HELSINKI, Finland, October 17, 2013 — The French cell phone safety watchdog – The National Agency for Health, Food and Environmental Safety (ANSES) – published its new report on cell phones and health on October 15th, 2013.
What Causes the Damage? The part of the electromagnetic spectrum used by cell phones and other wireless devices to communicate does not occur naturally on the earths surface — logically, it has to be, or there would be too much interference for cell phones to work.
Anyone telling you there is no correlation and causation between wifi technology, such as cell phones and cell phone towers or home wifi devices, and cancer, is a criminal liar.
~ Uncle Russ
A Swedish study on the use of wireless phones, including cell phones and cordless phones, has uncovered a link between electromagnetic radiation exposures and the risk of malignant and non-malignant brain tumors.
Based upon recent findings, the BC CDC recommends that males keep cell phones away from the groin area and limit mobile phone use. The report confirms that there is consistent evidence that exposure to testes is associated with reduced sperm count, motility, concentration and altered cell structure.
A reminder from 3 years ago on nuking your head.
Samsung recently announce it plans to put eft (electronic frequency transmission) protection devices onto their wifi offerings, further proving the dangers!
Anyone telling you there is no initial or cumulative danger from wifi and eft exposure is a proven liar.
~ Uncle Russ
Radiation from cell phones can possibly cause cancer, according to the World Health Organization. The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same “carcinogenic hazard” category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform.
More empirical evidence on the subject covered in the attached article and citings.
Use your Speaker Phone Feature and Avoid Blue Tooth Head attachments!
Neurosurgeons and Dermatologists, I personally know, in medical practice, are reporting spikes in ear and brain cancers they “know” is a direct correlation to cell phone use and electronic frequency transmissions triggering/causing “metastasized cancers”.
~ Uncle Russ
Approximately 60,000 to 70,000 cell phones are sold each day in the United States. Over 110 million Americans use cell phones. And worldwide, it is estimated that approximately 1 billion people use cell phones.
If you post articles to your Facebook wall that warn others about the dangers of vaccines, or Tweet links to the latest studies tying vaccines to autism through Twitter, the vaccine pushers of the world could soon know about it in real time.
So if the gamma radiation on polar routes does not get you, the in flight wifi, or what feebly passes for food and beverages will.
~ Uncle Russ
(NaturalNews) WiFi connectivity is set to come to a plane journey near you if you fly Lufthansa mid-haul routes in 2014, according to news from businesstraveller.com. WiFi capable planes are part of a trend that’s still gathering pace across the entire aviation industry starting around 2009 in the United States.
Wifi on airplanes: great for airlines but not so good for fliers
Your Constitutional Rights Are Being Trampled By Uncle Sam Gone Wild At Your Tax Dollars Appropriate To Protect Big Government!
~ Uncle Russ
Congress has passed a controversial bill that will make it easier for law enforcement officials to fly unmanned drones over US airspace.
Anyone suggesting cell phones are not causing cancer to users or the environment is a liar.
~ Uncle Russ
Breast cancer occurring in women under the age of 40 is uncommon in the absence of family history or genetic predisposition, and prompts the exploration of other possible exposures or environmental risks. We report a case series of four young women—ages from 21 to 39—with multifocal invasive breast cancer that raises the concern of a possible association with nonionizing radiation of electromagnetic field exposures from cellular phones. All patients regularly carried their smartphones directly against their breasts in their brassieres for up to 10 hours a day, for several years, and developed tumors in areas of their breasts immediately underlying the phones.
The campaign by trolls on the internet, from the wifi,cell phone and power transmission industries, that there is nothing wrong with their products is a GIANT LIE.
Use your speaker phone and get a safe diode for your cell phone and take wifi router out of your homes.
~ Uncle Russ
In the video above you can listen to my powerful interview with Dr. Devra Davis, who is one of the most well-respected and credentialed researchers on the dangers of cell phones, among a number of other things.
