Author Archives: Frank Salvatori

Des enfants de l’école Notre dame de Ottorburn Park contre Telus

Un petit résumé de notre périple pour manifester à Ottawa. Ce qu’on ne voit pas dans la vidéo, parce qu’évidemment il n’était pas possible de filmer à l’intérieur de la Chambre des Communes, c’est que Matthew Dubé a encore une fois talonné le gouvernement; “Si le ministre n’écoute ni le mouvement citoyen, ni la municipalité, va t-il écouter les jeunes qui veulent défendre notre environnement contre la tour Telus? Est-ce qu’il va refuser l’imposition de la tour à Otterburn Park?” sous les applaudissements des députés et ministres, qui ont salué l’initiative de jeunes d’Otterburn Park qui ont remis une pétition d’une centaine de noms d’élèves de l’école Notre-Dame.

Chairman of Wireless Technology Research warning about cell phones causing brain cancer

Aegis Corporation Home Pageaegis back.jpg (3238 bytes)
Letter To AT&T Chairman C. Michael Armstrong From WTR Chairman Dr. George L. Carlo

This letter reveals that the occurrence of brain cancer and certain types of tumors among cellular phone users is twice that of non-users. Dr. Carlo is requesting AT&T’s assistance to distribute this information to consumers so that they can make an “informed judgment about how much of this unknown risk they wish to assume in their use of wireless phones.”

A signed copy of this letter was also sent to a panel of experts convened by the British Parliament to evaluate the science and health concerns regarding wireless communications.

7 October 1999

Mr. C. Michael Armstrong
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
AT & T Corporation
32 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 100313-2412

Dear Mr. Armstrong:

After much thought, I am writing this letter to you, personally, to ask your assistance in solving what I believe is an emerging and serious problem concerning wireless phones. I write this letter in the interest of the more than 80 million wireless phone users in the United States and the more than 200 million worldwide. But I also write this letter in the interest of your industry, a critical part of our social and economic infrastructure.

Since 1993, I have headed the WTR surveillance and research program funded by the wireless industry. The goal of WTR has always been to identify and solve any problems concerning consumers’ health that could arise from the use of these phones. This past February, at the annual convention of the CTIA, I met with the full board of that organization to brief them on some surprising findings from our work. I do not recall if you were there personally, but my understanding is that all segments of the industry were represented.

At that briefing, I explained that the well-conducted scientific studies that WTR was overseeing indicated that the question of wireless phone safety had become confused.

Specifically, I reported to you that:

The rate of death from brain cancer among handheld phone users was higher than the rate of brain cancer death among those who used non-handheld phones that were away from their head;

The risk of acoustic neuroma, a benign tumour of the auditory nerve that is well in range of the radiation coming from a phone’s antenna system, was fifty percent higher in people who reported using cell phones for six years or more, moreover, that relationship between the amount of cell phone use and this tumour appeared to follow a dose-response curve;

The risk of rare neuro epithelial tumours on the outside of the brain was more than doubled, a statistically significant risk increase, in cell phone users as compared to people who did not use cell phones;

There appeared to be some correlation between brain tumours occurring on the right side of the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head;

Laboratory studies looking at the ability of radiation from a phone’s antenna system to cause functional genetic damage were definitively positive, and were following a dose-responsive relationship.

I also indicated that while our overall study of brain cancer occurrence did not show a correlation with cell phone use, the vast majority of the tumours that were studied were well out of range of the radiation that one would expect from a cell phone’s antenna. Because of that distance, the finding of no effect was questionable. (Aegis Note: The entire phone is an antenna). Such misclassification of radiation exposure would tend to dilute any real effect that may have been present. In addition, I reported to you that the genetic damage studies we conducted to look at the ability of radiation from the phones to break DNA were negative, but that the positive finding of functional DNA damage could be more important, perhaps indicating a problem that is not dependent on DNA breakage, and that these inconsistencies needed to be clarified. I reported that while none of these findings alone were evidence of a definitive health hazard from wireless phones, the pattern of potential health effects evidenced by different types of studies, from different laboratories and by different investigators, raised serious questions.

