Owner And Principal EMF Consultant
Chief EMF Consultant at Elexana LLC – New York City’s Electromagnetic Field EMF/EMI Testing & Consulting Service
Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Alberta
Former Principal Engineer at Ready Engineering Corporation
9 Years Of Industrial Electrical Engineering Experience In Power Plants and Oil & Gas
Building Biology® Advanced Electromagnetic Radiation 5-day Seminar Lab Assistant in 2014, 2016, and 2018 and Featured Lecturer: How to Measure EMF Levels Emitted By Smart Meters, Data-logging for Smart Meter Measurements, and The Various Models of Smart Meters and Their Differences.
Liz Menkes is a professional EMF Consultant in the San Francisco Bay Area and one of only a few Certified Building Biology Environmental Consultants (Building Biologists) in the country. She is also a Certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist, having completed an advanced training program.
She first became interested in electromagnetic fields several years ago when her neighborhood opposed a cell tower that would be very close to its homes. That experience led her to representing a firm that advises local governments on the regulation of wireless facilities. She has a good understanding of the industry’s needs– what’s coming and why– and she shares this information with her clients.
Liz has been doing EMF home and office assessments since 2011. She was trained on the Building Biology protocol for measuring and mitigating EMFs. As a Certified Building Biologist, she is also part of a Building Biology study group that meets regularly and shares information and best practices. In addition, Liz has been a teaching assistant for the Building Biology EMF seminar.
Liz has a B.A. in History from UCLA. She recently received a certification in Electricity from Diablo Valley College.
I am a certified Building Biology Environmental Consultant, Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist, and New Build Consultant. My passion is helping people limit toxins on, in, and around their space. I test and asses air quality, water, and light quality, as well as measuring and mitigating harmful EMF levels.
My mission is to help you create work and living spaces for optimized health following the principles of Building Biology. I use science and common sense to help inform and empower you, the consumer, on your journey to better health.
I was blessed with a trailblazing mother who, while tirelessly providing her family with the healthiest lifestyle possible, created a legacy of activism and awareness. An avid and persistent researcher whose motto was “Never let convenience get in the way of common sense,” she found her way to the forefront of the La Leche League, homeopathy, the organic food movement, and recycling in the late 1960s.
As a child, I cut my teeth on her zeal and inquiring mind, because she demonstrated how to keep digging until one got to the true source of an issue. Here she is featured in the Dallas Morning News in 1971 (I am the baby on her lap) discussing pollution, recycling, chemicals, organic food, and protecting the health of her family and the planet. I’ve dedicated my life to building on the knowledge, wisdom, and common-sense principles she distilled in our family culture.
Experience (and my mom) has taught me that when untangling a health mystery, there is always a root cause. During college, I started experiencing stomach symptoms, low energy, and a general malaise every time I subscribed to the popular carb-loading craze for long-distance runners. Alternative health research helped me realize I needed to eliminate gluten, and I’ve been gluten-free since 1991. As I learned more, I adjusted my diet to combat polycystic ovarian disease. Doctors at the time said it was not possible for diet to affect the disease, but consuming high fats, low carbs, and cutting the soy lattes that were being peddled as “healthy” was a game-changer, as did removing all of my silver (aka 50% mercury) tooth fillings in 1997. Research and science during the intervening years have increased our understanding and substantiated the evidence in these areas, but alternative health sources led the way.
Continued research and diligence have become even more important as our family has grown.
When Our family began experiencing some scary health issues after moving into our newly built house 5 years ago, my research led me to Building Biology and EMFs. Issues like severe insomnia, fatigue, brain fog, and extremity tingling were eliminated when we mitigated our space for EMFs. We tied me and my daughter’s issues to the incredibly high Radio Frequencies (RF) pulsing through the house and my son’s issues to the high electric and magnetic fields from all the wiring running from our entertainment systems behind his headboard wall.
EMFs were coming from a dozen interior sources that we were able to identify and systematically eliminate. We also found it necessary to shield our upper bedrooms from the strong exterior tower signals with specialty metal mesh, fabric and window film. We made a plan, took immediate action, and now we sleep peacefully through the night.
When I’m not consulting, researching, or curating the best non-toxic products, I enjoy spending time with my husband and children, Samantha, 20, Austin, 9, and Alexa, 8 in Austin, Texas. I am a lover of green tea, outdoor activities, organic cooking, and traveling with my family. I am still running and have a personal goal of running a marathon on every continent, and I have three more to go!
Click HERE to visit her website
Eric Windheim is the owner of Windheim Environmental Solutions, a California high technology and environmental health and wellness company that he founded in 1991. The company is located in the Sacramento area with clients worldwide. Windheim EMF Solutions specializes in electromagnetic radiation and provides inspection, assessment, measurement, testing, abatement, and remediation of dangerous and unhealthy magnetic fields, electric fields, microwave radiation, and “dirty electricity.” Clients can feel better instantly when effective EMF solutions are enacted.
Windheim is a Certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist (EMRS). He is an expert in EMF inspection, detection, measurement, and prevention, and is certified to advise homeowners, homebuyers, architects, builders, inspectors, and engineers in the methods and practices that create and maintain a minimized presence of electromagnetic fields in homes and low-rise commercial buildings.
He is also a Certified Building Biology Environmental Consultant (BBEC). He has demonstrated proficiency in the use of testing instruments, and can identify hazards in homes and offices, especially those that derive from the presence of AC electric and AC magnetic fields, VOCs, out-gassing chemicals from building materials, household chemicals, and pesticides. He can propose solutions that provide a healthier indoor living environment that uses nature as its model.
In March of 2018 Windheim completed the Radio Frequency Safety Officer course (RFSO) that is accredited through the Institute Of Electrical And Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Professional Development and Certificates Program. This training covers the way the Federal Communications Commission, FCC, determines Safe Levels of RF Radiation, which considers only the thermal effect of RF radiation.
Education Windheim graduated from the University of California at Santa Barbara and has studied Environmental Science, Earth Science, Geography, Geology, Hydrology, Remote Satellite Photo Interpretation, and Advanced Solar Engineering.
Windheim specializes in EMF Assessment and Abatement, providing inspection, testing and remediation of microwave radiation, dirty electricity, and electric and magnetic fields. Prior to this he was the Director of Technical Services for the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association (SMACNA), Redwood Empire Chapter, providing education to HVAC contractors for California Title 24 Energy Regulation compliance. He worked for more than fourteen years in industrial machinery sales, residential and commercial solar energy system design, and sales with FAFCO Inc.
In June of 2012 Mr. Windheim founded and became Director of the Sacramento Smart Meter Awareness action group. In one year, without an attorney or funding, he and dedicated local leaders successfully prevailed against Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) in regaining the safe and reliable Analog Meter option for all Sacramento County/SMUD customers in order to restore health, safety, privacy, and accurate billing. This is a national victory with SMUD becoming the first municipal electric utility to allow customers to again use Analog Meters. Windheim is working with others nationwide to achieve the same results and available for speaking engagements, presentations on EMF safety and human health, and a film screening of Take Back Your Power for your group or organization.
Cities and Counties We Serve
Windheim EMF Solutions is located in Sacramento County and provides Building Biology, and EMF Services to the following cities: Chico, Davis, El Macero, Dixon, Gold River, Roseville, Folsom, Fair Oaks, Gold River, Citrus Heights, Antelope, North Highlands, Orangevale, Carmichael, Rancho Cordova, El Dorado Hills, Lincoln, Elk Grove, Arden-Arcade, Rocklin, Lincoln, Shingle Springs, Cameron Park, Placerville, Stockton, West Sacramento, Vacaville, Winters, Lodi, Galt, Wilton, Sheldon, Rancho Murieta, Manteca, Tracy, Loomis, New Castle, Granite Bay, Penryn, Colfax and Auburn.
We serve parts of Nevada and Washoe counties including these cities: Truckee, South Lake Tahoe, North Lake Tahoe, Verdi, Incline Village and Reno.
And we serve the following California counties: Yolo County, Placer County, El Dorado County, Sutter County, Amador County, San Joaquin County, and Marin County.
