Go Back Natural Medicine Talk > Health > General Discussions

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
� #1
Old 09-17-2012, 08:36 AM
jfh jfh is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 3,280
Blog Entries: 16
jfh will become famous soon enoughjfh will become famous soon enough
Default EMF from Cell and WIFI show no health problems

I'm still uncertain, even after this study.

----------------------------

There is no scientific evidence that low-level electromagnetic field exposure from mobile phones and other transmitting devices causes adverse health effects, according to a report presented by a Norwegian Expert Committee. In addition, the Committee provides advice to authorities about risk management and regulatory practice. The Committee has assessed the health hazards from low-level electromagnetic fields generated by radio transmitters. These electromagnetic fields are found around mobile phones, wireless phones and networks, mobile phone base stations, broadcasting transmitters and other communications equipment. The Committee has evaluated the power of the fields, whether they pose a health risk, the current regulatory practice, and whether the threshold limit values for exposure are observed.

The report is entitled �Svake h�yfrekvente elektromagnetiske felt � en vurdering av helserisiko og forvaltningspraksis. FHI-rapport 2012:3� (In English: Low-level radiofrequency electromagnetic fields � an assessment of health risks and evaluation of regulatory practice. NIPH report 2012:3). Published on September 13th, the report contains a Norwegian and English summary.

Studied electromagnetic fields below threshold limit values

The low-level electromagnetic fields generated when antennas in mobile phones and other wireless devices transmit radio signals are referred to as radiofrequency (RF) fields.

The health authorities have determined that the threshold limit values for electromagnetic fields around transmitters in mobile phones and other equipment should be the same as those recommended by the International Commission on Non-ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The threshold limit values are based on fields above a certain power that can cause harmful heating of tissue. The ICNIRP has not observed other adverse health effects under this level.

The threshold limit values for these fields are 50 times below the level that causes heating of human tissue or stimulation of nerve cells. Due to increasing public concerns, the government requested the appointment of an Expert Committee to assess whether such low-level electromagnetic fields could cause health effects.

The Norwegian Institute of Public Health was commissioned to appoint the Expert Committee by the Ministry of Health and Care Services and the Ministry of Transport and Communication. The Committee was chaired by Professor Jan Alexander, Assistant Director-General at the Institute.

Research indicates no health risk

The Committee has assessed a number of possible health effects from low-level electromagnetic fields and has evaluated the research in each area.

The group found no evidence that the low-level fields around mobile phones and other transmitters increase the risk of cancer, impair male fertility, cause other reproductive damage or lead to other diseases and adverse health effects, such as changes to the endocrine and immune systems.

No cancer risk found

Most studies concerning cancer have focused on the risk of cancer in the head and neck. The Committee found no scientific evidence for an association between mobile phone use and fast-growing brain tumours. So far, the effect on slow-growing tumours has been studied in people who have used mobile phones for up to 20 years. These studies show no association.

Only limited data exist for the other types of cancer in the head and neck area, as well as for leukaemia and lymphoma, but so far there is no evidence of an increased risk from mobile phone use. Cancer registries have not observed an increase in these tumours in the population since mobile phones were introduced.

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity

The Committee did not find that mobile phones and other equipment can cause health problems such as electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

Does this mean that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is an imaginary problem?

�We have no grounds to say that the symptoms are imaginary. But a large number of studies suggest that these symptoms must have other causes than the physical effects of low-level electromagnetic fields around mobile phones, wireless transmitters and other wireless equipment. Research provides no evidence to support that interventions help, such as reducing the use of mobile phones or wireless networks. Our opinion is that patients with these health problems must be taken seriously by the health service and should be treated as other patients. There is a need for greater expertise in the health service for this group of patients,� says Alexander.

Many people have found that holding a mobile phone to the head causes the area around the ear to become hot � is this due to electromagnetic radiation?

�The skin warms up slightly due to heat from the battery and not from the radio transmitter in the phone. The electromagnetic field will have very little or no heating effect. The body will remove the heat through normal blood flow, in the same way as the body otherwise regulates temperature.�

Some mobile phone models transmitting at maximum power provide exposure that comes close to the threshold limit values. Even so, any heating due to electromagnetic fields would be negligible.

Advice: Show general caution

Since there are no uncertainties in the health risk assessment of low-level electromagnetic fields that warrant introduction of the precautionary principle, the Committee believes that general caution is sufficient. This means that exposure should not be higher than needed to achieve the intended purpose.

When comparing the power of the fields around different types of equipment, talking on a mobile phone tops the list, whilst wireless internet networks are at the bottom. Base stations and broadcasting transmitters also come low down in the list. An example of exercising general caution would be for the authorities to inform that hands-free kits will significantly reduce exposure from mobile phones.

