14 December 2015 - Eco Health Solutions

Some Facts About Mobile Phones

by Lucinda Curran | building biology, ehs, electromagnetic radiation, EMF, environmental sensitivities, health, high frequencies, indoor environmental health, mobile phone, radiofrequencies, smart meters

International Scientists Talk about Mobile Phones

Australia has really blessed in the latter weeks of 2015 with international scientists coming to share their expertise in public lectures.

At the end of November 2015, Dr (PhD) Devra Davis presented to the Australian public her lectures on “The Truth About Mobile Phones and Wireless Radiation.”

Davis has been involved in public health for decades. She was instrumental in having cigarette smoking banned in airplanes! (Remember when people did that?? It is horrifying to realise that this was changed in my lifetime!)

Mobile Phones = High Frequencies | Radiofrequency EMF

Mobile phone and wireless radiation relies upon high frequencies (which includes radiofrequencies) – the same as that used in our cordless phones, wireless, smart meters, wireless baby monitors, microwave ovens, game consoles and so forth. The exposure standards for these are based on a fluid filled plastic construction (ie like a bucket of water) and the heating effects that this level of radiation has on the water. They are based entirely upon what is termed “thermal effects” – that is, does it heat the tissue?

Given that there are a multitude of other effects – bioeffects and health effects – that take place well below the heating of tissue, these exposure standards are way too high.

To top it off, in 2011, IARC classified radiofrequencies as 2B “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” Earlier in 2015, around 200 scientists from around the world petitioned the WHO to move this up to category 1 of known carcinogens.

There are a few key points from Davis' lectures:

Buried inside our iPhones are some warnings. See for yourself – go to Settings -> General -> About -> Legal -> RF Exposure
Children are being marketed to, with devices such as the pad potty. In a recent interview, “Davis is particularly horrified by the enrolment of infants in their parents' gadgets. ‘There is no reason whatsoever that anybody should be giving a cell phone to an infant in the crib, yet there are thousands of apps for babies in cribs,' she observes. ‘If you must give a cell phone to a toddler, at least make sure it is in flight mode.'” (read the article here)
A study in India shows that mobile phone radiation is “causal to sperm damage” – so, fellas, have a think about where you keep your mobile phone

As well, she and her colleagues are creating models to show the effects of mobile phone radiation – which when you can see it, it is even more alarming.

You can view her Melbourne lecture here:

ACEBR at RMIT

Unfortunately, there are some scientists with their minds closed to possibilities – perhaps fattened wallets ensure that eyes and minds stay blinkered? – and this group are now in positions to make decisions. At the December ACEBR event held at RMIT, it became clear that all terminology has been reinvented to help blur the lines and keep people confused. Some terminology that Croft have redefined at that event are:

“Thermal effects” apparently now refers to any health or bioeffects that suits their team of researchers. By doing this, they can maintain that EMF has thermal effects at high levels, and has no other effects. Effects on sleep, according to the speakers at this meeting, is a thermal effect, under their new definition
“Science,” for some of the speakers at this meeting, “science” refers to “our truth.” In that, if it is something they disagree with, then it is “not real science”

The Precautionary Principle

Another outrageous attitude presented at the ACEBR event included that there was no need to follow or establish precautionary principles “because we don't want to alarm the public.”

The Precautionary Principle is all about keeping the public safe. If there isn't enough science to prove that something is safe, we need to exercise caution.

Consumers believe that what they can access in shops or online is SAFE FOR THEM. Consumers have the right to think this. Decision-makers have the responsibility, or even duty of care, to make sure that they are safe… but it is in this last step that the system falls apart.

In the meantime, believing the effluent that flows from the mouths of the affluent scientists who are no longer impartial and show a clear bias, is unwise because it is unsafe.

Take Action To Protect Yourself

If the decision-makers don't have the guts to protect you – take action yourself. There are a few more articles you can read here:

More Information from the Scientists on Mobile Phones

Prof Dariusz Leszczynski (Finland) also did two lectures in Melbourne, “Wireless Radiation and Human Health: How Reliable Is the Scientific Evidence?” (slides here) and “Mobile Phone Radiation and the Blood Brain Barrier: Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation on the Human Endothelium” (slides here).

Leszczynski was one of the 30 scientists invited by IARC to make the decisions about how to classify RF back in 2011.

Some key points from Leszczynski's lectures:

A regular mobile phone user is someone who uses their phone for one call a week, every week for six months – so that makes many people a few steps beyond excessive users??
Since 2011, some very important research has been published:
- CERENAT found an increased risk of glioma, temporal tumours with occasional and urban use
- Lerchl found increased risk of lung and liver tumours in animals; and an increased risk in brain tumours in heavy phone users
- Schmid and Kuster found that exposure of the skin, blood and muscles may well exceed 40W/kg (way in excess of the SAR levels) at a cellular level

Leszczynski wants to see IARC classify radiofrequencies as 2A – as probably carcinogenic to humans.

For more information on mobile phones and more

Listen to interviews:

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Part 1 interview with ES-UK's Michael Bevington
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Part 2 interview with ES-UK's Michael Bevington