Children in Risk - Outcome of EMF & Health, London

I am back. From the EMF & Health - A Global View, Royal Society, London.

For parents with children I have a message:      

Don't let your children use a mobile phone or a 3G data connection (without strict guidance) !

Why?

First, look at the picture and differences in adult's and child's skull and how radiation is absorbed. The picture is originally from Om Gandhi. Preadolescent children are more vulnerable [to microwave radiation] because of their thinner skulls, their still developing nervous systems, their increased levels of cell division, and their less robust immune systems.

In the conference professor Lennart Hardell pointed that the risk of Glioma (brain cancer) of a child is 5.2 times higher than compared to an adult who has started to use mobile phone when ... he was already grown-up. I recommend the following papers from Hardell & Co: [1] , [2] , [3].

The research originally from Wiart et al. (2008) demonstrates SAR values in child's head compared to adult's head. As the picture indicates, children have higher radiation absorption rates till 15 years age. 

The presentation of Lloyd Morgan was about the design flaws of InterPhone studies and how they indicate smaller risk than what is reality. Update 26th September 2008: Good to know: some Interphone studies indicate already increased risk for heavy users, like Sadetzki et al. (2008), Lahkola et al. (2008), Hours et al. (2007) and Blettner et al. (2007) - despite of design limitations :-( Update 4th October: Professor Michael Kundi's balanced literature review "The Controversy About a Possible Relationship Between Mobile Phone Use and Cancer" is worth checking as well.

My discussions (in Russian ;-) with professors Yuri Grigoriev and  Oleg Grigoriev, from the  Russian Radiation Protection Bureau (RNCNIRP) were useful. Children and pregnant women are not allowed to use mobile phone in Russia. Update: Their official warning document is worth reading. RNCNIRP's independent research teams have the longest research experience in this area in the world. Additionally they have learned from catastrophes (Chernobyl ,  US Embassy in Moscow). So, they know what chronic exposure is and what the outcomes are. Yuri had a good slide about new standards that are needed for children. All Yuri Grigoriev's slides can be found here.

My earlier story indicated warnings that Russian and other governments have announced around the globe.

For those skeptics (even medical doctors!) who claim that non-ionising radiation can not cause cancer,  I can point out at least 4 mechanisms:

1. Pulsed or UMTS-modulated radiation from a mobile phone makes the blood-brain barrier leak --> substances and chemicals from blood circulation are able to access brain.
2. Radiation affects the pineal gland and reduces melatonin production  --> According to Dr John Walker that is the main cause in the UK's (mainly breast and skin) cancer clusters close to some base stations.
3. Radiation removes calcium ions in cells and makes them leak.
4. Radiation breaks DNA-double strands, through reactive oxygen species increase. 

Update 26th September 2008: The presentation of Henry Lai had these mechanisms with references listed. Please, check the following slide set:  Henry_Lai_EMF_Health_London_RRT.pdf .

If you still don't believe, please, ask me more comprehensive references.

AND it is not only question of Cancer. Depression, Infertility, Alzheimer, Electrosensitivity (see George Carlo's excellent slides), ADHD, Autism etc are all the time increasing countries with extensive mobile infrastucture. The presentation of Eileen O'Connor (in the picture) about the risks of base stations was both shocking and memorable one. 

If you don't believe in human symptoms and illnesses, then look at what is happening in nature. Birds close to base stations have vanished, eggs have high mortality rate and bees lose their orientation ability. The presentation of Ulrich Warnke in the conference was ... stunning. Update 24th September: Check Warnke's longer paper. See also the research papers collected by the LivingPlanet. European Parliament just indicated the problems with radiation levels of base station and how inadequate the ICNIRP guidance levels are (See chapters 21-23).

Update 26th September: This topic is becoming really 'hot'. Please, watch the following video:

US Congressional Hearing - Cell Phone Use and Tumors: What the Science Says. Chairman: Senator Dennis Kucinich.

(I highly appreciate the commitment of Mrs Ellen Marks, Senator Dennis Kucinich, Director Ronald Herberman and Director David Carpenter!)

--

Technical topics: Why did we abandon analog phones and related systems like NMT? They were much safer without pulsing ala GSM, DECT, Wi-Fi, @450, Digital-TV or nasty signal modulation ala UMTS (3G). Why can not countries invest in fiber optics infrastructure? (My country Finland is one of worst in that, our government even allows shutting down landlines  in the countryside and small children are forced to make calls far from base stations with mobile phones increasing their power by 20-40 times.) Really ugly and irresponsible. 

I don't want any new 4G antennas next to my house and I don't want that untested technologies with radio wave frequencies are run through me or my immunity system is compromised without my approval. I find it amazing that historical records show so clearly the risks and still new services are launched every day with the governments' approval. 

Ethical topics: There is a tremendous amount of corruption in the mobile industry. Professor George Carlo's and Martin Schram's book provides a comprehensive overview of it. The outcome of WTR (Wireless Technology Research) project (1993-2000) was a warning of health risk related to cell phones/mobile phones. Therefore, Carlo and his team recommended hands-free use, post-market surveillance and strict avoidance of children's use of mobile phones . Only one operator that time, Metro Call, listened and advised its customers about the safer use of mobile phones. All other teleoperators/carriers and mobile phone manufacturers did...nothing . Once again, I am asking: How ethical or responsible is mobile business?

