Electropollution (Toxic Frequencies).. continued

Hans - since this topic rolled off the immediate viewing list, I'm responding to your comment here to bring this forward again.

Thanks for your comments. I may be doing a Part 3 but not immediately. As I stated, this just barely scratches the surface.

It was good to see your comments on your home evaluation and I’m hoping to find someone in my area. I also can appreciate the caution regarding Earthing pads, since one could easily be lulled into a false sense of security thinking the pads were all one needs. Since George N mentioned his using one, I thought it was a good idea. But, overall,it's certainly much more than using an Earthing pad. I'll probably be doing another separate report on Earthing as well.

However, the major focus about electropollution should be Awareness. Then it becomes acting on that awareness and that’s the difficult part for a the majority of people.

When we try to help guide new afibbers to learn about electrolyte imbalances, potential toxic triggers, etc, I think we should now begin asking about the level of toxic frequency exposure because in electro-sensitive individuals, it may be a key issue. Of course, correcting it can be a challenge as no one wants to give up their wireless conveniences. I agree with you about cell phones and cordless phones. Just don’t use them unless it’s an emergency. Long-term, we have no idea about the consequences and at the rate of information dissemination, we probably won’t be officially warned until it is far too late.

I don’t consider myself to be especially ‘electro-sensitive’ however, I am in the process of eliminating potential EMF/RF hazards in my home. I have a cell phone for emergencies in the car, but otherwise, never turn it on. But, I don’t know of anyone who is going to ditch their cell phone.

What I do worry about, though, is being surrounded by everyone else’s cells (the toxic wave plumes)....all turned on receiving the harmful signals. I was at a meeting last week… 12 women… and I was the only one who didn’t have a cell phone turned on ‘standby.’ That was really unnerving. I had to exercise a huge amount of self-restraint not to launch an awareness alert on the spot. One woman gave her iPhone to her 3-year old daughter to keep her amused. Oh my!

I was recently invited to visit the office of a friend who relocated his business to a new facility. To my shock and dismay, as we drove back to the building, I saw it was located right beside an extensive field of power transmission lines. I didn’t even want to stay…but I did and received the grand tour. Since my awareness level is now significantly increased… I noted that everything seemed to be wireless. Everyone had a cordless phone and could walk around with it so a not to miss a call. Two people were talking on cell phones. I was there for about an hour and I began to have a fuzzy feeling in my head that was bothering my focus. On the way home, the phone rang in the car... a touchpad on the dashboard screen allowed the call to come through the speaker. I could not wait to get out of that car and away from all that exposure.

We should keep in mind that the increasing prevalence of afib, especially among younger people not typically projected to experience AF, may indeed be connected to toxic frequency exposure. Based on the science, it seems very logical.

Jackie

Part 2 <[www.afibbers.org]> Electropollution (Toxic Frequencies) - Health Risks Identified

Part 1 <[www.afibbers.org]> Electropollution - Cardiovascular Risk?

Jackie,
One very minor caveat--- when you say "What I do worry about, though, is being surrounded by everyone else’s cells (the toxic wave plumes)....all turned on receiving the harmful signals," let me just point out that it is not so much the RECEIVED signals (which after all were transmitted from a hopefully relatively distant cell-tower) that are the problem; it is rather the TRANSMITTED signals (emitted by the cellphones in your immediate vicinity) that are the predominant radiation threats. Which is not to ignore the parallel problem of the "toxic wave plumes" which you refer to, where the combined effects of multiple cell-towers that increasingly surround us (particularly in urban areas) create a mounting environment of electropollution---my point is only that this parallel threat exists regardless of whether we (or those around us) do or do not use cellphones.

Mike

Jackie,

Actually cordless phones are even worse than cell phones as far as EMF radiation is concerned - and the radiation is continuous even if the phone is not in use.

Hans

There isn't any electropollution from cell 'phone towers or whatever, as I live on the edge of civilization, but something (the 60 Herz field in every house?) induces 2 VAC in my skin.
Our bodies run on millivolts, so I thought that this might be a problem.

Didn't want to cough up the $ for an Earthing pad, but remembered the antistatic wrist band I wore as a technician, so pounded a hole in the dirt outside, stuck a piece of old copper water pipe in, drilled a hole in the house and pushed a 10 gauge wire through it.
The wire was soldered to the pipe at night, since the hole came out too close to a nest of wasps (Big ones) in the wall.
The antistatic wrist band reduced the 2.0 V to 0.2 V, so not perfect but better, and I'm using my skin as an Earthing pad. Clever, nicht wahr?

William

Mike - thanks - you've said it better than I did. The people discussing this say all these towers sending their frequencies and then the phones are sending out messages saying: Here I am - here's my signal" as each carrier or phone company has it's own frequency...and we are bombarded with all that 'availability' and searching. So yes, we get that exposure... plus what's already out there that we cannot avoid at all.