Click HERE to visit his website
Welcome to The Electrosensitive Society. This website is dedicated to helping people who have electro-hyper-sensitivity (EHS). EHS is an environmentally-induced disability that has been around for the past 100 plus years. It used to be called neurasthenia, in the early 1900s, which means weakened nervous system. During World War II, it was called radio wave sickness or microwave illness for those people who reacted to radar, which generates microwave radiation. Screen dermatitis was the name given to women who worked in front of video display terminals in the 1980s, and this manifested itself by skin rashes. During the 1990s it was called electromagnetic sensitivity and later electromagnetic hypersensitivity or electrohypersensitivity because there are some members of society who react strongly to even low levels of this radiation. The World Health Organization (WHO) held a meeting in 2004 in Prague and at that meeting they stated the following about EHS.
“. . . a phenomenon where individuals experience adverse health effects while using or being in the vicinity of devices emanating electric, magnetic, or electromagnetic fields (EMFs).”
“ . . . EHS is a real and sometimes a debilitating problem for the affected persons . . . Their exposures are generally several orders of magnitude under the limits in internationally accepted standards.”
Our members are individuals from around the world that have come to realize that our body is bio-electric and thus is sensitive to the negative effects from over-exposures to electromagnetic fields from our modern technology. Here in these pages, we share information and resources on how to live safely in this ever expanding wireless world.
By Arthur Arthur Firstenberg
In 2002, Gro Harlem Brundtland, then head of the World Health Organization, told a Norwegian journalist that cell phones were banned from her office in Geneva because she personally becomes ill if a cell phone is brought within about four meters (13 feet) of her. Mrs. Brundtland is a medical doctor and former Prime Minister of Norway. This sensational news, published March 9, 2002 in Dagbladet, was ignored by every other newspaper in the world.
The following week Michael Repacholi, her subordinate in charge of the International EMF (electromagnetic field) Project, responded with a public statement belittling his boss’s concerns. Five months later, for reasons that many suspect were related to these circumstances, Mrs. Brundtland announced she would step down from her leadership post at the WHO after just one term.
Nothing could better illustrate our collective schizophrenia when it comes to thinking about electromagnetic radiation. We respond to those who are worried about its dangers — hence the International EMF Project — but we ignore and marginalize those, like Mrs. Brundtland, who have already succumbed to its effects.
As a consultant on the health effects of wireless technology, I receive calls that can be broadly divided into two main groups: those from people who are merely worried, whom I will call A, and those from people who are already sick, whom I will call B. I sometimes wish I could arrange a large conference call and have the two groups talk to each other — there needs to be more mutual understanding so that we are all trying to solve the same problems.
Caller A, worried, commonly asks what kind of shield to buy for his cell phone or what kind of headset to wear with it. Sometimes he wants to know what is a safe distance to live from a cell tower. Caller B, sick, wants to know what kind of shielding to put on her house, what kind of medical treatment to get, or, increasingly often, what part of the country she could move to to escape the radiation to save her life.
The following is designed as a sort of a primer: first, to help everybody get more or less on the same page, and second, to clear up some of the confusions so that we can make rational decisions toward a healthier world.
The most basic fact about cell phones and cell towers is that they emit microwave radiation; so do Wi-Fi (wireless Internet) antennas, wireless computers, cordless (portable) phones and their base units, and all other wireless devices. If it’s a communication device and it’s not attached to the wall by a wire, it’s emitting radiation. Most Wi-Fi systems and some cordless phones operate at the exact same frequency as a microwave oven, while other devices use a different frequency. Wi-Fi is always on and always radiating. The base units of most cordless phones are always radiating, even when no one is using the phone. A cell phone that is on but not in use is also radiating. And, needless to say, cell towers are always radiating.
Why is this a problem, you might ask? Scientists usually divide the electromagnetic spectrum into “ionizing” and “non-ionizing.” Ionizing radiation, which includes x-rays and atomic radiation, causes cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, which includes microwave radiation, is supposed to be safe. This distinction always reminded me of the propaganda in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: “Four legs good, two legs bad.” “Non-ionizing good, ionizing bad” is as little to be trusted.
An astronomer once quipped that if Neil Armstrong had taken a cell phone to the Moon in 1969, it would have appeared to be the third most powerful source of microwave radiation in the universe, next only to the Sun and the Milky Way. He was right. Life evolved with negligible levels of microwave radiation. ** An increasing number of scientists speculate that our body’s own cells, in fact, use the microwave spectrum to communicate with one another, like children whispering in the dark, and that cell phones, like jackhammers, interfere with their signaling. ** In any case, it is a fact that we are all being bombarded, day in and day out, whether we use a cell phone or not, by an amount of microwave radiation that is some ten million times as strong as the average natural background. And it is also a fact that most of this radiation is due to technology that has been developed since the 1970s.
As far as cell phones themselves are concerned, if you put one up to your head you are damaging your brain in a number of different ways. First, think of a microwave oven. A cell phone, like a microwave oven and unlike a hot shower, heats you from the inside out, not from the outside in. And there are no sensory nerve endings in the brain to warn you of a rise in temperature because we did not evolve with microwave radiation, and this never happens in nature. Worse, the structure of the head and brain is so complex and non-uniform that “hot spots” are produced, where heating can be tens or hundreds of times what it is nearby. Hot spots can occur both close to the surface of the skull and deep within the brain, and also on a molecular level.
Cell phones are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, and you can find, in the packaging of most new phones, a number called the Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR, which is supposed to indicate the rate at which energy is absorbed by the brain from that particular model. One problem, however, is the arbitrary assumption, upon which the FCC’s regulations are based, that the brain can safely dissipate added heat at a rate of up to 1 degree C per hour. Compounding this is the scandalous procedure used to demonstrate compliance with these limits and give each cell phone its SAR rating. The standard way to measure SAR is on a “phantom” consisting, incredibly, of a homogenous fluid encased in Plexiglas in the shape of a head. Presto, no hot spots! But in reality, people who use cell phones for hours per day are chronically heating places in their brain. The FCC’s safety standard, by the way, was developed by electrical engineers, not doctors.
The Blood-Brain Barrier
The second effect that I want to focus on, which has been proven in the laboratory, should by itself have been enough to shut down this industry and should be enough to scare away anyone from ever using a cell phone again. I call it the “smoking gun” of cell phone experiments. Like most biological effects of microwave radiation, this has nothing to do with heating.
The brain is protected by tight junctions between adjacent cells of capillary walls, the so-called blood-brain barrier, which, like a border patrol, lets nutrients pass through from the blood to the brain, but keeps toxic substances out. Since 1988, researchers in the laboratory of a Swedish neurosurgeon, Leif Salford, have been running variations on this simple experiment: they expose young laboratory rats to either a cell phone or other source of microwave radiation, and later they sacrifice the animals and look for albumin in their brain tissue. Albumin is a protein that is a normal component of blood but that does not normally cross the blood-brain barrier. The presence of albumin in brain tissue is always a sign that blood vessels have been damaged and that the brain has lost some of its protection.
Here is what these researchers have found, consistently for 18 years: Microwave radiation, at doses equal to a cell phone’s emissions, causes albumin to be found in brain tissue. A one-time exposure to an ordinary cell phone for just two minutes causes albumin to leak into the brain. In one set of experiments, reducing the exposure level by a factor of 1,000 actually increased the damage to the blood-brain barrier, showing that this is not a dose-response effect and that reducing the power will not make wireless technology safer. And finally, in research published in June 2003, a single two-hour exposure to a cell phone, just once during its lifetime, permanently damaged the blood-brain barrier and, on autopsy 50 days later, was found to have damaged or destroyed up to 2 percent of an animal’s brain cells, including cells in areas of the brain concerned with learning, memory and movement.1 Reducing the exposure level by a factor of 10 or 100, thereby duplicating the effect of wearing a headset, moving a cell phone further from your body, or standing next to somebody else’s phone, did not appreciably change the results! Even at the lowest exposure, half the animals had a moderate to high number of damaged neurons.
The implications for us? Two minutes on a cell phone disrupts the blood-brain barrier, two hours on a cell phone causes permanent brain damage, and secondhand radiation may be almost as bad. The blood-brain barrier is the same in a rat and a human being.