Furthermore, the field strength around a mobile phone is lower when there is good coverage.

Little benefit from more research

The Committee has evaluated the assessments previously published by international expert groups, as well as recent individual studies. The material is very extensive. A number of studies were performed on cells and tissues in the laboratory, as well as in animals and humans. In addition, population studies and cancer registry studies were conducted in several countries.

Little uncertainty

There is always an element of uncertainty in all risk assessments. In this case, the Committee considers the uncertainty to be small. Some uncertainty is associated with high exposure over time, such as extensive use of mobile phones over several decades. Until now, this has been impossible to study. Cancer registries should follow the development of cancer incidence in the future and research should not cease. Studies of animals that have been exposed throughout life provide no evidence that low level RF fields cause cancer. It is unlikely that long-term use of mobile phones will cause health risks that are unknown today.

Regarding equipment that provides the lowest exposure, such as base stations, wireless networks, broadcasting transmitters and proximity to other mobile phones, the experts believe that the risk assessment has negligible uncertainty. In other words, it is reasonably certain that such equipment is not associated with health risks.

The report is approximately 200 pages long and includes Norwegian and English summaries. It can be downloaded in PDF format at www.fhi.no.
__________________
-
- Jim
"A good listener is not only popular everywhere, but after a while he gets to know something." �Wilson Mizner
Reply With Quote
� #2
Old 09-17-2012, 11:44 AM
Mad Scientest's Avatar
Lecturer
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,739
Mad Scientest will become famous soon enoughMad Scientest will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfh View Post
I'm still uncertain, even after this study.
They don�t say much about how these studies were done. They do say no heating effect was noted do to their extremely low power as compared to what we find in a microwave oven and I don�t doubt that. But can this radiation be causing effects, other then heating, that we are aware of yet?

Somehow the idea of walking around all day with even a �low power transmitter� glued to your head just doesn�t seem to be a smart thing to do.
Reply With Quote
� #3
Old 09-18-2012, 03:40 PM
Solstice Goat's Avatar
Alchemist
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 338
Solstice Goat is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Scientest View Post
They don�t say much about how these studies were done. They do say no heating effect was noted do to their extremely low power as compared to what we find in a microwave oven and I don�t doubt that. But can this radiation be causing effects, other then heating, that we are aware of yet?

Somehow the idea of walking around all day with even a �low power transmitter� glued to your head just doesn�t seem to be a smart thing to do.

Lots of myths about radio waves get reinforced by the medical and airline folks, ie, 'turn off your cell phone because it will interfere with medical equipment or airplane equipment'.

This is pure BS. The signal from the cell tower is at least ten times more powerful than your cell phone, so if the signal was going to interfere with anything, the tower would already be doing it.

File this in the 'collectivist finger-waggling hokum' file.
__________________
I'd rather meander for the prevention than race for the cure.
Reply With Quote
� #4
Old 09-18-2012, 09:33 PM
pinballdoctor's Avatar
Lecturer
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Saskatchewan Canada
Posts: 1,546
pinballdoctor is on a distinguished road
Default

Lets just wait a few more years while these cancer tumors continue to grow in the brains, ears, and jaws of young people.

Then we'll see what the new studies show.

There were several studies done on smoking in the 50's and 60's and most showed smoking was harmless, and "soothing on the throat".

9 out of 10 doctors smoked camels.
__________________
Let Food Be Your Medicine And Medicine Be Your Food.(Hippocrates)
Reply With Quote
� #5
Old 09-18-2012, 09:35 PM
Enlightener
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sunny, tropical, CA.
Posts: 885
mommysunshine is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Due to increasing public concerns, the government requested the appointment of an Expert Committee to assess whether such low-level electromagnetic fields could cause health effects.
The government requested a study.....don't think I'll put my trust in it.....sad to say.
Reply With Quote
� #6
Old 09-18-2012, 09:41 PM
Enlightener
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sunny, tropical, CA.
Posts: 885
mommysunshine is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinballdoctor View Post
Lets just wait a few more years while these cancer tumors continue to grow in the brains, ears, and jaws of young people.
There was a study done and in 1997 it revealed brain tumors in the test subjects who were in their late 20's. I'm too lazy at the moment to dig it up.

Smoking cigarettes is a perfect example of what is going on with the cover up of EMF health hazards. It took over 20 years for the powers that be to finally reveal that yes, cigarettes do cause lung cancer and other health problems.
Reply With Quote
� #7
Old 09-19-2012, 07:22 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
Observing cool stuff
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: IN-nearChicago-a bit east
Posts: 168
happy2bhere is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Smoking cigarettes is a perfect example of what is going on with the cover up of EMF health hazards. It took over 20 years for the powers that be to finally reveal that yes, cigarettes do cause lung cancer and other health problems.
Haven't we learned - the hard way?!! Don't we now know that much of the research is to benefit those that DO CAUSE harm?