Things do not go better with Coke…
~ Uncle Russ
Earlier this year, Coca-Cola Company rolled out an ad campaign encouraging people to unite in the fight against obesity. The irony of the situation was not lost on most people however, and the ads drew fire from consumers, consumer advocates and obesity experts1,2 alike.
Bernstein Liebhard LLP, a nationwide law firm representing consumers in cell phone radiation lawsuits, (http://www.consumerinjurylawyers.com/cell-phone-radiation-lawsuit.html) applauds a new effort by a consortium of health and consumers groups to convince U.S. government regulators to revamp cell phone radiation standards.
Keep the cell phone away from your head and body, use the speaker feature.
Children and health compromised individuals are particularly vulnerable to physical harm.
Want real wellness through proven nutrition?
GOT BRAND NEW ZIJA SMARTMIX and XM+?!
~ Uncle Russ
If you’re one of the people who has suspected cell phones/cell towers were bad news, get ready for the latest affront to our health: The 4G/LTE network. This is the latest scheme cooked up by the greedy telecommunications industry.
This just in from a leading Physicist and Electronic Engineer at a highly prestigious American University.
~ Uncle Russ
Foreign researchers are extremely excited for a biology project from five 9th grade girls.
Researchers from England, Holland and Sweden have shown great interest in the five girls’ biology experiments.
Take 400 Cress seeds and place them into 12 trays. Then place six trays in two rooms at the same temperature. Give them the same amount of water and sun over 12 days, and remember to expose half of them to mobile (Wi-Fi) radiation.
News of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA)’s covert spying activities on Americans has sent shockwaves throughout the nation, rattling what little rudiments of freedom and liberty still remain in this once great nation.
The director of a prominent cancer research institution has released cautionary words to his administrators and staff to restrain from excessive use of cell phones because of a chance of cancer, according to The Associated Press.
It’s an all too familiar scene: children, some as young as nine, spending an exorbitant amount of time on cell phones. What may not be as familiar, and therefore go unnoticed, is the sight of children who are suffering and sick from cancer, specifically brain cancer.
People who started using mobile as teenagers and have been doing so for more than a decade are at a five-fold risk of developing a common type of brain cancer, new evidence indicates.
While the proliferation of wireless devices has made accessing the internet more convenient and less obtrusive (no unsightly cables lying around), studies are now revealing the trade-offs that come with convenience. More specifically, the dangers that the widespread adoption of wireless technology has created in regards to our health. Simply put, most people underestimate the dangers of wireless technology to our health and well-being.
Keep those cell phones and wifi away from your body and exposure, electronic frequencies are radiating you and your family!
~ Uncle Russ
by Josh Mitteldorf
Posted on July 8, 2013
In the 21st Century, we live in a sea of radio waves. No one wants to think that this might have consequences for our health – there are enough things to worry about that are more within our power to change. We get plenty of encouragement not to think about the subject from the news media which, come to think of it, are not so easily distinguished from the telecomm companies. The danger is real, if not so easy to quantify, and common sense suggests we might mitigate the largest sources of risk with minimal inconvenience.
It was twelve years ago that a neighbor asked me if she should worry about exposing her teenage children to cell phone radiation. I put on my physicist’s hat and patiently explained to her the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Radiation comes in little quantum packets, and the type of radiation corresponds to how much energy is in each packet. UV, X-rays, gamma rays and cosmic rays all pack enough energy in each photon that they can damage the complex and delicate chemicals, including DNA, on which our life depends. Radio waves are low-energy radiation. Each single packet lacks the punch to break a chemical bond, and so the only way they can affect our chemistry is if many of them act together. This (I explained) is called “heating”. Unless a radio signal is strong enough to change our temperature, then it can’t be doing any damage.
I was not alone in accepting this theoretical “proof” that non-ionizing radation can’t hurt us. Throughout the 20th Century, as radio technology was being developed with wider applications in more bands of the spectrum, scientists and regulators universally assumed it was (biologically) a benign technology.