Following my presentation, I heard by voice vote of those present, a pledge to “do the right thing in following up these findings” and a commitment of the necessary funds.

When I took on the responsibility of doing this work for you, I pledged five years. I was asked to continue on through the end of a sixth year, and agreed. My tenure is now completed. My presentation to you and the CTIA board in February was not an effort to lengthen my tenure at WTR, nor to lengthen the tenure of WTR itself. I was simply doing my job of letting you know what we found and what needed to be done following from our findings. I made this expressly clear during my presentation to you and in many subsequent conversations with members of your industry and the media.

Today, I sit here extremely frustrated and concerned that appropriate steps have not been taken by the wireless industry to protect consumers during this time of uncertainty about safety. The steps I am referring to were specifically followed from the WTR program and have been recommended repeatedly in public and private for and by me and other experts from around the world. As I prepare to move away from the wireless phone issue and into a different public health direction, I am concerned that the wireless industry is missing a valuable opportunity by dealing with these public health concerns through politics, creating illusions that more research over the next several years helps consumers today, and false claims that regulatory compliance means safety. The better choice by the wireless industry would be to implement measured steps aimed at true consumer protection.

Alarmingly, indications are that some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings suggesting potential health effects, have repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including children, and have created an illusion of responsible follow up by calling for and supporting more research. The most important measures of consumer protection are missing: complete and honest factual information to allow informed judgment by consumers about assumption of risk; the direct tracking and monitoring of what happens to consumers who use wireless phones; and, the monitoring of changes in the technology that could impact health.

I am especially concerned about what appear to be actions by a segment of the industry to conscript the FCC, the FDA and The World Health Organization with them in following a non-effectual course that will likely result in a regulatory and consumer backlash.

As an industry, you will have to deal with the fallout from all of your choices, good and bad, in the long term. But short term, I would like your help in effectuating an important public health intervention today.

The question of wireless phone safety is unclear. Therefore, from a public health perspective, it is critical for consumers to have the information they need to make an informed judgment about how much of this unknown risk they wish to assume in their use of wireless phones.

Informing consumers openly and honestly about what is known and not-known about health risks is not liability laden – it is evidence that your industry is being responsible, and doing all it can to assure safe use of its products. The current popular backlash we are witnessing in the United States today against the tobacco industry is derived in large part from perceived dishonesty on the part of that industry in not being forthright about health effects. I urge you to help your industry not repeat that mistake.

As we close out the business of the WTR, I would like to openly ask for your help in distributing the summary findings we have complied of our work. This last action is what always has been anticipated and forecast in the WTR’s research agenda. I have asked another organization with which I am affiliated, The Health Risk Management Group (HRMG), to help us with this public health intervention step, and to put together a consumer information package for widespread distribution. Because neither WTR nor HRMG have the means to effectuate this intervention, I am asking you to help us do the right thing.

I would be happy to talk to you personally about this.

Sincerely yours

George L. Carlo Ph.D, M.S., J.D
Chairman
Wireless Technology Research LLC

Top of Page

Cell Phone – Russian Roulette

robert_c_kane_cellular_telephone_russian_roulette

In Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette, author Robert Kane, a former top Motorola engineer, traces the history of cell phone development (in which he was involved) and analyzes the cell phone radiation bioeffects research base from 1950 to 1996.

Despite industry’s claim to safety, Kane’s report suggests that there was much more information available indicating safety concerns than the industry has ever acknowledged.

The work includes a review of:

· The foundations of radiofrequency (RF) radiation research (starting with radar).

· The discoveries of bioeffects from RF exposure as early as the 1970’s, and the discovery of “hot spots” in the brains of mobile phone users.

· The industry’s influence on “safe” exposure guidelines in order to meet its own product needs.

· The ways research design can be manipulated to bias the outcome of lab studies.