These results caused enough of a commotion in Europe that in November 2003 a conference was held, sponsored by the European Union, titled “The Blood-Brain Barrier — Can It Be Influenced by RF [radio frequency]-Field Interactions?” as if to reassure the public: “See, we are doing something about this.” But, predictably, nothing was done about it, as nothing has been done about it for 30 years.
America’s Allan Frey, during the 1970s, was the first of many to demonstrate that low-level microwave radiation damages the blood-brain barrier.2 Similar mechanisms protect the eye (the blood-vitreous barrier) and the fetus (the placental barrier), and the work of Frey and others indicates that microwave radiation damages those barriers also.3 The implication: No pregnant woman should ever be using a cell phone.
Dr. Salford is quite outspoken about his work. He has called the use of handheld cell phones “the largest human biological experiment ever.” And he has publicly warned that a whole generation of cell-phone-using teenagers may suffer from mental deficits or Alzheimer’s disease by the time they reach middle age.
Unfortunately, cell phone users are not the only ones being injured, nor should we be worried only about the brain. The following brief summary is distilled from a vast scientific literature on the effects of radio waves (a larger spectrum which includes microwaves), together with the experiences of scientists and doctors all over the world with whom I am in contact.
Organs that have been shown to be especially susceptible to radio waves include the lungs, nervous system, heart, eyes, testes and thyroid gland. Diseases that have increased remarkably in the last couple of decades, and that there is good reason to connect with the massive increase in radiation in our environment, include asthma, sleep disorders, anxiety disorders, attention deficit disorder, autism, multiple sclerosis, ALS, Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, cataracts, hypothyroidism, diabetes, malignant melanoma, testicular cancer, and heart attacks and strokes in young people.
Radiation from microwave towers has also been associated with forest die-off, reproductive failure and population decline in many species of birds, and ill health and birth deformities in farm animals. The literature showing biological effects of microwave radiation is truly enormous, running to tens of thousands of documents, and I am amazed that industry spokespersons are getting away with saying that wireless technology has been proved safe or — just as ridiculous — that there is no evidence of harm.
I have omitted one disease from the above list: the illness that Caller B has, and that I have. A short history is in order here.
In the 1950s and 1960s workers who built, tested and repaired radar equipment came down with this disease in large numbers. So did operators of industrial microwave heaters and sealers. The Soviets named it, appropriately, radio wave sickness, and studied it extensively. In the West its existence was denied totally, but workers came down with it anyway. Witness congressional hearings held in 1981, chaired by then Representative Al Gore, on the health effects of radio-frequency heaters and sealers, another episode in “See, we are doing something about this,” while nothing is done.
Today, with the mass proliferation of radio towers and personal transmitters, the disease has spread like a plague into the general population. Estimates of its prevalence range up to one-third of the population, but it is rarely recognized for what it is until it has so disabled a person that he or she can no longer participate in society. You may recognize some of its common symptoms: insomnia, dizziness, nausea, headaches, fatigue, memory loss, inability to concentrate, depression, chest discomfort, ringing in the ears. Patients may also develop medical problems such as chronic respiratory infections, heart arrhythmias, sudden fluctuations in blood pressure, uncontrolled blood sugar, dehydration, and even seizures and internal bleeding.
What makes this disease so difficult to accept, and even more difficult to cope with, is that no treatment is likely to succeed unless one can also avoid exposure to its cause — and its cause is now everywhere. A 1998 survey by the California Department of Health Services indicated that at that time 120,000 Californians — and by implication 1 million Americans — were unable to work due to electromagnetic pollution.(4) The ranks of these so-called electrically sensitive are swelling in almost every country in the world, marginalized, stigmatized and ignored. With the level of radiation everywhere today, they almost never recover and sometimes take their own lives.
“They are acting as a warning for all of us,” says Dr. Olle Johansson of people with this illness. “It could be a major mistake to subject the entire world’s population to whole-body irradiation, 24 hours a day.” A neuroscientist at the famous Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Dr. Johansson heads a research team that is documenting a significant and permanent worsening of the public health that began precisely when the second-generation, 1800 MHz cell phones were introduced into Sweden in late l997.(5,6) After a decade-long decline, the number of Swedish workers on sick leave began to rise in late 1997 and more than doubled during the next five years. During the same period of time, sales of antidepressant drugs also doubled. The number of traffic accidents, after declining for years, began to climb again in 1997. The number of deaths from Alzheimer’s disease, after declining for several years, rose sharply in 1999 and had nearly doubled by 2001. This two-year delay is understandable when one considers that Alzheimer’s disease requires some time to develop.
If cell phones and cell towers are really deadly, have the radio and TV towers that we have been living with for a century been safe? In 2002 Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson coauthored a paper titled “Cancer Trends During the 20th Century,” which examined one aspect of that question.7 They found, in the United States, Sweden and dozens of other countries, that mortality rates for skin melanoma and for bladder, prostate, colon, breast and lung cancers closely paralleled the degree of public exposure to radio waves during the past hundred years. When radio broadcasting increased in a given location, so did those forms of cancer; when it decreased, so did those forms of cancer. And, a sensational finding: country by country — and county by county in Sweden — they found, statistically, that exposure to radio waves appears to be as big a factor in causing lung cancer as cigarette smoking!
Which brings me to address a widespread misconception. The biggest difference between the cell towers of today and the radio towers of the past is not their safety, but their numbers. The number of ordinary radio stations in the United States today is still less than 14,000. But cell towers and Wi-Fi towers number in the hundreds of thousands, and cell phones, wireless computers, cordless telephones and two-way radios number in the hundreds of millions. Radar facilities and emergency communication networks are also proliferating out of control. Since 1978, when the Environmental Protection Agency last surveyed the radio frequency environment in the United States, the average urban dweller’s exposure to radio waves has increased 1,000-fold, most of this increase occurring in just the last nine years.8 In the same period of time, radio pollution has spread from the cities to rest like a ubiquitous fog over the entire planet.
The vast human consequences of all this are being ignored. Since the late 1990s a whole new class of environmental refugees has been created right here in the United States. We have more and more people, sick, dying, seeking relief from our suffering, leaving our homes and our livelihoods, living in cars, trailers and tents in remote places. Unlike victims of hurricanes and earthquakes, we are not the subject of any relief efforts. No one is donating money to help us, to buy us a protected refuge; no one is volunteering to forego their cell phones, their wireless computers and their cordless phones so that we can once more be their neighbors and live among them.
The worried and the sick have not yet opened their hearts to each other, but they are asking questions. To answer caller A: No shield or headset will protect you from your cell or portable phone. There is no safe distance from a cell tower. If your cell phone or your wireless computer works where you live, you are being irradiated 24 hours a day.
To caller B: To effectively shield a house is difficult and rarely successful. There are only a few doctors in the United States attempting to treat radio wave sickness, and their success rate is poor — because there are few places left on Earth where one can go to escape this radiation and recover.
Yes, radiation comes down from satellites, too; they are part of the problem, not the solution. There is simply no way to make wireless technology safe.
Our society has become both socially and economically dependent, in just one short decade, upon a technology that is doing tremendous damage to the fabric of our world. The more entrenched we let ourselves become in it, the more difficult it will become to change our course. The time to extricate ourselves, both individually and collectively — difficult though it is already is — is now.
1. Leif G. Salford et al., “Nerve Cell Damage in Mammalian Brain After Exposure to Microwaves from GSM Mobile Phones,” Environmental Health Perspectives 111, no. 7 (2003): 881–883.
2. Allan H. Frey, Sondra R. Feld and Barbara Frey, “Neural Function and Behavior,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 247 (1975): 433–439.
3. Allan H. Frey, “Evolution and Results
of Biological Research with Low-Intensity Nonionizing Radiation,” in Modern Bioelectricity, ed. Andrew A. Marino (New York: Dekker, 1988), 785–837, at 809–810.
4. California EMF Program, The Risk Evaluation: An Evaluation of the Possible Risks From Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs) From Power Lines, Internal Wiring, Electrical Occupations and Appliances (2002), app. 3.
5. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “1997 — A Curious Year in Sweden,” European Journal of Cancer Prevention 13, no. 6 (2004): 535–538.
6. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “Does GSM 1800 MHz Affect the Public Health in Sweden?” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop “Biological Effects of EMFs,” Kos, Greece, October 4-8, 2004, 361–364.
7. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “Cancer Trends During the 20th Century,”
Journal of Australian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine 21, no. 1 (2002): 3–8.
8. David E. Janes Jr., “Radiofrequency Environments in the United States,” in 15th IEEE Conference on Communication, Boston, MA, June 10–14, 1979, vol. 2, 31.4.1–31.4.5.
Arthur Firstenberg’s Bio
Arthur Firstenberg is the founder and president of the Cellular Phone Task Force and the author of Microwaving Our Planet: The Environmental Impact of the Wireless Revolution (Cellular Phone Task Force 1996). From 1997 to 2002, he was the editor of the journal No Place To Hide.
Since 1996, the Task Force has provided a global clearinghouse for information about wireless technology’s injurious effects, and a national support network for people disabled by this technology. In 1997 the Task Force was the lead litigant in a challenge brought by over 50 citizens groups against the FCC’s limits for human exposure to radio frequency radiation.
Articles by Firstenberg or about his work have appeared in Mother Jones, The Ecologist, Earth Island Journal, Vegetarian Times, Village Voice, Utne Reader, Santa Fe New Mexican, San Francisco Chronicle, and other newspapers and magazines. His work has been translated into Spanish, French, Portuguese, Dutch, Italian, Danish, Japanese, and Chinese.
After graduating Phi Beta Kappa from Cornell University with a B.A. in mathematics, he attended the University of California, Irvine School of Medicine from 1978 to 1982. Injury by
x-ray overdose cut short his medical career. For the past 29 years he has been a researcher, consultant and lecturer on the health and environmental effects of electromagnetic radiation.
Essays by Firstenberg
April 5, 2008: “Sebastopol’s brave rejection of WiFi.” Santa Rosa Press Democrat.
March 30, 2008: “Unsung casualties of a wireless war.” Sun News.
January 14, 2007: “Look Wi-Fi in the eye.” Santa Fe New Mexican.
January 2006: “The largest biological experiment ever.” Sun Monthly.
December 2005: “Danger: radiation,” reprinted in Voices of the New Earth.
September 2005: “Danger: radiation.” Total Wellness.
August 2005: “Everyone is affected by electromagnetic radiation.” Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients.
June 2004: “Killing Fields.” The Ecologist.
March 2004: “Telecommunications vs. the environment.” HopeDance.
August 2003: “Electrical sensitivity.” Human Ecology Study Group Newsletter.
July 2002: “Electrical sensitivity,” by Arthur Firstenberg and Susan Molloy. Latitudes.
Winter 2000-2001: “Radio waves: Invisible danger.” Earth Island Journal.
November 2001: “Wireless means radiation.” Lapis Lazuli Light, in Chinese.
November 2001: “Radio waves, the blood-brain barrier, and cerebral hemorrhage.” No Place To Hide.
October 2001: “Wireless means radiation.” Lapis News.
July 2000: “Measuring EMFs.” Our Toxic Times.
June 2000: Historical perspectives on EMFs.” Our Toxic Times.
Fall 2000: “The truth about cellular.” Progressive Health.
March 2000: “The problem of Internet pollution.” Alive: Canadian Journal of Health and Nutrition.
October 1999: “Microwaving the planet: Americans fight cellular towers in court.” Alive: Canadian Journal of Health and Nutrition.
September 1999: “Mortality statistics.” No Place To Hide.
September 1999: “Source of the Taos Hum.” No Place To Hide.
Summer 1999: “In the name of communication.” The Gazette.
June 1999: “About ringing in the ears – perception of electromagnetic waves.” AEVICEM Newsletter, in French.
June 1999: “The forgotten works of Bose and d’Arsonval.” AEVICEM Newsletter, in French.
March 1999: “Thousands of homing pigeons lose their way.” G∙A News (published by Tokyo Citizens for a Safe and Sane Environment), in Japanese.
March 1999: “Microwaving the planet.” Earth First! Journal.
January 1999: Cellular phone towers – mixed signals. Hearing Health.
1999-2004: Occasional contributor of op-ed columns in The Mendocino Beacon.
September 1998: “Influenza and electricity.” Japan Environment Monitor.
Summer 1998: “(Just about) nowhere is safe from the mobile phone” (edited reprint of “Microwaving our planet.”) The Third Opinion (Australia)
Summer 1998: “Microwaving our planet,” reprinted in Green Living.
September 1997: “Microwaving our planet.” HealthMap Magazine.
Summer 1997: “Microwaving our planet.” Earth Island Journal.
March 1996: “What does electromagnetic sensitivity have to do with porphyria? A biological detective story.” Electrical Sensitivity News
December 1995: “MTBE: A review of its good and bad points.” Our Toxic Times.
1994: “Economics, and human diversity.” Chapter in Earth Tones: Creative Perspectives on Ecological Issues, Belinda Subraman, ed., Vergin Press, El Paso, TX.
December 1981: “The effects of radiant energy on living organisms.” Paper presented at California College of Medicine, Irvine, CA.
Articles about Firstenberg and his work
Butler, Kiera. “This Is Your Brain on Cell Phones.” Mother Jones, July/August 2008.
Censored 1998, Peter Phillips and Project Censored, Seven Stories Press, NY 1998. Honorable Mention awarded to “Microwaving Our Planet,” Earth Island Journal, Summer 1997.
Curiel, Jonathan. “Worries cell phones could damage your cells.” San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 14, 2007.
Culbert, Michael. “Electrical sensitivity: hidden illness spreads.” International Council on Health Freedom Newsletter, Summer 1999.
Culbert, Michael. “Those cell phones – miracle or menace?” International Council on Health Freedom Newsletter, Spring 2000.
Culbert, Michael. Regular mention of Firstenberg’s work in International Council on Health Freedom Newsletter until it ceased publication in 2004.
Davis, Kevin. “The zapping of America; Can we survive the wireless revolution?” Utne Reader January-February 1998.
De Vita, Sabina M. Electromagnetic Pollution: A Hidden Stress to Your Health, Wellness Institute, Brampton, ON, 2000. Chapter on “The Electronic Workplace,” pp. 40-41.
EMF Health and Safety Digest. “In Brief.” Report on the federal lawsuit brought by the Cellular Phone Taskforce et al., April 1999.
Geske, Anne. “Hang Up and Listen.” Utne Reader, Jan./Feb. 2005.
Gilbert, Evelyn. “Lethal lampposts? Cellular phone antennas may threaten your health.” Village Voice, April 26, 1997.
Gilbert, Evelyn. “Cell phone static.” Vegetarian Times, August 1998.
Gitchel, Mel. “About the towers.” Journal Opinion, Bradford, VT, July 19, 2000.
Mittelman, Jerry, DDS. Special Report on Cell Phones. Holistic Dental Digest 1999.
Mooney, Elizabeth V. “Federal judges hear RF emissions debate.” RCR (the weekly newspaper for the wireless communications industry), April 12, 1999.
Nelson, Erik. “Radiation is one more reason cell-phone users can make you sick.” Long Island Voice, Dec. 3-9, 1998.
Rogers, Sherry, MD. “Cell phones cause leaky brain syndrome.” Total Wellness, Sept. 2005.
Sanders, Gabriel. “No strings attached.” Time Out New York, July 19-26, 2001.
Smith, Gar. “Zapped from space.” Earth Island Journal, Winter 1998.
Wilcox, Richard and Wilkinson, Jens. “Life in a Cellular Paradise.” The New Observer, Dec. 1999.
Williams, Rose Marie (President, American Cancer Coalition). “Cell phone controversy.” Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, June 2005.
Williams, Rose Marie. “Cell phones and children.” Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, July 2005.
“Microwaving Our Planet: The Environmental Impact of the Wireless Revolution is an essential reference tool.”
– Daryl T. Bean, National President, Public Service
Alliance of Canada, September 14, 1998.
“Firstenberg is to be congratulated on the quality of his publication! He also has courage to take up military technology.”