No one, in good conscience, can think that way any more.
Studies of health hazards linked to microwaves have left the threshold of plausible deniability far behind, and it is only through an extensive program of censorship and scientific disinformation that the subject has been kept from the mainstream of public discourse. Devra Davis has worked tirelessly to advocate and educate on the connection between cell phone use and brain cancer.
So far, there has been no public health catastrophe, but (as Davis explains), there is a time lag of up to ten years before cancer develops, and the rapid rise in the use of cell phones may take a much larger toll in the coming decade.
Three important and very different questions arise:
- What can we learn about fundamental cell science from the fact that biological systems are sensitive to radio frequency?
- What practical measures can we take in our daily lives to mitigate the risk of radio waves?
- What policies and regulations should government be promoting to guide broadcasters and manufacturers of consumer devices toward safer technologies?
I’ll say a few words about the first two, and refer you to the EMR Policy Institute for the third.
What can we learn about biology?
Strong interactions between radio frequency (RF) radiation and living cells is surprising to a physicist, but perhaps not utterly mysterious. In my opinion, the most plausible theories involve resonance.
When you tune your radio to a particular station, you are programing the receiver to focus on one particular frequency, corresponding to an exact amount of energy in each quantum packet. A large number of packets confined to a particular frequency is characteristic of the way that radio communication works (including cell phones, broadcast radio, wifi and bluetooth, etc). Back in the 1970s and 80s, a German-British physicist named Herbert Fröhlich wrote some far-sighted theoretical papers about ways in which biomolecules might respond to RF radiation that happened to resonate with their vibrational frequencies. When the frequency of a radio wave corresponds to a vibrational mode for a molecule, the interaction is extra-strong, and it may be that the molecule is induced to shake violently. There are so many biomolecules and so many different broadcast channels that resonances are bound to occur by chance. If this is indeed the reason for biological effects of RF radiation, then it may be that the radio communications that surround us could be made far safer simply by prohibitions against broadcast at certain critical frequencies.
There is a related theory that RF radiation disrupts the membranes on which cells depend to maintian their structure and separate chemical constituents in different parts.
A bit of research has been done (in Croatia Croatia and India! India!) to look for signs of ways that cells respond to radio waves, starting from a purely observational approach without a theory. This ought to pique the interest of every cell biologist, and new experiments should be devised to search for fundamental new mechanisms. It is a certainty that profoundly new biology remains to be discovered if this thread is pursued.
(I have difficulty explaining why this isn’t a hot field for new research, except if I think of all the monied interests that feel threatened by research in the field.) It may be that the effects are all weak and beome manifest only over longer periods of time, and this will make the phenomena a bit harder to study. But this research promises to open a whole new field of knowledge – what are we waiting for?
What can we do to protect ourselves?
So far, we know little about which frequencies might have more effect than others. Without that information, it makes sense to look just at RF power and compare exposure from different sources – especially those over which we exert some individual control.
Radio power is measured in watts, and power density in watts per square centimeter. Think of the power from a transmitter rippling outward in an expanding sphere. As you move away from a source of RF, the power gets rapidly diluted over a larger and larger sphere. Power density is computed as the output power of the transmitter divided by the area of the sphere. I assume that it is the power density that dictates the danger, and that we would be prudent to avoid the RF sources in our environment that have the highest power density.
Cell phones – The problem with cell phones arises from the facts that (1) they need to broadcast with enough power to reach a cell phone tower up to 10 miles away, and (2) people hold them close up against the heads. The transmission power of a cell phone is limited by FCC to 2 watts, and distance to the brain is less than 1 cm. So power densities inside your head can be as high as 1 watt/cm2.