· The red-herring requirement by industry that research must identify a single biological causation mechanism for adverse health effects from RF exposure before science can say there is proven harm.

·The emergence of a PR campaign to mask the risks of cell phone radiation to the user.

It needs a good index and some section headings, but this book is jam-packed with information, much of which you won’t find anywhere else. It will be of interest to those who have already gained some familiarity with the RF radiation health issue and are not put off by some of the technical terms used (megahertz, S.A.R., etc.). Serious readers may begin to smell more-than-feint traces of tobacco.

Another good book to dig up is Nicholas Steneck’s 1984 science-and-values overview of “The Microwave Debate” which shows there has been some concern about RF radiation’s ability to affect biology for quite some time.

Devon primary school to walk-out over phone mast and fears of ‘excessive radiation’

From DevonLive, June 25, 2018

Parents and students at a Devon primary school are planning a mass walk-out in protest of a controversial mobile phone mast.

The 10m high structure is located just 50 metres away from Dartington Primary School, Totnes, which has worried parents over suggested radiation readings at the school which apparently show the highest reading of ‘excessive radiation.’

Those involved in the protest want the mast located at least 1km away from the school, as well as the outdoor pool, a children’s playground and a school for children with additional needs that fall within a 100m radius of the Vodafone mast.

Chloe and her two children stood next to the controversial phone mast

Some have claimed these masts emit levels of electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) and radiation that can lead to significant health issues.

Dr David Carpenter, Professor of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of Albany, USA said:

“Children are more vulnerable to RF/MW radiation because of the susceptibility of their developing nervous systems.

“Children are largely unable to remove themselves from exposures to harmful substances in their environments. Their exposure is involuntary.

“There is a major legal difference between an exposure that an individual chooses to accept and one that is forced upon a person, especially a dependent, who can do nothing about it.”

Michelle McHale, Director of Attachment Parenting UK whose girls attended Dartington Primary said she is astonished at the lack of precaution or care in siting the mast.

Locals agree that young children’s health is absolutely paramount. Mum Natascha, whose son has additional needs and has been thriving at Dartington Primary commented:

“We love our school and we agree with technological development but the mast’s closeness casts a dark shadow over our newly built school and many parents are seriously considering de-registering which could create a real conundrum for the council who own the small roadside verge where the mast is erected.”

Dartington Primary School Head teacher Jill Mahon (pictured left) (Image: Andy Styles)

Mum of one, Leela, feels strongly that the mast needs to be located at a distance to both amenities and housing and that extensive consultation was sorely missing. Leela commented;

“Why would we risk subjecting our children to consistent radiation while other European Countries adhere to the EU’s ‘precautionary principle’ when it comes to EMFs?

“I can see how phone companies could shatter our confidence in the safety of where we live by placing a 10m mast with permitted planning rights alongside a home or school and we have zero rights to appeal our involuntary radiation exposure. What does that mean for our human rights?”

Our Wireless Tech Is Unsafe, and These 5 US Government Agencies Have Tried to Warn Us

From “Takebackyourpower.net” (September 23, 2018)

Many countries’ governing agencies (such as the FCC, Health Canada, and ICNIRP) continue to base their radiofrequency “safety” standards exclusively on thermal effectsor exposure levels which increase the temperature of tissue by a certain number of degrees. So, your body tissue would need to “begin to cook” in order for it to be considered an unsafe exposure level.

This means that thousands of studies which show biological harm from RF radiation are not even considered by the government agencies that are supposed to ensure safety.

But due to the increasing obviousness of harm from the proliferation of wireless technologies — such as the recent $25M cancer study by the National Toxicology Project — there is now increasing pressure being put on agencies to reform.

The FCC is totally controlled by corporate interests

In the FCC’s mission statement, there is no indication whatsoever of any jurisdiction or mandated protection of men, women, and children for biological and medical harm caused by radiofrequencies. There is no clear response from the EPA as to why this responsibility somehow does not fall under their purview.

