Before you read the article, take a look at these videos and think about
them for a second: if cell phone can pop a kernel, what do you think
they can do to your brain?
Do Cellular Phones Cause Brain
There has been anecdotal evidence for several years associating use
of cellular phones, and other sources of electromagnetic radiation in
the microwave region of the spectrum, with brain cancers and other cancers.
From police officers who used radar guns to heavy users of cellular
phones who have contracted cancer, there has been mounting evidence
that exposure to this kind of electromagnetic radiation may not be as
safe as advertised.
The article below appeared in The Australian
Newspaper, April 29, 1997. It speaks for itself.
Cell phones/cancer connection, by Stewart Fist,
The Australian newspaper, Tues 29 April 1997
A team of scientists funded by Telstra to investigate
claimed links between cellular phones and cancer has turned up probably
the most significant finding of an adverse health effects yet.
When presented to 'Science' magazine for publication
the study was rejected on the grounds that publication "would cause
a panic". Three other prominent magazines including 'Nature' also
later rejected the report, suggesting that they would not handle such
important conclusions without the research being further confirmed.
The study looked at 200 mice, half exposed and
half not, to pulsed digital phone radiation. The work was conducted
at the Royal Adelaide Hospital by Dr Michael Repacholi, Professor Tony
Basten, Dr Alan Harris and statistician Val Gebski, and it revealed
a highly-significant doubling of cancer rates in the exposed group.
The mice were subject to GSM-type pulsed microwaves
at a power-density roughly equal to a cell-phone transmitting for two
half-hour periods each day; this was pulsed transmission as from a handset,
not the steady transmission of a cell-phone tower.
A significant increase in B-cell lymphomas was
evident early in the experiment, but the incidence continued to rise
over the 18 months. The implications of the B-cell (rather than the
normal T-cell) lymphomas here, is that B-cell effects are implicated
in roughly 85 percent of all cancers.
The experiment was conducted as a blind trial,
using absolutely identical equipment and conditions for two groups of
100 mice. The only difference between handling the two groups was that
the power to one antenna was never switched on. Over the 18 months,
the exposed mice had 2.4-times the tumour rate of the unexposed - but
this was later corrected downwards to a more confident 2-times claim
to remove other possible influences.
According to Dr Alan Harris from the Walter and
Eliza Institute in Melbourne: "This is important because at present,
there was no convincing evidence that radio fields (in contrast to X-
and Gamma-rays, ultraviolet and atomic radiation) can directly cause
the changes in genes responsible for cancer development."
In fact, until late 1996, most governments and
all cell-phone companies have been claiming that the safety of their
product has been proved - and that the only possible biological effect
of radio frequency transmission is localised body heating.
The conduct of this experiment actually raises
questions more about the potential for cell-phone handset radiation
to effect people nearby (passive exposures) than just the user him/herself.
The experiment was conducted in the 'far field', at distances greater
from the mice than the cell-phone is normally held from the head.
Near-field biological effects in EMF effects
are thought to be sustantially different from far-field, although the
biomedical implications are not clear. Also, in close proximity, most
of the energy transfers from the handset to the head by induction rather
than just radiation, and this can raise the energy transfer by a factor
The study therefore under-rates the potential
power effects on the handset user, while over-rating those for people
The Adelaide study has been held back from publication
for over two years while the B-cell implications were checked at a laboratory
in Maryland, USA. Under their contract with Telstra, those involved
in the study were prohibited from discussing their findings until after
Increased tumours began to be recorded after
about 9 months. It is important to note that these were transgenic mice,
specially bred to be susceptible to cancers of the immune system. However
susceptible mice are commonly used in these studies as 'proxies', since
cancer-causing effects are believed to be cumulative at the cell level.
The total exposure period is very much less than
can be expected from human use over a lifetime, so while one of the
scientists downplayed the importance, saying, "humans are not rodents"
another pointed out that "DNA is DNA".
Every attempt appears to have been made to hose
down the significance of this report, however the importance of the
finding will not be lost on the international scientific community.