Microwave ovens – I became aware that microwave ovens leak when I noticed that I couldn’t make a Skype call or watch a Youtube video from my kitchen while the microwave oven was operating. Apparently it leaked enough to interfere with the wifi in the house. Some ovens are much leakier than others. But manufacturers don’t list leakage in their specifications, and there are no government or consumer web sites where you can find a comparison. Meanwhile, there is a thriving market in microwave meters. Meters that measure just the particular frequency from ovens are inexpensive, meters that cover a broader frequency spectrum, suitable for wifi and cell phones as well, are a few hundred dollars
But in comparison to cell phone emissions, microwave ovens tend to be much smaller. The meters measure in units of 0.001 watts/cm2, which is hundreds of times smaller than what you receive from holding a cell phone next to your head.
The most practical and effective thing you can do to minimize your RF exposure is to carry a cell phone in a purse or backpack rather than in your pocket, and use a wired headset rather than hold the phone up to your ear.
Laptop computer - Typical wifi power from a laptop computer is 0.1 watt. If you work with one of these all day long and you hold it close to your body, your computer can be the second most powerful source of RF radiation in your daily life. The remedy is to turn off the wifi in your laptop and run a network cable to your network hub, rather than relying on wifi. This can be quite practical at your desk or other work area where you habitually use the computer.
WiFi – Typical home wifi systems radiate about 1 watt. If you sit right next to the unit while you work, you could be exposing your head and body to a few milliwatts/cm2, comparable to sitting next to a leaky microwave oven.
The exposure from wifi is all over your body, and constant throughout the day spent in your home or office. How does that compare to a much higher exposure concentrated at your head for a few minutes a day that you use a cell phone? This is a big question for epidemiologists, and to my knowledge there are no reported data and no one is doing such studies at present. Tentatively (based only on fuzzy theory), I would focus on the acute, high-intensity exposure and ignore the low-intensity, chronic exposure until better data becomes available.
Microwave and cell phone towers – Typically, they radiate ~300 watts. If you live right next to one, say 100 meters, then your exposure all day long is still only a few microwatts, which is 1000 times less than the exposure from sitting next to your wifi modem or your microwave oven. These, in turn, are hundreds of times smaller than the exposure from your cell phone.
Commercial radio broadcasts – The largest of these may broadcast at 50,000 watts If you happen to be within 1 km of the Empire State Building or Twin Peaks in San Francisco, you could be receiving a few microwatts/cm2 of exposure.
The bottom line
Distance trumps power. (This is the physics of the inverse-square law.) Beware the close-up sources and don’t sweat the more powerful ones far away. Carry your cell phone away from your body, and use a wired headset. The next level of protection is provided by turning off the wifi in your laptop computer. Beyond this, you might want to stay a few feet away from your microwave oven and your wifi hub. Remember that exposure from these is likely to be ~100 times smaller than from your cell phone. Don’t worry about big broadcast towers, which expose you to radiation intensities that are ~100,000 times smaller than your cell phone.
Meanwhile, there’s an urgent need to study whole-body effects and a possible frequency dependence for the biological effects of radio waves. My suspicion is that such research is being suppressed by the telecomm industry and its political influence.
A new study, published in the February 2006 issue of the International Journal of Oncology, by Professor Lennart Hardell and colleagues shows statistically significant increases in the risk of benign brain tumors, especially acoustic neuromas, following the use of mobile telephones.
Facts Don’t Lie, But Cell Phone, Power Transmission Line, Wifi Advocates And Lobbyist Do Lie And Are DEATH MERCHANTS.
~ Uncle Russ
Cell phones have become ubiquitous in today’s society. It’s almost as if you don’t have one, then you’re not living in the 21st century.
Evidence is daily mounting on wifi and cell phone and electronic frequency transmissions causing disease, cancer, and premature death, at any exposure level.
~ Uncle Russ
They’re called wifi hotspots or wireless Internet zones. They’re inside coffeehouses, hotels, restaurants, and even buses and trains.
Cellphones May Interfere With Some Critical Care Medical Devices, Experts Say.
If energetic interference can occur with critical care equipment, just imagine what it is doing to the sophisticated energetics of your own body
This adverse effects are being shown up more and more as EMR ElectroMagnetic Radiation is being recognised as the real and legitimate cause of disturbance and ill-health.