In any case, this ebook report from the Harvard Ethics Department clearly identifies that the FCC is a captured agency. This is the same with virtually all other western countries’ agencies responsible for wireless and health.

At least 5 other agencies have tried to warn us

  1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 1993: The FCC’s exposure standards are “seriously flawed.” (Official comments to the FCC on guidelines for evaluation of electromagnetic effects of radio frequency radiation, FCC Docket ET 93-62, November 9, 1993.)
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2002: Norbert Hankin of the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, Center for Science and Risk Assessment, Radiation Protection Division, wrote:

    “The FCC’s current [radio frequency/microwave] exposure guidelines, as well as those of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection, are thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, non-thermal exposure situations…. The generalization by many that the guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified….  There are reports that suggest that potentially adverse health effects, such as cancer, may occur….  Federal health and safety agencies have not yet developed policies concerning possible risk from long-term, non-thermal exposures.”

  2. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 1993:

    “FCC rules do not address the issue of long-term, chronic exposure to RF fields.”
    (Comments of the FDA to the FCC, November 10, 1993.)

  3. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 1994: The FCC’s standard is inadequate because it

    “is based on only one dominant mechanism — adverse health effects caused by body heating.”
    (Comments of NIOSH to the FCC, January 11, 1994.)

  4. Amateur Radio Relay League Bio-Effects Committee, 1994:

    “The FCC’s standard does not protect against non-thermal effects.”
    (Comments of the ARRL Bio-Effects Committee to the FCC, January 7, 1994.)

  5. The U.S. Department of Interior, 2014:

    “Study results have documented [bird] nest and site abandonment, plumage deterioration, locomotion problems, reduced survivorship, and death…. The electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.”

Mobile phone radiation may affect memory performance in adolescents, study finds

Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields may have adverse effects on the development of memory performance of specific brain regions exposed during mobile phone use. These are the findings of a study involving nearly 700 adolescents in Switzerland. The investigation, led by the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH), will be published on Monday, 23 July 2018 in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

The rapid evolution of information and communication technologies (ICT) goes along with an increase in exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) in our daily life. The most relevant exposure source to the brain is the use of a mobile phone close to the head. Several studies have been conducted to identify potential health effects related to RF-EMF, though results have remained inconclusive.

The research conducted by scientists at the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH) looked at the relationship between exposure to RF-EMF from wireless communication devices and memory performance in adolescents. The study follows up a report published in the scientific journal Environment International in 2015 with twice the sample size and more recent information on the absorption of RF-EMF in adolescent brains during different types of wireless communication device use. These are the world’s first epidemiological studies to estimate cumulative RF-EMF brain dose in adolescents.

Media usage and brain exposure in young adults

The study to be published on 23 July 2018 found that cumulative RF-EMF brain exposure from mobile phone use over one year may have a negative effect on the development of figural memory performance in adolescents, confirming prior results published in 2015. Figural memory is mainly located in the right brain hemisphere and association with RF-EMF was more pronounced in adolescents using the mobile phone on the right side of the head. “This may suggest that indeed RF-EMF absorbed by the brain is responsible for the observed associations.” said Martin Röösli, Head of Environmental Exposures and Health at Swiss TPH.

The rapid evolution of information and communication technologies (ICT) goes along with an increase in exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) in our daily life. The most relevant exposure source to the brain is the use of a mobile phone close to the head. Several studies have been conducted to identify potential health effects related to RF-EMF, though results have remained inconclusive.

The research conducted by scientists at the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH) looked at the relationship between exposure to RF-EMF from wireless communication devices and memory performance in adolescents. The study follows up a report published in the scientific journal Environment International in 2015 with twice the sample size and more recent information on the absorption of RF-EMF in adolescent brains during different types of wireless communication device use. These are the world’s first epidemiological studies to estimate cumulative RF-EMF brain dose in adolescents.

