Background

Background to site contents

Background:

Back in the early 1990s there was widespread opposition to the installation of mobile phone masts. Why? In those days, the telecomms industries attempted to install mobile phone masts, antennas and transmitting equipment in or close to premises where large numbers of children would be gathered. Mobile phone technology was new to most people yet almost everyone intuitively felt great unease at the birth of this New Dawn of telecommunication. In the UK, the battle to install masts and ancillary equipment within public spaces was mostly fought in the planning departments of local councils. The big unknown for many people was the question marks regarding use of mobile phone technology i.e. microwave radiation and health. Those who knew the answer to these questions said nothing and this situation of not really knowing simply festered.  Have you ever wondered why radiation scientists the world over cannot agree on a safe level of exposure from microwave radiation? Most radiation dosimetry scientists know that high levels of microwave radiation cause cancers and other ills yet not one of them understands the consequences of long term low  microwave radiation exposure on our biology. That is the sad fact that we have to face and something the regulators will at some stage admit to.   

Typical mobile phone mast painted green to camouflage it within a green landscape

Fast forward 17 years or so and the landscape around these issues is vastly different: (a) many thousands of peer reviewed journals from scientists, epidemiologists and the medical profession show or strongly correlate the use of mobile phone and WIFI with a slew of adverse biological effects, (b) it appears that some sectors of the population suffer from ES (electrosensitivity) or EHS (electro-hyper-sensitivity) due to exposure from microwave radiation, (c) legislation written into Parliamentary law shows that providing telecomms companies do not operate their equipment outside their license conditions, it will be impossible for any council to turn down a planning application based on safety issues, and (d) this sleigh of hand or parliamentary procedure against the best interests of the people has since stifled any debate on the safety in use of microwave-enabled devices.

We have reached saturation conditions in which mobile phone antennas are almost within eye-shot everywhere we go. The urban landscape is now completely throttled down in electrosmog of all descriptions. The proliferation of mobile phone antennas is probably the reason why EHS is sharply increasing – people are genuinely getting sick and I call this sickness ‘microwave sickness’.

Microwave frequencies are the operating frequencies used by mobile phone transmitters, tablets, WIFI modems, smartphones, smart TVs, emergency service transmitters, smart meters, DECT cordless phones, most baby monitors and even toys. Exposure to microwave frequencies has been classified by the IARC (International Agency on Research of Cancer) of the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.) as a class 2B carcinogen: “The exposure circumstance (of microwave radiation) entails exposures that are possibly carcinogenic to humans”. This classification of potential cancer induction was based on the incidence of gliomas observed in heavy users of mobile phone. Please satisfy yourself on the safety in using technology which has been shown to induce cancers of various types plus a whole host of other adverse biological effects. These effects were known about as early as the 1940s when radar was being developed in countries such as the USA, the USSR, Britain, Germany and other European countries. Unfortunately, the telecoms industry and regulators have adopted a strategy of looking the other way when it comes to discussing matters of well-being, health and safety in relation to any microwave-enabled consumer device. They can do this quite legally because safety legislation is based purely on thermal effects (skin heating effects) from microwave radiation, nothing else. In other words, even though there are many thousands of peer reviewed medical, scientific and epidemiological studies showing that exposure to microwave radiation is capable of inducing cancers, these non thermal effects are not recognised by any regulatory bodies as having any causal nature – the regulatory bodies and telecomms industries simply ignore them. Maximum allowable limits on transmit powers used by mobile phone transmitting equipment are therefore based on thermal effects only. In other words, if you suffer from feelings of tingly skin, develop headaches, are unable to sleep or concentrate and then go on to develop a rare cancer, this wouldn’t be recognised as linked to the erection of that mobile phoneFebruary 22, 2017>