Here is an archive article for son 5 years ago that was a harbinger of FACTS and TRUTH the cell phone, wifi and power transmission industries do not want you to know.
Oh, by the way, no less than The World Health Organization has affirmed these electronic frequencies transmissions or radiation, in 2012 affirmed such exposure, individually, initially ans cumulatively do pose a cancer risk.
Anyone attempting to deflect or deny these facts is a LIAR or propaganda hack (essentially the same thing but paid to LIE) for the industries in question.
EFT’s destroy and tear apart you DNA and erode and degrade telomerase activity, triggering metastization to cancer and harm body immunity to other microbial. fungal, bacteriological, viral, toxic exposures laced through the food, beverage, drug and cosmetic chains of distribution, to name one a few daily ingestions or topical exposures.
Are sick care death merchants profiting on your shorten and degrade life span in a criminal fashion? Yes.
Are governmental regulators and politicians totally bought off, through lobby special interest and their lawyers? Yes.
Who care about you safety in this worlds? You better look in a mirror.
Little has change from Roman Empire times and the maxim CAVEAT EMPTOR (“Let The Buyer Beware”).
Any representation the Uncle Sam is protecting consumers is also a giant fraud.
Want real proven wellness?
GOT ZIJA SUPERMIX?!
Drink Life In!
~ Uncle Russ
My name is Enrico Grani and I presently live in Australia. I used cell phones for ten-plus years extensively on-and-off, and because of this I developed a brain tumor!
Every week now, Dr. Riina Bray sees two or three new patients with a similar array of ailments and ends up blaming the same, controversial cause.
Suffering from stabbing headaches, “brain fog,” tinnitus or extreme fatigue, their symptoms seem linked to exposure to Wi-Fi routers, cellphone towers and other sources of radio-frequency radiation, says the environmental health specialist at Toronto’s prestigious Women’s College Hospital.
Is it a cactus? A palm tree? A water tower? No! It’s a cell phone tower! That’s right! Cell phone towers today are being disguised in subtle ways unheard of just a few years ago. See a grain silo? Or a church steeple? You guessed it. It could very well be a cell phone tower. There’s even a cell phone tower that looks just like a lighthouse…never mind that it’s over two miles from the ocean.
Remember that classic “this is your brain on drugs” commercial, with the egg frying in a pan? If you soon see a “this is your brain on cell phones” clip, don’t say we didn’t warn you: Cell phone radiation may be slowly sautéing your noodle, finds new research published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Would you allow 1600 chest x-rays for yourself or your child?
Some scientists say that’s what 24 hours of cell phone use amounts to. Here’s visual proof.
Anyone (feebly) attempting to tell you there is no risk or association for cell phone, cell phone tower, or electronic transmission (power industry) or frequency exposure/emission, at any exposure level (wifi) is a LIAR, IDIOT, DEATH MERCHANT, or HACK for the cell phone, eft, or wifi industries.
~ Uncle Russ
Could exposure to radiation from cell phone towers really responsible for over 7,000 cancer deaths? According to research findings from Brazil, the facts speak for themselves. The study established a direct link between cancer deaths in Belo Horizonte, Brazil’s third largest city, with the cell phone network.
Hillary and Bill Clinton order this cover up, just like Hillary order the Benghazi cover up, they are TRAITORS to America.
~ Uncle Russ
The producers of an upcoming documentary on TWA Flight 800—which exploded and crashed into the waters off Long Island, N.Y., on July 17, 1996, killing all 230 people on board—claim to have proof that a missile caused the Paris-bound flight to crash.
Further PROOF WIFI RADIATION harms.
I find is AMAZING that 9th Graders can measure what eminent so-called scientists cannot.
Bottom line: cell phone wifi electronic frequency transmissions are harmful and kill.
~ Uncle Russ
Ninth-graders design science experiment to test the effect of cellphone radiation on plants. The results may surprise you.