Media usage and brain exposure in young adults

The study to be published on 23 July 2018 found that cumulative RF-EMF brain exposure from mobile phone use over one year may have a negative effect on the development of figural memory performance in adolescents, confirming prior results published in 2015. Figural memory is mainly located in the right brain hemisphere and association with RF-EMF was more pronounced in adolescents using the mobile phone on the right side of the head. “This may suggest that indeed RF-EMF absorbed by the brain is responsible for the observed associations.” said Martin Röösli, Head of Environmental Exposures and Health at Swiss TPH.

Other aspects of wireless communication use, such as sending text messages, playing games or browsing the Internet cause only marginal RF-EMF exposure to the brain and were not associated with the development of memory performance. “A unique feature of this study is the use of objectively collected mobile phone user data from mobile phone operators.” said Röösli. He emphasised that further research is needed to rule out the influence of other factors. “For instance, the study results could have been affected by puberty, which affects both mobile phone use and the participant’s cognitive and behavioural state.”

The data gathered from the Health Effects Related to Mobile phone usE in adolescentS (HERMES) cohort looked at the relationship between exposure to RF-EMF and development of memory performance of almost 700 adolescents over the course of one year. Participants, aged 12 to 17 years, were recruited from 7th to 9th public school grades in urban and rural areas of Swiss-German speaking Switzerland.

Minimising the risk of RF-EMF exposure

The potential effect of RF-EMF exposure to the brain is a relatively new field of scientific inquiry. “It is not yet clear how RF-EMF could potentially affect brain processes or how relevant our findings are in the long-term.” said Röösli. “Potential risks to the brain can be minimised by using headphones or the loud speaker while calling, in particular when network quality is low and the mobile phone is functioning at maximum power.”

About the publication

The study was conducted by Swiss TPH in collaboration with the European Union project GERoNiMO, which aims to improve the knowledge of whether and to what extent RF-EMF affects health. The work on dose calculations was conducted in collaboration with Belgian scientists. The project was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF).

The Toxic Electro Magnetic Pollution Health Canada Doesn’t Want You to Know About!!!

May 09, 2018

By Suzanne Maher

The Toxic Electro Magnetic Pollution Health Canada Doesn’t Want You to Know About

Dr. Magda Havas is a Trent University toxicologist who speaks about the different types of toxic electro magnetic pollution Health Canada, the mainstream media and the telecommunications industry doesn’t want us to know about, and discusses the damaging effects it is having on our bodies.

The Federal guidelines for this radiation are not low and not protective. This pollution is making people acquire what Dr. Havas states is ‘rapid aging disease.’ When a person’s environment is cleaned up their symptoms disappear.

World’s Largest Animal Study on Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link

Press Release

World’s Largest Animal Study on Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link

Scientists call on the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer to re-evaluate the carcinogenicity of cell phone radiation after the Ramazzini Institute and US government studies report finding the same unusual cancers

This press release was orginally distributed by SBWire

Teton Village, WY — (SBWIRE) — 03/22/2018 — Researchers with the renowned Ramazzini Institute (RI) in Italy announce that a large-scale lifetime study of lab animals exposed to environmental levels of cell tower radiation developed cancer. A $25 million study of much higher levels of cell phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation, from the US National Toxicology Program (NTP), has also reported finding the same unusual cancer called Schwannoma of the heart in male rats treated at the highest dose. In addition, the RI study of cell tower radiation also found increases in malignant brain (glial) tumors in female rats and precancerous conditions including Schwann cells hyperplasia in both male and female rats.

“Our findings of cancerous tumors in rats exposed to environmental levels of RF are consistent with and reinforce the results of the US NTP studies on cell phone radiation, as both reported increases in the same types of tumors of the brain and heart in Sprague-Dawley rats. Together, these studies provide sufficient evidence to call for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to re-evaluate and re-classify their conclusions regarding the carcinogenic potential of RFR in humans,” said Fiorella Belpoggi PhD, study author and RI Director of Research.