Do we place so much faith into that research? Really? Why wouldn't those doing the research "fudge numbers" or out and out lie just to keep THEIR PAYCHECKS coming in?

And those that do feel it is best to tell the truth?

What happens to them?

A hypothetical - "I am a scientist that has done the research and I have found conclusively that the tumors found in young adults are the direct result from..." How long you think I am gonna last? I will be booted out of the community some how by those with bigger funds than I will ever have. Who is willing to go up against them and divulge any HARMFUL results? Would you?

Let me find the info about dead scientists that was happening a few years ago that may have sent a message...

ETA:
Quote:
But why does there seem to be so much government action on behalf of one corporation? Where's the logic? A better question may be, "Where's the connection?"
Meet Michael R. Taylor, Deputy Commissioner for the FDA. In 1981 he worked for the law firm, King & Spalding, where he lobbied for Monsanto and established the firm’s “food and drug law” practice. In 1991, he moved over to the FDA to fill a newly created position, Deputy Commissioner of Policy. Between 1994 and 1996, he did a stint at the U.S. Department of Agriculture as the Administrator of Food Safety. Then he returned to King & Spalding, then to Monsanto as VP for Public Policy, and today, he is again, a senior advisor to the FDA, occupying yet another newly created position, Deputy Commissioner of Foods.
Taylor is just one example of the “revolving door” policy that exists between private corporate interests and the agencies that exist for their benefit. When a corporation or a group of corporations become large enough, powerful enough, the government ceases to regulate them, and instead becomes a thug, regulating the competition on their behalf.
https://www.usobserver.com/archive/ju...nto-pharma.htm

Color me s k e p t i c a l.
__________________



I walk the maze of moments but everywhere I turn to~ begins a new beginning but never finds a finish~ I walk to the horizon and there I find another~ it all seems so surprising and then I find that I know~You go there you're gone forever
Reply With Quote
� #8
Old 09-20-2012, 04:51 AM
liverock's Avatar
Lecturer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Out of sight
Posts: 1,054
liverock will become famous soon enoughliverock will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfh View Post
I'm still uncertain, even after this study.
These independant studies may help you to make up your mind.

https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/rf/phones.asp

For those who think they are clear due to low or no useage of a mobile phone check out the MAST sections.

https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/rf/masts.asp
Reply With Quote
� #9
Old 09-20-2012, 05:27 AM
revzen's Avatar
Explorer
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 58
revzen is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to revzen
Default

A MUST WATCH!!!

The Dangers of Microwave Technology.

Interview with Barrie Trower In November 2010. Barrie Trower is a former Royal Navy microwave weapons expert and former cold-war captured spy debriefer for the UK Intelligence Services. Mr Trower is a conscionable whistle-blower who lectures around the world on hidden dangers from microwave weapons and every-day microwave technologies such as mobile-phones and WiFi. Mr Trower has also repeatedly assisted the UK Police Fedration in their struggle to protect police officers from Tetra/Air-Band radio-communications systems that are harmful to health.

Reply With Quote
� #10
Old 09-20-2012, 06:51 AM
Observer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 13
ChrisCarlton67 is on a distinguished road
Default

While I am no conspiracy theorist, I do always question the motivations of the people that are FUNDING the research.

This is something that we will simply not know enough about until DECADES later when we have so much data that it cannot be denied.

It's not like you can press a button and, woops! I gave you cancer. There are so many variables, especially with genetics, to consider. Environment, diet, family history.

I worry about this stuff all the time. My job requires me to sit in front of computer screens. Be around WIFI that has MULTIPLE devices connecting to it. If I can, I go wired, but that's not always possible and not even likely.

I don't use a cell phone but that industry is so big right now I doubt we will see any negative studies that will make any game changing results. It all comes down to who benefits from the studies. If corporations can figure out a way to make money from destroying the cell phone market, then maybe we'd see more negative studies.

That's just my 2 cents of course.
Reply With Quote
� #11
Old 09-20-2012, 06:52 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
Observing cool stuff
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: IN-nearChicago-a bit east
Posts: 168
happy2bhere is on a distinguished road
Default

I take this VERY seriously for it concerns MY health and that of my family.

We have NO wifi. That's right. I am wired. So what. We have NO CORDLESS phones in the home. NONE. It is attached to the wall in the kitchen.

Our cell phones ARE OFF IN THE HOUSE - or in another room. We TEXT most of the time or use speaker. The cell phone is NEVER in a pocket while on or near body. NEVER.

We have NO TV in bedrooms/kitchen or areas like that which we are in for long periods of time. NO COMPUTERS, as well (basement with the tv in the family room).

I have antenna/air (FREE) tv. NO CABLE. NONE.