Further proof Red China is out to destroy America.
RED CHINA IS THE EVIL EMPIRE.
~ Uncle Russ
A quarter of firms that are members of a leading U.S. business lobby in China have been victims of data theft, a report by the group said on Friday, amid growing vitriol between Beijing and Washington over the threat of cyber attacks.
Once again, in the attached article and study, we find hard evidence that cell phone exposure in frequency near the body is a serious health threat.
Argumentation by anyone that cell phone radiation exposure is not a safety issue are FLAT OUT LIARS.
~ Uncle Russ
With 5.9 billion reported users, mobile phones constitute a new, ubiquitous and rapidly growing exposure worldwide.
GMO Death Merchants cannot stop truth!
All genetically modified substances cause cancer and premature death.
Tell your friends about this application!
~ Uncle Russ
One of the biggest obstacles holding people back from eating healthy is easy access to resourceful information, about chemicals in foods, or natural remedies and supplements, and about new choices to make right at the store.
Keep those cell phones away from your head and do not use blue tooth, unless you like brain and head cancer.
~ Uncle Russ
What does the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) have in common with the cicada bug? They both follow 17-year cycles.
The Firm is actively filing cell phone radiation lawsuits on behalf of individuals who allegedly suffered brain tumors from cell phones.
I am a Blackberry fan, and there is a new version out with a keyboard I require as a dyslexic.
The encryption on Blackberry products are also THE best of any cell phone.
Attached, find very recent empirical information on cell phones you need to know about!
I personally always keep my cell phone away from my head and use the speaker feature.
Remember, cumulative exposures to cell phone radiation/wave length frequency ARE, not if, proven to be cancer causing!
Good nutrition is also essential in helping your telomere activity and integrity for optimum wellness.
DRINK LIFE IN!
~ Uncle Russ
The European Environment Agency published a major report to alert governments about the need to attend to early warning signs about technology health risks, including mobile phones.
More proof electronic frequency transmission deflection propagandists , denial spin artists, as well as private or public lobbyists for the harmful producers of these disease causing products, are all
profiteering crooks, genocidal murderers, and liars.
~ Uncle Russ
A shocking new cell phone radiation study conducted on New Zealand adolescents and their cell phone usage asks the question, “Are children at increased risk of brain tumors already?”
Note, the above headline fails to reveal Coke has FAILED to refute a class action lawsuit.
The merit of the lawsuit asserts Coke’s juice brands are not what they claim to be or provide real absorbable nutrition.
“Invariably the simples answer tends to be the correct one” to quote Ockhan’s Razor.
Chemistry does not lie, juice pushers (powder or drinks) do.
If these so-called juices were real (as in nature or pure or unadulterated) the naturally occurring mono, di and oligosaccharides would FERMEMT from exposure to air borne yeast, bacteria, mold, or fungi, into beer or wine.
Thus when someone suggests any fruit powder or juice or drink is all natural, that is not flash frozen (even then, they are typically chemically concentrated and nutrient degraded or cut); they are LYING to you.
Stripped, concentrated, deionized, pasteurized, heated, pH altered, emulsified, reconstituted, asceptically cooked, flavored, colored, sweetened, filtered. centrifuged, microwaved, gased, clarified, fragranced, irradiated, are only a few denaturing techniques employed for these expense and nutrient void sugar waters and powders.
~ Uncle Russ
The Coca-Cola Company has failed in its attempt to strike out 13
consolidated lawsuits alleging that Simply Orange Juice and Minute Maid
products were falsely advertised as natural, but says it will fight what it
claims is a ‘meritless case’.
The retail brand, in the attached article, was already BUSTED for FRAUDULENT representation in the USA, in late 2010 (front page of the Wall Street Journal and NY Times) claims, by the FTC/US Department Of Justice, for non absorbability.