– Rosalie Bertell, PhD, Editor-in-Chief, International
Perspectives in Public Health, April 1, 1999
“We feel that reading the No Place To Hide newsletter could extend your life with healthier years.”
– Jerry Mittelman, DDS, editor, The Holistic Dental
Digest, Sept./Oct. 1999
“He is one of my valued contributors and a personal hero.”
– Gar Smith, editor, Earth Island Journal,
October 24, 2000
“His work is absolutely essential and eventually it will be more widely appreciated.”
– William E. Morton, MD, PhD, Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology, Oregon
Health Sciences University, May 1, 2001
“Your cause is a most important one, without any doubt. You mustn’t give up.”
– Teddy Goldsmith, founder, The Ecologist,
July 27, 2001
“At age 81, it’s normal for me to start losing my memory. But everybody I tell this to, says, ‘Well, I seem to be losing my memory, too.’ And I tell them about the work of Arthur Firstenberg.”
– Pete Seeger, April 21, 2000
“Firstenberg is a pioneer in the sense that Rachel Carson was a pioneer.”
– Chellis Glendinning, PhD, author of When
Technology Wounds, March 17, 2007
Written by Thomas Corriher
I have long been known by certain friends and my entire family as that “crazy” guy. The term was usually meant to describe me as being odd and unusual, rather than insane. Although, a few of those people may have suspected the latter from time to time. I’m okay with that, for being ‘normal’ is greatly overrated. I am considerably smarter than most people, so I have often taken refuge in the fact there there has always been a fine line between genius and insanity. Crazy like a fox, or crazy like a nut? I guess it’s entirely a matter of perspective.
One of my episodes of “craziness” occurred during the presentation of my 7th grade science project. I was still in the public schools at that time, and the understanding of science by teachers and students alike was more than a little bit underwhelming. They knew that light was really fast, but their overall understanding seemed to stop shortly thereafter. When I began preaching to them about fluorescent lights emitting radioactive, electromagnetic fields that were guaranteed to increase a person’s cancer risk: well, everyone’s eyes seemed to glaze over as if I were speaking a foreign language.
I vainly explained that if these lights operated at high voltages, and these voltages were pulsed at high frequencies, then radioactive energy would be emitted, and moreover, they were already known for producing the full band of light energy (some of which is destructive, too). It is how radio waves are made: frequency pulses. The higher the frequency, the more dangerous overall, but voltage and proximity matter, too, in regards to its dangerous ionizing effects upon the human body. They just looked at me as if I were the stupid one. They had those ‘he’s so special’ looks on their faces, in most cases. Some had the ‘he’s so crazy’ look. It was incomprehensible to them that I actually understood the topic that I had tried to lecture them about. Thus, I had the problem.
I believe my teacher even failed me, while the dumbed-down science projects like “Do Plants Need Water?” were graded highly. It was the typical public school’s act of rewarding only mediocrity. Shortly thereafter, by some freak of the cosmos, it was actually proven by multiple independent studies that electrically-produced electromagnetic energy (radiation) from fluorescent lights and power lines were indeed a danger to health. This was long before cell phones existed, and these were considered ground-breaking findings. Eventually, my being ‘crazy’ (thinking independently and having a willingness to challenge authority) got me sent to military school to get “straightened out”. These traits would have been considered virtues in more noble times.
It is time for me to get crazy again, with a topic that has far more importance and significance than radiation from power lines and fluorescent lights. Please read the remainder of this article with care, for it is vitally important that all of us spread this message, and you should understand why, by the time you have completed your reading. I realize that few of our readers have backgrounds in electrical or electronics engineering, so I am going to attempt to explain some otherwise complex topics in plain English.
This article will explain that there is a new generation of light bulbs that produce radiation in a more dangerous manner than we have ever seen before. Thus, I need to explain some very basic laws of electricity, so that readers may understand the dilemma that we all face. Please patiently wade through this information, because you need to know it and understand it. I promise you this on my honor.
Electricity really only exists in motion. Nothing happens without power transmission (“current”), and therefore, there is no real power without its movement. A disconnected battery is like a ship in a bottle. The ship is not really a sea vessel, because it never has the motion of floatation. Both these things have the potential to be more (a sea vessel or power supply), but they are both just paper weights until that time.
The 3 Core Types of Electrical Current (Don’t Skip This)
There is D.C. (direct current). This is the steady state current: meaning that the voltage never changes while the current is flowing. This is the “cleanest” type of power. It may come from a filtered power supply or a battery. D.C. power will usually produce a tiny magnetic field along its wires; but overall, it will not bleed energy or effect other devices.
Next there is A.C. (alternating current). This is a current/voltage combination that is constantly changing, as if it were produced by a standard generator. It typically reverses itself (back flows) half of the time to show negative voltages and currents on equipment capable of measuring it. As alternating current cycles from its maximum to its minimum value, the time this takes in seconds is mathematically computed to produce the frequency calculation.
In other words, frequency is a calculated measurement of how fast the voltage/current is changing. For instance, the standard frequency for power in the U.S. is 60 Hz.. This means that the power peaks and then drops to its lowest value exactly 60 times per second. Some readers may find it fascinating to know that this means the generators are rotating exactly 60 times per second too (60 R.P.M.).
Finally, there is pulsating D.C.. Pulsating direct current is a combination of D.C. and A.C.. The voltage and current with pulsating D.C. do not change in values, except for changing from a state of being fully on or fully off. It is as if someone is quickly turning a switch on and off, but there are no middle voltages, or negative voltages. On precision equipment, the on pulses usually appear as blocks called “square waves”.
Why You Need To Know A Little Something About High Frequency Currents
You may be asking why would our readers need to know these things? That comes really soon, so be careful what you wish for. (Just kidding.) As I mentioned earlier, a new radiation threat is upon us all. In lieu of this, I must begin by emphasizing the ‘radio’ and ‘radiant’ roots for the word radiation. They ultimately are descriptions of the same phenomena: radiant energy in the form of electromagnetic waves of pulsating energy. So, how does the energy actually radiate itself outward? The truth is, we don’t really understand that part.
Physicists have pulled their hair out for decades over that question. What we do know is that when things vibrate at a nuclear level or have electrical current changes, then these changes of state ― these frequencies ― cause energy to be radiated outward at the same frequencies. This is how radio transmissions work. Radio transmissions merely mix the audio (voice) signal with an exact frequency that listening radios are “tuned” for, and viola! Or as my past electronics teachers would have said, in their fancy-smancy engineering terms: “It will have imparted intelligence upon the carrier wave”.
A good analogy of how frequencies operate is remembering the ripples from a time when you dropped a pebble into a small creek or pond. You may recall that the ripples were reflected from the banks at exactly the same rate and distance as the original waves that struck them. The whole point of this paragraph is to make clear that the very basis of radiant energy transmissions and all types of radiation on the entire electromagnetic spectrum boil down to one thing: frequencies. Frequencies determine how far the energy travels, how well it penetrates, and how it effects things.
The ultra high frequencies of gamma (ie. nuclear) radiation will quickly destroy a person through burns, cancer, or otherwise; while the low 60 Hz. of standard American power has little effect in typical exposure. Frequency determines if the energy is radio, microwave, infrared light, visible light, x-rays, gamma, or ultraviolet. There is real power in frequencies. No pun intended. As a general rule, the higher the frequency, the more dangerous the energy is. Nuclear radiation is at a really high frequency, for example.
For years, we have heard about how incandescent bulbs are bad for the environment. This made way for a whole new industry of “green” bulbs, marketed to the growing portion of people who seek to address environmental concerns. However, they actually compromise people’s health, and are ultimately more harmful to the environment.
Common Symptoms Resulting From Exposure To “Energy Efficient” Light Bulbs
There are lots of theories regarding how these bulbs can cause these effects, but they are speculative. Very little research has been done. Despite this, European countries are phasing out incandescent bulbs, and forcing the public to switch to the “energy efficient” alternative.