Beds are wood frames (ikea). Low elect in bedrooms.

(I do, however, have this nasty water meter reader on my home.) I used to have a smart water meter reader pulsing every 14 seconds or so reading HIGH on the meter-in the basement. So, I had the town come put the analog meter back in. The wireless reader is on the brick in the backyard shooting out pulses directly in front of it. You get a high reading in my daughter's bedroom closet and I don't like it. (I use a Cornet electrosmog reader) The current reading stays in the yellow area of the Cornet while I am on the computer. When I had wiFi, it was in the UPPER RED areas.

Microwave is NOT used. If dh uses we leave the area.

I also have Salt lamps in the bedrooms and some type of sticky Film that is supposed to help reduce the amount of rf/emf in the bedroom that faces the high tension (195 ft) poles a few blocks away.

I dont profess to understand grounding and currents, etc. I am hopeful we are taking the necessary precautions. The information is SO VERY conflicting - I just won't chance it.

What I do find disturbing is the number of CELL TOWERS, or whatever they are, creeping ever so closely to residential homes. Some, disguised as "flag" poles. Complete with 6ft wood fence and WARNING: DANGER DO NOT TRESPASS signs on the fence. For a "flag" pole? huh? DON"T LIKE THIS AT ALL! Is it Boston that have removed all cell towers away from resident fire houses due to the disrupt of sleep for the firemen? I believe I read that somewhere.

Find the towers in YOUR area here: https://www.antennasearch.com/
Reply With Quote
� #12
Old 09-20-2012, 07:03 AM
Observer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 13
ChrisCarlton67 is on a distinguished road
Default

Wow that is VERY interesting Happy. It would be my wish that most people could have this kind of dedication. The more extreme solution would be to simply live off the grid.

I am curious as to how much I am exposing my own family to. We are very electronics heavy, but I, like any good parent, want my kids to grow up as healthy as possible.

I'll check into that reader you mentioned.

Regards,
Chris
Reply With Quote
� #13
Old 09-20-2012, 07:45 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
Observing cool stuff
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: IN-nearChicago-a bit east
Posts: 168
happy2bhere is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisCarlton67 View Post
Wow that is VERY interesting Happy. It would be my wish that most people could have this kind of dedication. The more extreme solution would be to simply live off the grid.

I am curious as to how much I am exposing my own family to. We are very electronics heavy, but I, like any good parent, want my kids to grow up as healthy as possible.

I'll check into that reader you mentioned.

Regards,
Chris
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ simply live off the grid ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Sounds so nice!!
Reply With Quote
� #14
Old 09-20-2012, 09:13 AM
Arrowwind09's Avatar
Standing at the Portal
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: At The Door of Death
Posts: 6,236
Blog Entries: 16
Arrowwind09 will become famous soon enoughArrowwind09 will become famous soon enough
Default

Point to note. Microwaves aren not the same a radio frequency. I will not keep a microwave in my house. They are also illegal, or were, in old Soviet Russia, their scientists determining that they were not safe.

We have been bombarded with radio frequency since the 1950's and the advent of the transistor radio.

Clearly through the work of Rife and others, frequencies do have a very measurable effect on the body.
__________________
Please be advised
I advocate all health blogs linked to NMT.
Read them and explore MMS and CS.
It may be the best chance that you have to heal yourself
of long term and chronic illness.
Reply With Quote
� #15
Old 09-20-2012, 02:00 PM
liverock's Avatar
Lecturer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Out of sight
Posts: 1,054
liverock will become famous soon enoughliverock will become famous soon enough
Default

Biggest RF radiation in the home is the Digital Electronic Cordless Telelephone(DECT). Most homes have these cordless phones and what people dont understand is the phone docking station is emitting RF radiation 24/7 even when the phone is not in use!

https://www.natmedtalk.com/f41/22697-...tml#post185531

Your better switching back to the corded phone, but as they are no longer "cool" with teenagers, if you must have a cordless phone get a Siemens ECODECT type from Amazon or Ebay, which only emits RF when in use (not 24/7 like the ordinary DECT).

https://www.natmedtalk.com/f41/23298-...tml#post190014

This explains the difference between a DECT phone and an ECODECT phone.

https://www.lessradiation.co.uk/low-r...rdless-phones/

.
Reply With Quote
Reply Bookmark and Share

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Husband and I are having same health problems mamasnug Systems & Organs 28 12-21-2011 03:00 PM
Looking for a german tv show just me Chitchat 4 12-01-2011 12:32 PM
Feelin crappy for almost a year? health problems / stress moxsum General Discussions 20 06-06-2010 06:50 PM
I have a ton of health problems haha General Discussions 4 02-18-2010 02:56 AM
Health & WiFi jw8725 General Discussions 7 08-14-2009 07:13 AM