As a matter of fact, the joke in hospitals and other institutional settings (convalescent homes), call this and similar brands “bed pan bullets”, because they pass through the gut, undissolved, let alone absorbed.
So we should ask a simple question: if so called vitamin and mineral supplements, like the above brand, actually worked, why are folks getting sicker and sicker?
In point of provable FACT, such brands are a scam and fraud, to get you sicker, to get you on more drugs, for REVENUE and PROFIT for Big Pharma.
Read THE TRUTH ABOUT THE DRUG COMPANIES by Dr. Marcia Angell, MD. For Editor ans Chief of The New England Journal Of Medicine.
Want real absorbable nutrition toward real wellness?
GOT ZIJA SUPERMIX?!
~ Uncle Russ
TV advert claims for Pfizer owned Centrum multivitamins that used EU-approved health claims were still misleading because they did not make clear that a balanced diet could be achieved without supplements, the UK advertising watchdog has found.
Truth in advertising may be off the table, but at least truth in fake advertising is alive and well.
The full-body scanners now in use at many U.S. airports can damage insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices, according to an article published in the journal Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics.
There are several books in the technical recommended reading section of this web site backing up these empirical and legal findings.
So do not think a blue tooth will help you either….use an ear cord like from www.mercola.com or use the conference speaker phone feature and keep these mini portable microwaves from your head and body.
~ Uncle Russ
The Supreme Court of Italy has affirmed a ruling granting worker’s compensation to a businessman who developed a tumor after using a cell phone for 12 years. This is the first time that a court —in any country— has ruled in favor a link between mobile phone radiation and tumor development.
Innocente Marcolini, a financial manager at an industrial plant in Brescia in northern Italy, used cell and cordless phones for five-to-six hours a day for 12 years. Then one morning ten years ago, Marcolini, who was 50 years old at the time, sensed an unusual tingling in his chin while shaving. He was soon diagnosed as having a benign tumor on the trigeminal nerve, which controls facial muscles and sensations.
Marcolini filed for workers’ compensation alleging that his wireless phones were responsible for the tumor. At first, his claim was rejected. But, in December 2009, the Court of Appeals in Brescia reversed that decision and now, on October 18, Italy’s Supreme Court affirmed the Appeals Court’s ruling. No further appeals are possible.
“Marcolini wants people to know about the health risks associated with cell phone radiation,” Riccardo Staglianó told Microwave News. Staglianó, a reporter for La Repubblica, a major national daily newspaper, chronicled Marcolini’s story in his book on cell phone risks, Toglietevelo Dalla Testa, published earlier this year. The title of the book is hard to translate into English —it’s something like Get It Out of Your Head. Staglianó explained that his book tries to warn the reader not only to keep the phone away from the brain but also to reject the “fake reassurances” from parts of the scientific community that there are no health risks.
Indeed, it’s easy to see the decision as a battle between ICNIRP and ICEMS and their competing views of electromagnetic health hazards. ICNIRP does not recognize any risks associated with long-term, chronic exposures, especially those associated with tumor promotion. Cancer is not a concern, according to ICNIRP. ICEMS, on the other hand, sees large uncertainties and advocates precautionary policies to reduce exposures when possible.
The courts relied on the testimony of Gino Angelo Levis, one of the founders of ICEMS. Levis, an oncologist and a professor emeritus of environmental mutagenesis at the University of Padua, is also a founder and former president of the Association for the Prevention and Fight Against Electrosmog, known as APPLE. He is currently its vice president.
“The logic of the decision was very simple” said Fiorenzo Marinelli, who is with Italy’s National Research Council in Bologna and has done EMF research. Marinelli also helped set up ICEMS but was not involved with the Marcolini case. In an interview, Marinelli pointed to the studies of Lennart Hardell and IARC’s classification of RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen as grounds for the pro-compensation decision.
More than five years ago, Hardell’s group at the Örebro University Hospital in Sweden reported that the use of cell phones for ten or more years significantly increased the risk of acoustic neuroma. Acoustic neuroma is a tumor of the acoustic nerve, which is known as the eighth cranial nerve. This type of tumor grows from cells which make up the lining or the sheaf of the nerve, called Schwann cells.