The new light bulbs stunningly emit two forms of radiation outside of the light spectrum: ultraviolet and radio frequency; and would you believe the F.D.A. is involved? The F.D.A. states that in addition to visible light (U.V.A.), these bulbs also emit U.V.B., and infrared radiation; but let’s not forget those radio transmissions! These bulbs are also said to have a flicker rate of 100-120 cycles per second, which seems low considering the U.V.B. light that they produce, and of course, those radio transmissions. In any case, even a flicker rate as low as 100 hertz is more than enough to trigger severe episodes of epileptic seizures. Video games are well known to do the same at a mere 60 Hz.
Judging from the multiple bands of radiation released, the flicker rate can be expected to be well beyond 120 hertz (including the light that we can’t actually see), so just start adding zeros to get the point about how likely they are to trigger epileptic seizures. These bulbs have negative effects on people with lupus too, which is something that has baffled everyone so far. That’s still not all. They are known to damage the skin too, and did we mention high frequency radiation? Watchdog organizations in the U.K. are clamoring about the issues mentioned above, and the fact that these bulbs also aggravate eczema and porphyria too.
Our staff has been doing this work long enough to spot the pattern. The radiation from these bulbs directly attacks the immune system, and furthermore damages the skin tissues enough to prevent the proper formation of vitamin D3. This will cause major cholesterol problems in time, and cripple the liver by preventing it from converting the cholesterol reserves inside the skin tissues (vitamin D2) into usable vitamin D3. This has the potential to cause or aggravate, not dozens, but hundreds of disease states. All that they had to do was shift the frequencies of otherwise benign light bulbs, and suddenly we have this mess. It is as if the whole mess with fluorescent light bulbs gave somebody inspiration for how to radiation poison us, while tricking us to beg for it, in order to “save the environment”.
The Energy Efficient Scam
One of my first lessons while studying Electronics Engineering was that energy efficiency is effected more by heat than any other factor. That’s why super conductors are always super cooled, and why your oven uses about 60 times more power than your television. Heat equals wasted power. That’s written in stone. Amazingly, standard light bulbs manage to be extremely energy efficient, despite the heat that they produce, and despite the fact that their light comes from heated elements. In fact, they manage to waste less than 10% of the power applied. This is because the heat resists the current flow in the wire coil ― to the point of practically cutting off the current.
You see, heat also increases resistance. This breaking effect upon a bulb’s current gives standard incandescent light bulbs their overall high efficiency. My first engineering project was testing light bulbs with high-end testing equipment, to study this rare property. I remember our teacher gleefully laughing at us as we sat befuddled by the fact that all of our calculations for voltages, currents, and power usage just did not add up. He thought it was almost hysterical when we began testing the equipment itself. The exercise was meant to be a memorable lesson about how heat may dissipate (or conserve) power in such a way that electrical devices at least appear to bend the rules of physics.
Another important lesson was that while theoretically incandescent light bulbs ought to be wasteful of energy, they actually increase their own resistance via heat to the point that very little of their energy is wasted. Take for example how long a standard flashlight will produce bright light with one or two small batteries. On the other hand, just try to power an oven with those same batteries for an exercise in futility. The whole thing was fascinating to the point that I knew this program of study was meant for me.
The new generation of bulbs is supposedly designed to save us from a problem that does not exist ― inefficient conventional bulbs, so this is where the story about them starts to reek like dead fish. The new bulbs, as you may have already noticed, do not produce a noticeable amount of heat. This is because the light from the new generation of bulbs is produced by injecting pulsating electricity (having a frequency) into a chemical gas to radiate light, as in radiation. Pay close attention to that frequency thing.
By the types of radiation that the new bulbs emit, we know that they must operate at frequencies astronomically higher than the 120 hertz that they are said to, so somebody is certainly lying about them. What’s more is that technically, there is no reason for the higher frequencies to be used. If a lower frequency produces the needed visible light, then why do these bulbs operate at unnecessary higher frequency bands too? These extra frequencies simply could not have been stepped up and oscillated (frequency generated) higher by accident, regardless of whether the oscillation is chemical or electronic.
Doing such a thing can make even an experienced engineer’s head spin, due to the overall technical difficulties in frequency tuning; especially on the high-end. Furthermore, are we expected to believe that none of the companies or regulators involved ever bothered to test these new light bulbs with an oscilloscope during the testing? What else could an engineer test a new light device with? A sound meter? It’s absolutely ludicrous to believe that they do not know. Thus, the only explanation is that these bulbs produce harmful radiation by design. They are designed to produce dangerous ionizing radiation outside of the range of visible light, which is known to be extremely harmful (ie. deadly) to humans, and it is all justified to solve an “environmental problem” that doesn’t even exist.
The proof is already before you to observe at your leisure ― how they interfere with radios, cordless phones, and R.F. remote controls. Can you smell it too? This writer is practically gasping for air.
It Gets Even Worse. Seriously.
This may be showing my age to some, but I had never heard of ‘dirty electricity’ when I was in college. It sounds like the super power for a comic book super villain, and in a way, it actually is. Guess what it involves? If you guessed frequencies, then great job. For those of you with some electronics training, it is similar to the topic of harmonics, but the rest of you need not worry about this point. Here’s the quick and dirty about ‘dirty electricity’. The new age bulbs do not just directly radiate radiation from themselves, which alone would be plenty bad and a reason for infamy.
Believe it or not, these bulbs actually inject frequencies back into the buildings’ electrical supply lines. This means that every wire in the building is also producing radiation too, like a spider web of giant antennas, and at even higher frequencies. Is there any reader out there who still believes the radiation poisoning is unintentional? All I can say is God bless Dr. Magda Havas, of Trent University, who cataloged these findings with empirical data about the frequency ranges for both the radiation coming from the bulbs, and the ‘dirty electricity’ radiation that pulses throughout entire buildings.
“The energy efficient compact fluorescent lights that are commercial available generate radio frequency radiation and ultraviolet radiation, they contain mercury – a known neurotoxin, and they are making some people ill. Instead of promoting these light bulbs governments around the world should be insisting that manufactures produces light bulbs that are electromagnetically clean and contain no toxic chemicals. Some of these are already available (CLED) but are too expensive for regular use.
With a growing number of people developing electrohypersensitivity we have a serious emerging and newly identified health risk that is likely to get worse until regulations restricting our exposure to electromagnetic pollutants are enforced. Since everyone uses light bulbs and since the incandescent light bulbs are being phased out this is an area that requires immediate attention.”
It’s ironic that people buy these bulbs to help the environment, because they emit mercury vapor when they break. In fact, they’re so toxic that you’re not supposed to put them in your regular garbage. They’re household hazardous waste. If you break one in the house, you are supposed to open all of your windows and doors, and evacuate the house for at least 15 minutes to minimize your exposure to the poisonous mercury gas. Don’t forget that mercury is a bio-accumulative toxin, so it remains in your body forever in ever growing amounts.
The World Health Organization has a web page devoted to EHS and although they recognize the illness, they can’t clearly demonstrate EHS is attributed to electromagnetic fields. This is based upon their pooling together studies that demonstrate that EHS sufferers cannot detect the presence of electromagnetic fields.
What is surprising about this conclusion is that the former director of the World Health Organization, Gro Harlem Brundtland was a medical doctor that was also EHS. During interviews with her at the WHO, she had forbidden journalists from using cell phones in her office because of her EHS (electrohypersensitivity). This news was made public in Norway and Sweden and then a few months later, she had to abandon the leadership of the World Health Organization. Many point to Michael Repacholi and the the cell phone industry as authors of this proscription.
Dr. Brundtland is now very active with the Climate Change issue. Watch this youtube video.
Please let me introduce myself. My name is Dr. Carlos Sosa, M.D.
(physician and surgeon) and I’m presently living in Medellin, Colombia in South America.
During the month of May 2006, I was forced to leave my house because of the symptoms caused to me and my family by the microwaves of a wireless Internet (WiFi) mast (or antenna). The structure had been in our building for nearly three years and the company that owned it had been slowly raising the transmission frequency.
In May/06 I started feeling a terrible sense of unwellness: headaches, dizziness, insomnia, nausea, irritability, amnesia or forgetfulness and lack of attention or concentration capacity. I couldn’t bear being close to my house or to any other microwave mast, be it cell phone or WiFi antennas. I had to leave my house together with my whole family just to find out that the city was flooded by some 4000 masts that wouldn’t ‘t leave a single irradiated spot for us to live in.
