[Acoustic Neuromas – Alzheimer’s – Annie J. Sasco – Brain – Cancer Society Statistics – Cell Phones – Cell Towers – Children – Christoffer Johansen – C.K. Chou – CNS Central Nervous System – CT Scans – Danish Cohort Study – David O. Carpenter – Denis L. Henshaw – Devra Davis – DNA – Doctor Alasdair Philips – Electricity Shut Off – ELF – EMF Scientist Appeal – Fiorella Belpoggi – GBM Glioblastoma Multiforme – Graham Lamburn – Hans Skovgaard Poulsen – Health Canada Safety Code 6 – Heart Schwannomas – IARC – ICNIRP – International Scientific Declaration on EHS & MCS – Interphone – Jaap C. Reijneveld – Joachim Schüz – John Bucher – Joel Moskowitz – Lennart Hardell – Magda Havas – Marcus Schluschen Letter to Navdeep Bains re 5G – Michael O’Carroll – Microwave Radiation Reclassification to Class 2A Carcinogen or Class 1 – NIR Non-ionizing Radiation – NTP – Opt Outs – PowerWatch – Radar – Ramazzini Institute – RFR – Ronald L. Melnick – Ronald N. Kostoff – Scientist Appeal for 5G Moratorium – Sprague-Dawley Rats – Studies – Toxic Stimuli Promoters – Tracking – Tumours – Vincent K.Y. Ho – Water – WHO – Wi-Fi – Wireless | BC – Canada – Denmark – EU – Italy – Netherlands – Sweden – UK – Georgia, USA] & (audios) & (videos) & Websites
= = =
1) Dr. Alasdair Philips and others gathered data from various resources and concluded that rates of Glioblastoma, the most deadly form of brain cancer, is increasing significantly since the use of cell phones became common. The statistics are not being kept or monitored by any agency just, as I suspect, as in Canada. According to the Cancer Society, the rates of cancer are going down, so there is no evidence to be concerned about putting a radiating device to your head. The reduction in total numbers is misleading. Cancers from smoking are decreasing rapidly which can and probably has hidden the increase in brain cancers when the numbers are combined. The question is: why is the Cancer Society participating in this deception? Who is keeping the statistics? Who is studying and reporting on them in Canada?
Aggressive Brain Tumors on the Rise in England
Rate of GBM More Than Doubled Between 1995 and 2015
“The incidence of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the deadliest type of brain tumor, more than doubled in England between 1995 and 2015, according to a new analysis of national statistics. During that time, the number of cases of GBM rose from 983 to 2,531.
“We found a sustained and highly significant increase in GBM throughout the 21 years and across all ages,” said Alasdair Philips, the lead author of the study, which has just been released online by the peer-reviewed, open access, Journal of Environmental and Public Health.
“The incidence rate of GBM, the most aggressive and quickly fatal brain tumor, is rising dramatically in England while the rates for lower grade tumors have decreased, masking this dramatic trend in the overall data,” Philips told Microwave News from his home in Beeswing in southern Scotland, not far from the English border.”
http://microwavenews.com/news-center/gbms-rising-uk
Here is a link to Philips’ study.
or https://tinyurl.com/yarhddlz
2) Dr. Magda Havas reviewed the 2 recent major studies, the NTP and the Ramazzini, and has explained the significance which should lead to a reclassification of microwave radiation. Magda has a great sense of humor and I suspect the title is to get your attention.
Rats using cell phones are developing tumours!
The epidemiological studies are conducted under realistic conditions, using human subject (mostly) and show an association between an agent and an outcome. In this case the agent would be microwave radiation and the outcome would be cancer.
The in vivo studies are with living specimens (seldom humans) and are conducted in artificial, highly controlled environments and show a cause-effect relationship as only one parameters is altered at a time.
The in vitro studies (in glass) are similar to the in vivo studies but they look at cells, organelles, biochemical reactions, etc. and provide evidence for a mechanism.
When all three types of studies point in the same direction then we have more confidence in the results.
Each of these studies have their weaknesses and often when someone doesn’t like the results they focus on the inherent weakness in the type of study being performed (like … study was with rats not people; experiment was under artificial conditions; what happens in a test tube may not happen in a living organism; there could be confounders that were not considered; etc.).
The real value of the Ramazzini study is that it confirms the results in the NTP study as both showed an increase in two types of tumours Schwannomas of the heart and malignant glial brain tumours. We have additional evidence from epidemiological studies that these two types of tumours (various types of brain tumours) and schwannomas (in this case vestibular schwannomas that affect the ear rather than the heart) as an acoustic neuroma are higher in people who use cell phones. We also have scientific evidence showing that RFR causes an increase in free-radicals that can cause cancer; that it causes increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier, that it interferes with calcium biochemistry, etc. So, we have three types of studies pointing in the same direction. The tumours occur in humans under natural conditions; they occur in lab studies with rats at levels below existing international guidelines; and they occur in lab studies providing various mechanism (free-radical damage being only one probable cause). See: When theory and observation collide 2017.
Also, the NTP study is not the first but the second major study of microwave radiation and cancer in rats as the first one was conducted by Chou et al. in 1992. They found an increase in various tumours, especially primary tumours, for rats exposed to 2.4 GHz frequencies. It is the combination of studies that is important and all of these studies can’t be wrong!
http://www.magdahavas.com/rats-using-cell-phones-are-developing-tumours/
3) A comment on Magda’s comments, suggesting that the results of the NTP and Ramazzini studies were better than they would have been in a real life environment when exposures to other toxins exacerbate cancers and other diseases.