The trigeminal nerve —where Marcolini’s tumor was located— is the fifth cranial nerve. Tumors on the trigeminal nerve are also from Schwann cells and are closely related to acoustic neuroma.
Acoustic Neuroma Linked to Cell Phones in Many Countries
Hardell first reported a link between cell phones and acoustic neuroma in 2002. Two years later, a group led by Stefan Lönn and Maria Feychting at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, as part of the Interphone project, found a similar association among long-term users. At the time, Anders Ahlbom, Feychting’s mentor at the Karolinska, told us that, “These are strong data.” Feychting is the vice chair of ICNIRP; she took over Ahlbom’s seat on the commission in 2008 after he had served the maximum of 12 years.
Then in 2005, a joint analysis by Interphone groups in five northern European countries, including Sweden and the U.K., again pointed to a long-term risk of acoustic neuroma. And at the end of 2010, a Japanese team, also working on Interphone, concluded that those who used cell phones for more than 20 minutes a day for at least five years had three times more acoustic neuromas than expected.
And finally, last year, the Interphone study team from the 13 participating countries reported in their combined analysis that those who had spent the most time on cell phones had a higher risk of acoustic neuroma. But, due to growing tensions within the group, the researchers were unable to agree as to whether the link was real. The published conclusion advised that the elevated risk “could be due to chance, reporting bias or a causal effect.” Feychting and the rest of the Karolinska group are known to favor the explanation that the observed risk is due to chance and/or bias. For instance, in a government report issued earlier this year, Ahlbom and Feychting, together with Yngve Hamnerius and Lena Hillert, concluded that, “The few reported risk increases appear implausible.”
One of the noteworthy conclusions of the Italian Supreme Court is its stated preference for the Hardell study over Interphone. The court cited Hardell’s independence from industry funding, “unlike the IARC study,” which was partially paid for by cell phone manufacturers.
Paolo Vecchia, the former chair of ICNIRP took strong exception to the 2009 decision by the Brescia Court of Appeals. He and Susanna Lagorio, an epidemiologist at the Instituto Superiore di Sanità in Rome who worked on Interphone, attacked the judge for relying on “seriously flawed expert testimonies.” Writing in an Italian journal on occupational health, La Medicina del Lavoro, they accused Levis of being “clearly inexperienced” in the disciplines necessary to evaluate cell phone risks.
In a press release following the October 18 decision, APPLE —and presumably Levis— maintained that the Supreme Court had “acknowledged the presence of conflict of interest and thus ‘business bias’” within ICNIRP, IARC and Interphone. APPLE calls the decision an “important victory.”
David Gee a senior advisor at the European Environment Agency (EEA) in Copenhagen, doesn’t think the court’s preference for ICEMS’ outlook over that of ICNIRP will prompt any immediate changes. “The Italian decision will still be dismissed by most radiation authorities and conventional RF experts,” he told us, “Remember it was 20 years before the clear evidence of a twofold excess of leukemia from X-raying pregnant women was accepted by medical authorities. So I don’t expect much from them yet.” But, Gee added, “Lawyers for the phone manufacturers will take notice and the more responsible companies will quietly begin to build serious radiation reduction into their new products.”
As to whether there will be more litigation, Staglianó reported in La Repubblica that Levis is working on seven other possible claims and that a law firm in Turin is considering filing a class action suit with Levis’s assistance.
TSA = Tyrannists Scanning Americans
~ Uncle Russ
Women who possess the BRCA gene, the mutations of which are linked to so-called hereditary breast and ovarian cancers, may be particularly susceptible to the deleterious effects of ionizing radiation, suggests a fresh analysis of earlier research on the subject.
Before the Democrat-led Congress voted to approve President Obama’s healthcare “reform” law, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California declared, “…We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.”