I could sense the electromagnetic fields that were being given off by these antennas blocks away before I could even see them. Many times I felt like a burning candle in the back part of my head (occipital). We had to move to five different apartments all over the city because the situation was the same no matter where we went. I couldn’t find physical or mental peace anywhere in the city. I couldn’t study again which, being a Medical Doctor is a tragedy. Studying is my life and I wasn’t able to remember or to concentrate. I had to resign my position at the hospital where I worked because there were various microwave cell phone masts around the hospital. I could not stand being inside the Emergency Service because the electromagnetic contamination was just too high and I felt pain just trying to find a place to park the car. That used to be my daily routine.
Despite the fact that I tried to get help from local health authorities and the National Ministry of Communications of Colombia, nobody actually helped me. I sent my written reports with medical evidence to our city Health Secretary. He probably laughed a lot.
A few months later I found out of Dr. William Rea who runs the Environmental Health Clinic in Dallas, Texas. I left immediately in search of his help. I already knew I had Microwave Syndrome. The alterations in my physiology were serious enough to seek help anywhere in the world.
In Colombia, not a single medical doctor is trained in any of the universities to treat this problem. It’s simply not taught anywhere in pre-graduate or graduate programs in medical schools around the country. Plus, being a medical doctor, I know of the IGNORANCE and DOGMATISM of the medical profession. If I made it public I would be tried for witchcraft. Despite this, I tried a very prestigious neurologist who had studied in Great Britain. He didn’t even know the syndrome existed in Medicine and he tried to laugh before I showed him my box with some 2000 medical publications from all medical specialties written by doctors from all over the world.
In Dallas I was able to meet people from the five continents with exactly my same story: they had been subject to microwave radiation from a mast that was one, two, three or four blocks away.
I was not considering the possibility of surviving in the measure that my neurological functions were deeply affected. My best option at that point in time was committing suicide and I thought about it every hour of every day. Dr. Rea made the diagnosis of a toxic encephalopathy, immune dysregulation and dysautonomy. All of these diagnoses are a direct consequence of microwave irradiation. It had been many years since I had cried. I stayed in the clinic’s rest room for half an hour trying to vanish the traces of the tears and my red eyes. I knew how serious the situation was. Basically all of my life, my profession and my neurological integrity was at stake.
Dr. Rea taught me a lot. I will be eternally grateful to him. Though he wanted me to stay for two or three months, my economical situation did not allow for it. The very first day I had to spend almost all of my money in lab examinations. The medical results at the clinic spread through all of the gamut of possibilities from no response, partial recovery, functional symptoms, to total cure.
I returned to Colombia in search of a place to hide from microwaves in the jungle. I visited tens of towns and states around the country. The nation is totally contaminated with electromagnetic smog. And Colombia is far better than any city in the United States or Europe. I finally managed to find a spot at one of the turns of the Andes Mountains. It was a beautiful place with a creek, a forest, a 200 year old house with no electricity and pure air. (All those interested, please just write to [email protected]). Though I could sense the electromagnetic fields coming probably from radar units, there was a big reduction in the symptoms that allowed me to start recovering. After staying there for 5 months I had to return to the city, because I was starting to feel the microwaves of the airplanes crossing in the sky. Unfortunately, there was an international air navigation route on the sky and I had to leave in very much pain back to the city.
It was Dr. George Carlo, head of the epidemiology branch of the CTIA of the United States, who denounced publicly the evidence that they had concerning genetic damages, lymphomas, rupture of the brain-blood-barrier, presence of micronuclei, etc. The criteria used in Medicine and specifically in Epidemiology to establish a causal relationship between a chemical, bacterial or physical agent and disease, were fulfilled in less than ten years, states Carlo. These criteria, known as the Koch-Henle postulates, have proven that microwaves from cell phone telephony affect human health in a catastrophic way.
Not a single government in the world cares. Only through litigation will changes become effective.
My case, just like the case of other medical doctors who are or have been electro-sensitive, is just another modern version of infamy. Among these is the case of the former director of WHO and Norwegian prime minister: Gro Harlem Brundtland. She had forbidden journalists from using cell phones in her office because of her EHS (electrohypersensitivity). The news was made public in Norway and Sweden. A few months later, she had to abandon the leadership of the World Health Organization. Many point to Michael Repacholi and the the cell phone industry as authors of this proscription. Dr. Brundtland eventually became another patient in Dallas.
Like her, Dr. Arthur Firstenberg and Dr. Lisa Nagy have become the tips of the icebergs. There is no doubt: the Microwave Syndrome is not only the biggest experiment in the history of Mankind, but also, it is one of the biggest epidemics recorded in Medicine (after the Black Death, influenza, malaria, AIDS, etc). The Health Department of the State of California is estimating that the total number of people affected in the United States by EHS or the Microwave Syndrome is over ONE MILLION people.
In not a single Medicine book or journal in the world, be it a genetics, a physiology, a histology, a molecular biology, a biochemistry, a microbiology, an internal medicine, a pediatrics, a surgery, a neurology, a cardiology, or any other text does it say that the human cell was designed to to withstand microwave radiation day and night throughout the years. This is a creation, an invention or a lie from the cell phone industry. This industry was set up by engineers, physicist, electricians and many times, by graduates of elementary school who had no credentials and no knowledge of Medicine whatsoever. That’s the reason why many of us are ill or actually dying. As long as the cell phone industry owns the World Health Organization, the crime will proceed. The credibility gap of the WHO extends well beyond the Milky Way. The ethical conflict is patent. The international epidemic of the microwave syndrome is getting to levels of genocide. And Michael Repacholi is internationally responsible for CRIMES AGAINST MANKIND. The knowledge was there since the 1920’s.
Originally described in the Soviet Union during the 1940’s and 1950’s, the Microwave Syndrome, also called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, Microwave Disease, Radio-frequency Sickness, Radar Disease, Electric Sensitivity, Cell Phone Disease, Cell Phone Mast Disease constitutes a CRIME AGAINST MANKIND on behalf of the international cell phone industry. Soviet medical reports were already describing the damaging action of electromagnetic fields on human beings in the 1920’s. The microwaving of approximately 80-90% of the human population is, according to Dr. Leif Salford of the Neurosurgery Department of Lund University in Sweden, the greatest experiment ever conducted against Man. Medical ethics codes have been violated by the World Health Organization taken over by the the cell phone industry in 1996.
The Microwave Syndrome or Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, constitutes a criminal action that has violated medical ethics, the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Declaration, and Human Rights of MANKIND as a species. It is an international HOLOCAUST that is killing hundreds of thousands around the world. Not a single health authority in Great Britain, the United States, Spain, Germany, France or Colombia cares at all.
Taking into account the medical literature of the Soviet Union, Poland and Czechoslovakia, the total number of international medical references concerning this problem easily exceeds 100 million and they started to be published more than 80 years ago. The problem is not new. Furthermore, the British government knew of the symptoms of the operators of the radar antennas during the Second World War: the same symptoms that people who are subject to microwaves from cell phone masts experience. Microwave radiation is pertinent to cause death. Not a single government in the world cares because of the giant fortunes involved.
The World Health Organization, years ago a very serious and respectable institution, was bought in 1996 by the former director of the ICNIRP (International Commission for Non-ionizing Radiation Protection), Michael Repacholi. The ICNIRP is a private organization that was built up in order to protect the private interests of the American and European cell phone industry. In many regards, cell phones pose an equivalent problem as cocaine traffickers. No matter how damaging it actually is, there will always be corrupted officials who are willing to sell their conscience for money and look the other way. There is a present international campaign to submit Michael Repacholi to international justice for CRIMES AGAINST MANKIND. I personally hold Michael Repacholi responsible for my EHS. This person has to be sent to criminal trial for his actions against millions of human beings in the five continents. The WHO knew of this damaging action decades before the introduction of cell phone telephony in the world. Repacholi did not care. In 1973 the WHO conducted an international Congress in Warsaw under the auspices of the government of Poland and the Federal Drug Administration of the United States. The results of this congress were published in the book entitled: “Biologic Effects and Health Hazards of Microwave Radiation.” I have heard that Michael Repacholi ordered this book burned.