This research now places Australia at the fore-front of EMF-health research,
and it demands a series of follow-up studies to investigate dose-related
responses and near-field effects.
An expensive video-conference is being mounted
on Wednesday by Telstra in Adelaide to officially release the report,
with Dr Michael Repacholi speaking from Geneva. He has been prominent
crusader on the side of "cell-phones are safe" lobby for many
years. However, none of the technical or medical press involved in this
debate have been invited to Adelaide conference.
The official press release issued by the chairman
of the scientific committee, Professor Tony Basten of Sydney University,
also leads with gentle fire-extinguisher statement that "In our
opinion the findings are valid for this genetically-engineered mouse
model, but they must be put in context. Mice and humans absorb energy
from these fields differently so we cannot conclude from this single
study that humans have an increased risk of cancer from the use of digital
mobile phones. More focussed research needs to be done to resolve that
I couldn't agree more on the last point, but
nothing done in the last few years with the exception of the Drs. Lai-Singh
work in Seattle has more obviously established that cell-phone safety
has not yet been proved. There has been evidence accumulating over many
years that the long-term effects of radio-frequency exposures may have
serious consequences for a small percent of the population, but this
has been ignored by the industry and by governments.
The fact that Prof. Tony Basten concluded his
release with the statement "For the time being, at least, I see
no scientific reason to stop using my own mobile phone," is largely
irrelevant. At his age and in his occupation, the potential dangers
from increased phone use are probably minimal.
The question is, would he buy his teenage child
This report follows two other fierce brush-fires
in the cell-phone industry. The first was generated last year when Dr
Henry Lai and Dr Singh at Washington State University reported enormous
increases in double-strand DNA breaks in rat-brain tissue following
microwave exposures of only two hours. The industry largely ignored
these findings claiming that the frequencies used were not identical
In addition, the Wireless Technology Research
(WTR) group in the USA, which is funded by the cell-phone industry has
become embroiled in a number of scandals. The WTR was promoted to the
public and to the US Government as being an 'independent' and 'arms-length'
body controlling $25 million in research funding.
Recent leaked documents show that it has been
under the direct control of the industry association, and it has long
operated as a PR front. In the last four years it has spent $17 million
"without wetting a test-tube, " according to Microwave News
editor, Louis Slessin.
Following the tobacco industry's problems, the
WTR scientists recently went on strike for nearly a year, refusing to
perform their contracted research until adequately covered for indemnity
against law suits by the cellular phone industry association. Last week,
the WTR was finally paid US$938,000 to fund indeminity insurance coverage.
The US scientists' sensitivity to this issue
follows the filing of thirty-eight cases which are now before the courts
over past tobacco-safety studies. Both the tobacco company lawyers and
the scientists they funded have been charged as co-conspirators with
the Tobacco Institute and the cigarette companies in suppressing evidence
and manipulating research results.
As a director and his crew shoot a controversial
film about Christopher Columbus in Cochabamba, Bolivia, local people
rise up against plans to privatize the water supply. While filming,
it becomes apparent that the events that occured during the American
Holocaust were so horrendous and inhumane that they are often too
difficult to imagine.The film masterfully
illustrates the fact that 519 years later, indigenous people still
endure oppression at the hands of the european invaders proving that
only time separates the 16th century european invaders from their
Watch the movie, leave a comment
Academia Semillas del Pueblo
"If Brown (vs. Board
of Education) was just about letting Black people into a White
school, well we don’t care about that anymore. We don’t
necessarily want to go to White schools. What we want to do is
teach ourselves, teach our children the way we have of teaching.
We don’t want to drink from a White water fountain...We
don’t need a White water fountain. So the whole issue of
segregation and the whole issue of the Civil Rights Movement is
all within the box of White culture and White supremacy. We should
not still be fighting for what they have. We are not interested
in what they have because we have so much more and because the
world is so much larger. And ultimately the White way, the American
way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually lead
to our own destruction. And so it isn’t about an argument
of joining neo liberalism, it’s about us being able, as
human beings, to surpass the barrier."
- Marcos Aguilar (Principal,
Academia Semillas del Pueblo)