Hans - yes... cordless phones are the worst.

And actually, any wireless device held to the head is bad.... and as Dr. Sinatra says... What's not far from the head? The ears, eyes, the thyroid and the heart. No wonder there is an increased incidence of problems in these areas.

Jackie

funny this topic came up i bought the book Zapped and also bought a EMF Field tester by LUtron Measures in Gauss
so i went around the house doing measurements and was shocked to see that i got a big reading of 197 from the outlet in my bedroom across from my bed and also got a high reading from a radio/alarm clock device on my night stand. I unplugged that and moved it. But there are hot spots such as that outlet in your house.
I really don't know how dangerous or what these numbers mean yet. Will continue to do the research. My microwave was in the 20s i believe. My computer didn't register that much but i have also wireless in my condo. It certainly is an interesting subject. The book has some good points but i am not sure what the readings mean yet.

Hans – Just as a matter of interest regarding any phone cordless or cell – or wireless device such as Bluetooth, there is plenty of data to suggest we should all be both alarmed and cautious. I’d add angry that these details aren’t emphasized as a matter of Public Health knowledge. (certainly cordless phones add even more exposure concern and should be discarded... but anything that is wireless and held to the head (brain) should be of concern. Long calls are just as dangerous as hundreds or thousands of quick calls.

Of greatest concern is the use of wireless phones by children…and this seems to be largely ignored.

Cell phone standards ignore children
Scientists in a number of countries agree that the head and brain of a child absorb significantly more radiation than those of an adult (de Salles 2006; Gandhi 1996; Kang 2002; Wang 2003; Wiart 2008). Yet U.S. cell phone emission levels and federal standards are based on radiation absorbed by adults and fail to account for children’s higher exposures and greater health risks.

In general, as head size decreases, the percentage of energy absorbed by the brain increases,(Martinez-Burdalo 2004). Moreover, children’s tissues have higher water and ion content compared to adult tissues (Peyman 2009). Both factors increase radiation absorption, acccording to researchers from the U.S., the Finnish cell phone company Nokia, Institute of Applied Physics in Spain and the U.K. Health Protection Agency (Gandhi 2002; Keshvari 2006; Martinez-Burdalo 2004; Peyman 2009).

All these data, taken together, suggest that when a child uses a cell phone that complies with the FCC standards, he or she could easily absorb an amount of radiation over the maximum allowed radiation limits defined by the federal guidelines. FCC standards give adults only a slim margin of safety over emission levels that harm animals. For children, the margin is much slimmer – if one exists at all.
source: [www.cancerblock.net]

Researcher, George Carlo, PhD, JD, MS (referenced in Part 2) was the chief scientist heading the cell phone safety study... the results of which should have been published and should have provided the warnings and scrutiny that the public deserves, but instead, ended up once again, the facts were glossed over in favor of big business and politics. His book points out the often-quoted 1996 study by highly respected scientist at the Univ. of Utah, Dr. Om Gandhi, on the radiation penetration of adults in children remains something that we don’t often see referenced or published. Gandhi’s study compared the average specific absorption rate of radiation (measured in milliwatts/kilogram or mW/kg in three age groups, inside the brain.

He showed children absorbed more radiation by 3 to 6 times than adults.
(sorry this chart doesn't line up) Just follow the columns downward.

Body Part Radiation Absorbed in milli Watt/kg
Detail In Adults In 10 year old Kids In 5 year old Kids
Head 7.84 19.77 33.12
Eye Fluid 3.30 18.38 40.18
Eye Lens 1.34 6.93 15.60
Connective Tissue 1.77 9.8 19.69


The photos of brain penetration (adult and child) by radiation on pages 10 and 11 should be noted.
[www.ece.ncsu.edu]

Oram Miller’s website has great research reference links- if you go there, you can click on the hyperlinks mentioned in the following as 'click here'.

Research Citations on the Health Hazards
of Cell Phones, Cordless Telephones and Wireless Internet (Wi-Fi)

To see how your cell phone compares to other phones on a list measuring radiation output for all cell phones on the market, click here.
To view a PDF version of the slides presented at Oram's lecture on Cell Phones, Wi-Fi and the Wiring in Your Home: EMF Hazards and Solutions, click here.

To learn steps you can take to safeguard yourself against EMF exposure, click on Tips for a Healthy Home, Articles on EMFs, Safer Use of Computers, and Steps to Protect Yourself from Cell Phone Frequencies.

To learn about the dangers of cell phone use in cars, click here.

To link to an archived version of an important medical alert from Dr. George Carlo about the dangers of EMF-reduction chips that some folks stick on their cell phone, click here.

To read a Position Paper on Cell Phone Chips, Pendants and Home Harmonizers written by Oram Miller, BBEI, click here.

To see a list of retailers who sell cell phone radiation shielding and reduction devices, click here. This page last updated August 25, 2011.

[www.createhealthyhomes.com]