Repacholi recently revealed that up to half of the funds raised for the EMF project of the World Health Organization came from the cell phone industry.
The conflict of interests is like having the tobacco industry sponsor research in order to deny that cigarettes cause lung cancer, mouth floor cancer, larynx cancer, pharynx cancer, coronary disease, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, myocardial infarction, strokes, etc.
The Microwave Syndrome, as it was originally described by Soviet medical investigators consists of:
– A neurasthenic syndrome: fatigue, irritability, nausea, headaches, anorexia, depression, dizziness
– A cardiovascular syndrome: bradycardia, tachycardia, hypertension or low blood pressure
– A diencephalic syndrome: memory problems, concentration difficulties, insomnia
Chronic exposure to microwaves is associated with dermatological lesions, leukemia, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (epidemic), brain tumors (epidemic), changes in the electroencephalogram, cardiac arrhythmias, reproduction problems, allergies, hypothyroidism, sinusitis, chronic fatigue syndrome, etc.
Because it was known since the 1920’s that microwaves are bio-active, lawyers like Peter Angelos in the USA are making a fortune in litigation processes (similar to those against the tobacco industry) against the cell phone industry. Not only that, but Motorola openly lied to the federal government and its agencies when it stated that they had thousands of studies that proved that microwaves caused no ham. Last year, the judicial system of the United States established that the brain tumor that the patient Sharesa Price had was a direct consequence of cell phone use. Repacholi is totally silent, as so as the cell phone industry and the World Health Organization.
Because of this grave crisis that almost cost me my life, I started investigating on a possible cure for EHS or microwave syndrome. I developed an approach that reconstructs previous Soviet treatments and modern medicine. I started my own site in the hope of helping people around the world to overcome this tragedy ( www.thesanctuarydrsosa.com ). I presently live outside the city in a place with a very low microwave radiation level- a sanctuary.
Colombia has had some of the most astonishing cases in the world. One of them was located in Valledupar in the northern part of the country. One thousand people in El Amparo neighborhood are sick because of two giant cell phone masts. They are selling 250 houses because of the microwave syndrome people are suffering. The government says it’s just coincidence.
I want to dedicate my life to help other patients who like me, are facing an infamous situation caused by human greed. I have tons of medical information that I want to share with everybody. Feel free to contact me. There is hope and Medicine does in fact have treatment options to offer.
Dr. Carlos Sosa, M.D.
Electromagnetic radiation from power lines and transformers have known to be a cause in childhood leukemia. Children that have recovered often relapse when they are placed back into a home with high magnetic fields. Not all children will get leukemia when living close to powerlines, but it seems that some children that have a specific gene have higher rates of relapse. The National Cancer Institute has identified these genes.
Scientists have identified mutations in a gene that predict a high likelihood of relapse in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Although the researchers caution that further research is needed to determine how changes in the gene, called IKZF1 or IKAROS, lead to leukemia relapse, the findings are likely to provide the basis for future diagnostic tests to assess the risk of treatment failure. By using a molecular test to identify this genetic marker in ALL patients, physicians should be better able to assign patients to appropriate therapies.
The findings of the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) study, led by scientists from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tenn., the University of New Mexico Cancer Research and Treatment Center, Albuquerque, N.M., and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health, appear online Jan.7, 2009, in the New England Journal of Medicine, and in print on Jan. 29, 2009.
ALL, a cancer of the white blood cells, is the most common childhood cancer, in that it affects about one in 29,000 children annually. Using currently available therapies, cure rates for ALL are now upwards of 80 percent. However, those therapies carry with them substantial side effects, and even with treatment, only 30 percent of children who experience a relapse of ALL will survive five years. Determining the risk of relapse faced by an individual patient would help physicians tailor treatment intensity appropriately, but until now there has been no good marker for predicting outcome.
“Great progress has been made in recent years in improving the cure rate of childhood ALL,” said Stephen Hunger, M.D., chairman of the COG ALL committee and the lead COG investigator on this study. “The findings of this study help us further subdivide those patients who are unlikely to be cured, and identify patients in whom different therapies should be tested.”
In the study, researchers analyzed genetic data on leukemia cells obtained at diagnosis from 221 children with high-risk leukemia (i.e. a high chance of relapse) who had been treated in an existing COG study. They conducted their analysis using microarrays and DNA sequencing – technologies which allow researchers to quickly and efficiently identify and analyze multiple genes simultaneously in the same cell. Using these technologies to identify genetic abnormalities in leukemia cells, the investigators examined the DNA of the leukemia cells at the time of diagnosis and then determined if any of the identified genetic changes predicted relapse. To confirm that specific genetic changes were associated with relapse, the scientists also examined a second group of 258 children with ALL who were treated at St. Jude.
“We looked across the genome in an unbiased fashion in an attempt to pull out any genes that were significantly associated with outcome,” said Charles Mullighan, M.D., Ph.D., assistant member in the St. Jude Department of Pathology and the paper’s first author. “From these findings, we identified a group of genetic abnormalities that together predicted poor outcome.”
The most significant association was with the deletions or changes in the IKAROS gene. Mutations ofIKAROS were shown to identify a subgroup of patients who were treated in the COG study that had a very poor prognosis. The prognostic significance of these genetic alterations was validated in the independent St. Jude patient group, a finding of particular importance since different types of therapies were used in these two groups of patients.
Previous research has shown that the IKAROS gene serves as the blueprint for the production of theIKAROS protein, which regulates the activity of many other genes. The IKAROS protein plays an essential role in the development of lymphocytes, the white blood cells that, when changed, give rise to pediatric ALL. The way in which IKAROS abnormalities contribute to the development of relapse remains to be determined.
The study also examined gene expression in the leukemia cells using microarray chips, and found that leukemia cells from patients with IKAROS alterations expressed primitive, stem cell-like genes, suggesting that the cells are less mature and possibly more resistant to the effects of drugs used to treat ALL. “These findings show how detailed analysis of leukemic cells using complementary techniques can enhance our understanding of the genetic basis of leukemia,” said co-author Cheryl Willman, M.D., director and CEO, University of New Mexico Cancer Research and Treatment Center.
The researchers also tested whether the presence of IKAROS alterations was associated with levels of minimal residual disease, another measure of treatment response in ALL.
“Measurement of levels of minimal residual disease is widely used to monitor treatment responsiveness and also to alter patients’ therapy if they have a very poor response to treatment,” said James Downing, M.D., St. Jude scientific director and the paper’s senior author. “An important analysis we conducted was to see whether identifying the association of IKAROS alterations with poor outcome added anything to just measuring levels of minimal residual disease. And, indeed, it did.”
The researchers’ analysis indicated that identifying IKAROS alterations may be clinically useful and will complement existing diagnostic tests and measurement of minimal residual disease levels.
While a clinical test for alterations of IKAROS could prove valuable for predicting poor outcomes in children with ALL, complexities remain. There are different types of deletions in the gene, some that involve the entire IKAROS gene and others that involve only parts of the gene. Because the genetic alterations in IKAROS in ALL are not uniform or limited to a single mutation or deletion, it may be necessary to develop a panel of different tests to detect IKAROS lesions and identify which patients are at highest risk for relapse.
This research was done as part of the NCI Therapeutically Applicable Research to Generate Effective Treatments (TARGET) initiative, which seeks to utilize the study of genomics to identify therapeutic targets in order to develop more effective treatments for childhood cancers. The first two cancers being studied in the program are ALL and neuroblastoma, a cancer that arises in immature nerve cells and affects mostly infants and children. Combined, these two cancers account for 3,000 new cases each year, and in both cancers, there are some children who have a very favorable prognosis and others who are at high risk for treatment failure. By determining the genetic factors that distinguish these groups, the hope is that researchers can use this information to improve patient outcomes and develop better treatments, particularly for those in the high-risk group.
“In the long term, our goal is to develop effective therapeutic interventions, directed toward vulnerabilities that leukemia cells acquire as a result of the genomic abnormalities identified through the TARGET initiative,” said Malcolm Smith, M.D., Ph.D., of NCI’s Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. These are the first results to come out of this initiative. For more information about TARGET, please visit http://target.cancer.gov