The Ramazzini study exposed 2448 Sprague-Dawley rats from prenatal life until their natural death to “environmental” cell tower radiation for 19 hours per day (1.8 GHz GSM radiofrequency radiation (RFR) of 5, 25 and 50 V/m). RI exposures mimicked base station emissions like those from cell tower antennas, and exposure levels were far less than those used in the NTP studies of cell phone radiation.

“All of the exposures used in the Ramazzini study were below the US FCC limits. These are permissible exposures according the FCC. In other words, a person can legally be exposed to this level of radiation. Yet cancers occurred in these animals at these legally permitted levels. The Ramazzini findings are consistent with the NTP study demonstrating these effects are a reproducible finding,” explained Ronald Melnick PhD, formerly the Senior NIH toxicologist who led the design of the NTP study on cell phone radiation now a Senior Science Advisor to Environmental Health Trust (EHT). “Governments need to strengthen regulations to protect the public from these harmful non-thermal exposures.”

“This important article from one of the most acclaimed institutions of its kind in the world provides a major new addition to the technical literature indicating strong reasons for concern about electromagnetic radiation from base stations or cell towers,” stated Editor in Chief of Environmental Research Jose Domingo PhD, Professor of Toxicology, School of Medicine at Reus University, Catalonia, Spain.

“The US NTP results combined now with the Ramazzini study, reinforce human studies from our team and others providing clear evidence that RF radiation causes acoustic neuromaa (vestibular schwannoma) and gliomas, and should be classified carcinogenic to humans,” stated Lennart Hardell MD, PhD, physician-epidemiologist with the Department of Oncology, University Hospital, Oerebro, Sweden, who has published extensively on environmental causes of cancer including Agent Orange, pesticides and cell phone radiofrequency radiation.

“The evidence indicating wireless is carcinogenic has increased and can no longer be ignored,” stated University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health Professor Emeritus Anthony B. Miller MD, Member of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of Canada and the UK, and Senior Medical Advisor to EHT who is also a long-term advisor to the World Health Organization.

“This study raises concerns that simply living close to a cell tower will pose threats to human health. Governments need to take measures to reduce exposures from cell tower emissions. Cell towers should not be near schools, hospitals or people’s homes. Public health agencies need to educate the public on how to reduce exposure from all sources of wireless radiofrequency radiation—be it from cell towers or cell phones or Wi-Fi in schools,” stated David O. Carpenter MD, former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany. “This is particularly urgent because of current plans to place small 5G cell towers about every 300 meters in every street across the country. These 5G ‘small cell’ antennas will result in continuous exposure to everyone living nearby and everyone walking down the street. The increased exposures will increase risk of cancer and other diseases such as electro-hypersensitivity.”

Ramazzini Institute investigators have completed nearly 500 cancer bioassays on more than 200 compounds, and their study design is unique in that animals are allowed to live until their natural deaths in order to allow detection of late-developing tumors. Eighty percent of all human cancers are late-developing, occurring in humans after 60 years of age. This longer observation period has allowed the RI to detect such later-occurring tumors for a number of chemicals, and their published research includes studies of benzene, xylenes, mancozeb, formaldehyde and vinyl chloride.

The Ramazzini research results come in the wake of similar findings from the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) large-scale experimental studies on cell phone radiation. Both studies found statistically significant increases in the development of the same type of very rare and highly malignant tumor in the heart of male rats—schwannomas.

“This publication is a serious cause for concern,” stated Annie J. Sasco MD, DrPH, SM, MPH, retired Director of Research at the INSERM (French NIH) and former Unit Chief at the International Agency for Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, France, who commented that, “some of the results are not statistically significant due to the relatively small number of animals involved. Yet, that does not mean they should be ignored. Larger studies could turn out statistically significant results and in any event statistical significance is just one aspect of evaluation of the relation between exposure and disease. Biological significance and concordance of results between humans and animals clearly reinforces the strength of the evidence of carcinogenicity. The facts that both experimental studies found the same types of rare tumors, which also have pertinence to the human clinical picture, is striking.”