During the years, the FDA and other fdas around the world have remained silent and have not done their duty to advise (warn) consumers. I find it really strange.    

In 2000 the ECOLOG institute from Hannover was asked to provide a report of health risks to main European teleoperators. When these big bosses read it, nothing was done. Carriers and mobile phone manufacturers did/do not even bother to advice customers to use hands-free! More like, even more pressure was put to shut down laboratories of top researchers . Actions have been also indirect, by funding generously cancer and autism associations  ("don't bite the hand that feeds you").

Update 24th September: The ties of some scholars to industry remains to be ... secret . Additionally, if 70 percent of non-industry funded research shows biological effects, why are the ICNIRP guidance levels (still) based on thermal effects?   

How can you allow this kind of development? Are you so addicted to your mobile phone and wireless connection?

Comments

[Lloyd Morgan]

Beyond creativity is an excellent source of information on the effects from EMF exposure and information from the various meetings on this suject.

[Mikko Ahonen]

Thanks Lloyd!

I try to get better ;-) There is so much to learn for me in the EMF area.

I find it interesting, how much history teaches us about this subject:

http://www.diagnose-funk.ch/downloads/hechtvortrag070724englisch.pdf

When will politicians have time to focus EMF & Health riks? So, that our environmental decision making would be more balanced and sustainable.

[Maria]

Excellent compilation of EMF-facts! Thank you for raising awareness about the issue.

"How can you allow this kind of development?" I have been asking the same question... I'm afraid that history teaches us that man is able to "allow" almost anything, never mind that it causes suffering to others (people, animals, nature).

It is terrible that people suffering from microwave syndrom has got the "it's all in your head"- diagnosis for so long (even though there might be some cases were the reactions are due to phobia). This initial denial from the medical field has certainly delayed the general awareness and the discussion about the risks from EMF.

But I think and hope that there is some kind of change going on, because people are getting more aware of how unbalanced this earth is becoming. And with that might come a willingness to really SEE what life is and what balance is - and then you suddenly really understand that every toxic matter (even the slightest) you ever emit has to be dealt with by others (including yourself). And when I say others I include all life forms.

What I find strange is that, today, many people give you advice on how to cut back on your consumtion of electricity, but no one says a word about how mankind is creating a new technology that requires more electricity (wireless technology). Some countries are even dismantling an infrastructure that doesn't require electricity to replace it with another technology that requires electricity to operate (replacing landlines with mobile phones). Looks like hypocrisy to me!

Thank you Maria for your insightful comment. Especially I like the following sentence:

1. "What I find strange is that, today, many people give you advice on how to cut back on your consumtion of electricity, but no one says a word about how mankind is creating a new technology that requires more electricity (wireless technology)."

Indeed. When I save energy at home, it is peanuts compared to the power consumption of mobile phone base stations. Currently, several nuclear power plants in the world are needed to provide electricity to all those base stations. And more and more base stations are under construction. Yeah, sure, some of those base stations will have solar panels (in the future...).

Good to know: Power consumption of fiber optics network is minimal, almost zero.

Hopefully conferences like GreenComm ( http://www.greencomm09.org/home.html ) will address this topic. When will Greenpeace wake up?

2. BTW, have you ever thought about how "green" those energy saving lamps are? Why are we forced to change traditional light bulbs to mercury-containing, high dose EMF lamps?

http://www.international-light-association.eu/PDF/Artificial%20Light%20and%20Health%20PLDC07.pdf

http://www.oekotest.de/cgi/ot/otgs.cgi?suchtext=&doc=91415&pos=10&splits=0:1582:2799:4498:5557:7507:8428:9759:11934:12789:13930:15330:17591:18097:19528:20952:22348:23836:25060:27325:28324:29641:30549:31927:33755:34934:37059:37530:39368:40462:41940

3. What about those green cars? Have you any idea how high the magnetic field of an electrical/hybrid car is?

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/honda_insight.html

http://www.ehso.com/ehshome/emf.htm

http://www.aftonbladet.se/bil/article58868.ab

Something might be green, but it may not be healthy for humans and animals ;-)

I really need to talk with folks in the Green Party.

We have so much work to do, Maria :-)

[Max mickle]

Very nice site. Organized and an eye-pleaser.what is ur opinion? "is that possible to totally cure cancer in human body?"

[Mikko Ahonen]

To your question, Max:

I am bit sceptical. I see that medication and radiation therapy can only provide some improvements. Often when the tumour is radiated, some other areas in the body are damaged. As important as the mechanical-chemical treatment is the will of the patient. And nutrition + ... avoiding EMF-sources.

Currently the causes and cures of cancer are under heavy debate. I may not be the best person to answer your question.

Mikko

P.S. Please, send next time your real e-mail address if you want better / more comprehensive answers.