Probably the greatest sin ever visited on us from the marriage of mobile phone technology, telecomms industries, regulatory /safety bodies and politicians is the lack of safety information on any of these commonly bought microwave-enabled devices. Labelling of any safety information is tucked away in the small print and most people are completely unaware of the dangers inherent in the use of devices that utilise microwave radiation. I have spoken to all sorts of different people including parents, family, friends, telecomms engineers and installers, and every single one of them was unaware of any of these dangers. Part of the problem of the non communication of these issues is the way in which search engines ‘throttle back’ as much relevant information as possible. This state of affairs is allied to the algorithms search engines use as most of them are based on returning advertising revenue and products rather than the words you typed into the search engine. The biggest offender is google. If you type in mobile transmitters and safety, the resulting web links relate to buying phone advertisements rather than their observed safety effects. I am positive that if all parents knew about the real dangers of mobile phone technology they would not let their kids near them. Similarly, if all parents knew the full extent of the non thermal adverse biological effects of microwave radiation on their children they would not allow schools to use WIFI as a way to connect school computers to the internet. The purpose of this site is to disclose as much safety information on these issues as possible and to push school governors not to use WIFI in schools. The much saner and safer alternative is to use hard wired connections, optical or ethernet. It is so obvious yet almost impossible to get this message across because of ignorance by consumers and indifference by the telecomms companies, radio frequency regulators and politicians. As far as they are concerned, ‘the show must go on’!!

I end this page with a salutary warning on what happens in the real world of telecomm-land. There is a conspiracy of silence on these issues and consumers for the large part buy these goods completely unaware of any safety issues associated with their use. Apple IPhones for example have four antennas which operate on the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands. Arguably, as frequency increases, perhaps the latency period between exposure from these devices and cancer induction decreases? It is bad enough using these devices as an adult but if your child uses them, all sorts of issues take place (a) children have thinner skeletal frames (b) their immune system is not fully developed (c) their physical size means their bodies act as antennas which increases the signal and their everyday behaviour begins to mimic symptoms of ADHD including an inability to tear themselves fro these devices. 


APPLE IPHONES AND ‘HIDDEN’ SAR (specific absorption rate) DATA AND INFORMATION

Below is an excerpt taken from http://consumers4safephones.com/apple-warns-customers-to-never-use-or-carry-an-iphone-in-your-pocket/:

Apple has issued a safety warning in every iPhone user manual – but, they deceptively printed it in tiny print and located it in a section where no one will see it.  Yep, it’s in yours!  Go take a look in the section on radio frequency compliance – in the section that talks about SAR (what’s SAR?) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) required warning to never use or carry the iPhone on your body.  You’ll need a magnifying glass, however as the print is so small, it is barely legible with the naked eye.  Here’s a quote of what you’ll find in the user guide that came with your iPhone. (I’ve increased the font size so you can actually read it):

“SAR measurement may exceed the FCC exposure guidelines for body-worn operation if positioned less than 15 mm (5/8 inch) from the body (e.g. when carrying iPhone in your pocket). For optimal mobile device performance and to be sure that human exposure to RF energy does not exceed the FCC, IC, and European Union guidelines, always follow these instructions and precautions: When on a call using the built-in audio receiver in iPhone, hold iPhone with the dock connector pointed down toward your shoulder to increase separation from the antenna. When using iPhone near your body for voice calls or for wireless data transmission over a cellular network, keep iPhone at least 15 mm (5/8 inch) away from the body, and only use carrying cases, belt clips, or holders that do not have metal parts and that maintain at least 15 mm (5/8 inch) separation between iPhone and the body.” The cell phone industry executives claim that cell phone radiation is not a big deal and there is no unsafe way to use a cell phone.  This is what Apple and all the other manufacturers want you to believe.  But, the facts tell us otherwise!


In other words, if you put any mobile phone next to your head when either transmitting or listening you have exceeded FCC guidelines on ‘safe’ exposure. For argument’s sake, if you decide to sue Apple in 5 years because of a tumor on the side of your head, the first question the Apple lawyers will ask is how often do you use your phone and how do you hold it in relation to proximity to your body. It is so important to get clued up on anything related to mobile phones – it is literally a slow kill technology.

See my ‘services‘ section at the top of this page for information relating to exposure and strategies to limit adverse biological effects from mobile phone technology or simply to get up to date on what is real and what is illusion in ‘telecomm-land’.

Namaste,

Ellis

Leave a Reply