On March 23 2018,
Kostoff, Ronald N <ronald.kostoff@pubpolicy.gatech.edu>
http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/k/Kostoff:Ronald_N=
https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/Ronald-N.-Kostoff/1724020 wrote:
“Because of synergies, we need to take into account not only all EMF sources, but all other major toxic stimuli to which one is exposed. My EMF book chapter on combinations of toxic stimuli including EMF shows that combined effects can be very different from effects of toxic stimuli taken in isolation. So, if one function of RFR is to act as a promoter (the analog of a catalyst in chemical reactions), then the other toxic stimuli need to be included in any experiments to show the true damage potential of the RFR.
That’s one of the key problems I have with both the NTP and Ramazzini studies. I think they under-estimate the real damage caused by RFR, and as I pointed out in the email this morning, could be used by the developers to show that their small cell towers will be operating at sufficiently low power levels to be safe. That’s why I prefer the cell tower studies I referenced, and the epidemiological studies like those performed by Hardell. They show the real damage possible, even given the limitations of such studies. They also show the latencies of the effects; who knows what will happen in thirty/forty/fifty years after these combined exposures. We are still in the infancy of large-scale RF exposures. I address some issues like these in my recent monograph on preventing and reversing Alzheimer’s Disease (https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/59311).”
4) A phone press conference, with several famous experts, about the Ramazzini Study.
Ramazzini Study on Base Station/Cell Tower Radiation: Press Conference 3/22/2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9LLfFxJTVg 72 minutes
The last half is a Question and Answer period. Very interesting, especially after the first few minutes.
5) A very proactive resistance group in Georgia. They managed to stop “smart” water meters based on the risk to health posed by RF. They are still fighting the good fight against electric meters which are not mandated by law. The utility companies there pull the same stunts as they do here – threaten to shut power off, etc. It’s always good to make new contacts. Each of their successes gives us hope.
http://www.stopsmartmetersgeorgia.org/contactus.html
Letters:
From: Marcus Schluschen (name given with permission)
To: Navdeep.Bains@parl.gc.ca
Sent: March 20, 2018
Subject: Scientists Warn of Serious Health Impacts of 5G
Re: Scientists Warn Of 5G Health Impacts
Dear Minister Bains,
Since the Liberal Government announced that it will sink millions of taxpayers’ dollars into private for profit business ventures, involving 5G wireless networks, should this decision not be backed by independent health research first, as we are dealing with biologically untested technology?
In May of 2011, the World Health Organization/IARC classified all microwave radiation, a Class 2B Carcinogen, no matter its source. This cancer classification should raise many red flags for a government, who prides itself on “science based decision making”, instead of forging ahead and blindly accepting assurances of safety by corporate telecom giants, and Canada’s internationally critiqued: “non protective” Safety Code 6.
More than 180 scientists and doctors from 35 countries, recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry.
Please view the 7 pages of signatures by doctors and scientists, following page 4.
https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Scientist-5G-appeal-2017.pdf
More than 230 EMF scientists from 41 countries have expressed their “serious concerns” regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by wireless devices already before the additional 5G roll-out.
https://emfscientist.org/images/docs/International_EMF_Scientist-Appeal.pdf
After the scientists’ appeal was written in 2015, additional research convincingly confirmed serious health risks from RF-EMF fields from wireless technology.
The world’s largest study (25 million US dollar) National Toxicology Program (NTP) shows statistically significant increase in the incidence of brain and heart cancer in animals exposed to EMF below the ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) guidelines followed by most countries.
The International Scientific Declaration on EHS & Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) – Brussels 2015,
declares: “In view of our present scientific knowledge, we thereby stress all national and international bodies and institutions…to recognize EHS and MCS as true medical conditions which acting as sentinel diseases may create a major public health concern in years to come worldwide i.e. in all the countries implementing unrestricted use of electromagnetic field-based wireless technologies and marketed chemical substances…
Inaction is a cost to society and is not an option anymore… we unanimously acknowledge this serious hazard to public health…that major primary prevention measures are adopted and prioritized, to face this worldwide pan-epidemic in perspective.”
Who will “benefit” when the health of Canadians and the environment will be adversely affected by increased microwave radiation, emanating 24/7, from 5G microcells placed everywhere, on top of 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. already in place?
RF-EMF microwave radiation has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment, as insects, birds and amphibians are in a rapid decline, even in Canada, since the arrival of mass wireless communications.
I know many people, including my wife, whose lives have been greatly diminished by the relentless roll-out of wireless technology. Man-made radiation destroys people’s health and lives and, ultimately, the environment that we all rely on.
This should come as no surprise to anyone, considering that our bodies are bioelectric by nature.
If the claims of “science based decision making” by this Liberal Government carries any validity, it would be prudent to spend money on industry independent research, before sinking hundreds of millions of dollars into this ill conceived 5G corporate venture.
It is time to turn ‘green posturing’ by government officials into concrete actions, by actively protecting the environment and the future of generations to come.
The public has a right to expect that health takes priority over any technological advancement or corporate profit!
Best regards,
Marcus Schluschen
Sharon Noble
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“No diet will remove all the fat from your body because the brain is entirely fat. Without a brain, you might look good, but all you could do is run for public office.”
~ George Bernard Shaw