“Such findings of effects at very low levels are not unexpected,” stated Devra Davis PhD, MPH, president of EHT, pointing to a Jacobs University replication animal study published in 2015 that also found very low levels of RFR promoted tumor growth. “This study confirms an ever growing literature and provides a wake-up call to governments to enact protective policy to limit exposures to the public and to the private sector to make safe radiation-free technology available.”

In January 2017 at an international conference co-sponsored by Environmental Health Trust and the Israel Institute for Advanced Study at Hebrew University, Fiorella Belpoggi PhD, Director of Research at the Ramazzini Institute, presented the study design and the findings that RFR-exposed animals had significantly lower litter weights. Belpoggi’s presentation and slides are available online. The Ramazzini findings of lower litter weights are consistent with the NTP study, which also found lower litter weights in prenatally exposed animals. At that time, the Italian journal Corriere published an article about the presentation of the Ramazzini study and quoted Belpoggi’s recommendation of “maximum precaution for children and pregnant women.”

Noting that “current standards were not set to protect children, pregnant women, and the growing numbers of infants and toddlers for whom devices have become playthings,” Davis, who is also Visiting Professor of Medicine of Hebrew University Medical Center and Guest Editor in Chief of the journal Environmental Research, added, “Current two-decade old FCC limits were set when the average call was six minutes and costly cell phones were used by very few. These important, new, game-changing studies show that animals develop the same types of unusual cancers that are being seen in those few human epidemiological studies that have been done. In light of these results, Environmental Health Trust joins with public health experts from the states of California, Connecticut and Maryland, as well as those in France, Israel and Belgium to call on government and the private sector to carry out major ongoing public health educational campaigns to promote safer phone and personal device technology, to require and expedite fundamental changes in hardware and software to reduce exposures to RFR/microwave radiation throughout indoor and outdoor environments, and to institute major monitoring, training and research programs to identify solutions, future problems and prevention of related hazards and risks.”

“More than a dozen countries recommend reducing radiofrequency radiation exposure to children, and countries such as China, Italy, India and Russia have far more stringent cell tower radiation regulations in place when compared to the United States FCC. However, this study provides scientific evidence that governments can use to take even further action,” stated Theodora Scarato, Executive Director of EHT.

The article is “Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz base station environmental emission” by L. Falcioni, L. Bua, E.Tibaldi, M. Lauriola, L. De Angelis, F. Gnudi, D. Mandrioli, M. Manservigi, F. Manservisi, I. Manzoli, I. Menghetti, R. Montella, S. Panzacchi, D. Sgargi, V. Strollo, A.Vornoli, F. Belpoggi (doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.037). It appears in Environmental Research published by Elsevier.

About Environmental Research
Environmental Research publishes original reports describing studies of the adverse effects of environmental agents on humans and animals. The principal aim of the journal is to assess the impact of chemicals and microbiological pollutants on human health. Both in vivo and in vitro studies, focused on defining the etiology of environmentally induced illness and to increase understanding of the mechanisms by which environmental agents cause disease, are especially welcome. Investigations on the effects of global warming/climate change on the environment and public health, as well as those focused on the effects of anthropogenic activities on climate change are also of particular interest.

About Environmental Health Trust
EHT is a scientific virtual think tank conducting cutting-edge research on environmental health risks with some of the world’s top researchers. EHT educates individuals, health professionals and communities about policy changes needed to reduce those risks. EHT maintains a regularly updated database of worldwide precautionary policies: more than a dozen countries recommend reducing wireless exposure to children.

https://ehtrust.org

For more information on this press release visit: http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/worlds-largest-animal-study-on-cell-tower-radiation-confirms-cancer-link-953696.htm

Media Relations Contact

Janet Vasquez
media contact
JV Public Relations NY
Telephone: 212-645-5498
Email: Click to Email Janet Vasquez
Web: http://www.ehtrust.org