.  This includes light bulbs, computers, wireless home devices like baby monitors and cordless phones, cell phones, smart meters, plasma TVs, among others.
5. architects, builders, electricians, and plumbers to design and construct buildings that are based on principles of good electromagnetic hygiene.  This includes using materials that absorb or shield building interiors from microwave radiation especially near external sources of this radiation and in multi-unit buildings; to provide wired alternatives to wireless devices; to properly wire and ground buildings to minimize low frequency electromagnetic fields and to eliminate ground current problems; and to install filters on electrical panels and/or throughout the building to ensure good power quality.
6. local, state, federal health authorities to educate medical professions about the potential biological effects of both low frequency and radio frequency electromagnetic energy; about the growing number of people who have electrosensitivity (ES) or electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and to alert them on how they can help their patients in terms of minimizing their exposure and promoting their recovery.
7. hospitals and
   
8. school boards should choose wired internet access over WiFi (wireless technology) and not allow towers/antennas within 400 meters of their school property.
9. parents to practice good electromagnetic hygiene especially in the bedroom and especially for their children.  This involves using wired rather than wireless devices in the home, keeping electric appliances away from the bed, turning off/unplugging devices when not in use.
10. the media to provide information to the public about the health and safety of using this technology; to rely on “independent experts” who do not receive funding or other benefits based on the outcome of research studies; and to identify experts funded by the industry as “industry representatives”.   The integrity of many of these scientists leaves much to be desired.

June 10, 2011.   The Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board (KPRDSB) is having a public meeting regarding WiFi in schools but only a few select individuals are allowed to present.  Individuals who oppose WiFi installations, in favor of wired installations, are not allowed to present.

I asked to be a presenter but was not given permission despite the fact that new information from various organizations has been recently made available and that I have scientific expertise regarding the health effects of radio frequency radiation.  I was told ” this is not a debate”.

The School Board approved having WiFi installed in KPRD schools earlier this year, despite the fact that parents and others presented evidence that this form of radiation may not be safe and that it was better to err on the side of caution.  Medical Doctors (David Carpenter and Stephen Sinatra) wrote to the school board stating this radiation was not safe.

The recent (May 31, 2011) World Health Organization reclassification of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (which includes WiFi radiation) as a “possible human carcinogen” is being ignored.

The recent recommendations by the Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe (Canada has observer status) that “for children in general, and particularly in schools and classrooms, give preference to wired Internet connections, and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises” is being ignored.

Studies at Queen’s University (Kingston, Ontario) and elsewhere, which show that this radiation (from cell phone and wireless computers) affects sperm quality and may adversely affect reproduction, is being ignored.

Parents are silenced.  Trustees are not returning calls.  Teachers have been disciplined for questioning school board policy.  Teachers who are sensitive to this radiation fear that they will not be able to continue teaching once the WiFi routers are activated.

We asked that wired internet access be used (indeed this is already present at many schools).  But this request was ignored.

If WiFi is installed, we asked that the system be designed so that:

1. WiFi routers can be turned off when not in use;
2. WiFi-free areas be established in schools; and
3. Students-whose parents do not want them exposed-be allowed to use wired computers for internet access. While this would not eliminate their exposure it would reduce it since the highest levels of radiation are near the computers.

We have yet to hear if any of these recommendations are being seriously considered.

We are told that the level of radiation from WiFi in classrooms is so low it can’t possibly have any health effects. Yet, levels of radiation at a school in Collingwood exceeded the Safety Code 6 Guidelines in one classroom nearest the computer!  Click here for this report.  Clearly those making such statements about how low levels are and that they can’t possibly have biological effects are unfamiliar with the research.

As I scientist, who knows how harmful this radiation is, it is impossible for me to remain silent. If it weren’t for the children, I would walk away from this, allow the school board to install WiFi and then document the changes over time.  Some children will remain unaffected but some will become ill immediately and others will become ill over a period of time.  How many will develop cancer and have reproductive problems only time will tell.  The same will happen to teachers.  The question is no longer “if this will happen” but rather “how many will be adversely affected and how quickly”.

No University Ethic Board in North America would grant permission for this type of research (i.e. to expose children, grades K to 12, to low level microwave radiation for hours each day for 13 years and to study the biological effects).  And while schools and libraries in other parts of the world are removing WiFi, the KPRD School Board is going ahead with this experiment despite International Authorities recommending otherwise.

We exposed children to lead, to asbestos, to DDT, to second hand smoke before we realized this exposure was harmful.  Now toys from China with lead paint are returned and make headline news!  Yet we are willing to expose children to microwave radiation in the classroom AFTER we are told this radiation is unsafe at levels below existing federal and international guidelines.  This is willful ignorance and has legal implications.

In a recent letter I sent to Ms Diane Lloyd, Chair KPRD School Board, I shared with her three of my favorite quotes.  I provide them here.

Those of you who are reading this message, please do not let this happen in your community.  Children are precious.  As adults it is our responsibility to protect them.

Minimizing microwave and radio frequency radiation in schools is essential and that means preventing or regulating the use if WiFi and other types of wireless technology inside school buildings and ensuring that antennas (broadcast, radar, cell phone, WiMax) are placed  as far away from school property as possible.

Reducing exposure in the home is equally important.  Sources in the home include cordless phones, cell phones, wireless baby monitors, WiFi and smart meters (electricity, water, gas).  Sources external to the home include nearby antennas and wireless devices used by your neighbors.