Orgone Energy Products

I an on the cell 3-4 hours a day. What to do? Pro-active prevention. Cellphone neutralizer and Orgone cell guard.

According to research presented in 2007 by the American Academy of Otolaryngology, cell phone radiation incrementally damages the inner ear, causing high frequency hearing loss. Those who talk an hour a day or more, sustain the most damage.(11) Youthful cell phone habituates will suffer major and irreversible hearing damage by the time they reach young adulthood.

Microwaves cause eye lens opacity similar to cataracts. In the 1970s, researcher Milton Zaret demonstrated that weak microwave fields cause debilitating subcapsular eye lesions, sometimes years after exposure.(12) Israeli researchers have confirmed that microwaves at cell phone intensities cause macro and micro damage to the entire visual system, including tiny bubbles that can form on the eye lens.(13) Dr. Om Gandhi at the University of Utah reported that the eye lens of a 10 year old child will absorb five times more cell phone radiation than an adult eye.(14) Metal-rimmed eyeglasses can absorb microwaves, then re-emit that radiation onto the eye surface.(15)

Brain scans show that microwave phone radiation penetrates deeply into a child’s brain.(16) Within minutes, cell phone microwaves can open the blood brain barrier, allowing albumin and other chemicals from tiny blood vessels to leak into sensitive brain tissues. This leakage causes irreversible oxidative stress and nerve tissue damage.(17) Brain hormones, including melatonin, dopamine, norepinephrine and thyroid stimulating hormone are disrupted by phone microwaves.(18) [Also serotonin; ergo, depression, etc. -- PH]

In late 2007, Israeli experts announced that talking as little as 10 minutes on a cell phone triggers changes in brain tissues linked to abnormal cell division and cancer.(19) Phone microwaves are implicated in both eye and salivary gland tumors.(20) In 2006, studies by three European research groups reported an increased incidence of brain tumors in people who have used mobile phones for ten years or more. After 2000 hours of microwave phone exposure, kids face a 240 percent increased risk of developing brain malignancy.(21) If the 1.75 million 8 and 9 year olds who now use cell phones average only half an hour a day, they will be at high risk for radiation cancer in their teen years. Cancer is the number two cause of death for American children.
The public health catastrophe being unleashed by indiscriminate use of wireless phones is further brought into focus by a double-blind medical study completed in India in 2005 and published in the Indian Journal of Human Genetics.(23)

The study analyzed micronucleated cell damage in blood and buccal (mouth) tissues of people who use their cell phone one to 15 hours a day. The control group had never used cell phones at any time. DNA samples were coded and scored blind in strict protocol.

The test results of the “Indian study” are as stunning as the REFLEX work. The non cell phone users had an average of only four percent of their cells with DNA damage. The human body has a chance of meeting this moderate cellular reconstruction challenge, although every DNA repair operation carries with it a chance of error.

A whopping average of 39.75 percent of cells taken from mobile phone users showed DNA damage. The blood of one 24-year-old male revealed 63 percent micro-nucleated cells. He had used a cell phone for 1-2 hours per day for two years, the norm for millions of kids.
Within two minutes of microwave phone exposure, the electrical activity of a child’s brain is abnormally altered for up to one hour.(39) British radiation expert Dr. Gerald Hyland reported that cell phones which use repetitive, pulsing 2 Hz and 8.34 Hz frequencies can badly disrupt the delta and alpha stabilization process in a child’s developing brain.(40)

Dr. Hyland confirmed that cell phone energy can cause radical changes in human mood and behavior.(41) This is the case because microwaves at cell phone levels can unleash a cornucopia of radical damage to all parts of the brain, including the cortex, the hippocampus (memory center) and the basal ganglia. To wit:

• Scientists have demonstrated that cell phone radiation causes immediate blood flow changes in the brain, and also deregulates calcium efflux from brain cells, causing cell membranes to weaken and leak.(42)

• Researchers in Finland have shown that one hour of cell phone radiation causes brain cells to shrink, indicating permanent damage to cell structure as confirmed by REFLEX studies.(43)

• The Max Planck Institute in Germany reported that cell phones can blast heat spikes into the brain which may flash burn cell membranes to the boiling point of water. (44)

• British researchers have shown that weak microwave radiation can change the shape of brain proteins into formations resembling pathological fibrils associated with Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s Disease. (45)

• Swedish scientists demonstrated that cell phone radiation makes holes (lesions) in rat brains and they predict a wave of early-onset Alzheimer’s in young cell phone users. (46)

Could the past two decades of mass brain damage from wireless radiation be among the roots of our nation’s mental health crisis? ….. The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection says that we may expect kids who use cell phones to suffer not only brain tumors and dementia, but also increased epileptic readiness and depressive mental illness.(47)
Source

By Rebecca Camber

Fourteen people living within a mile of a mobile phone mast that emits one of the highest levels of radiation in the country have died of cancer.

Four of the deaths have been in a cul-de-sac yards from the site.

A further 20 residents have developed tumours in the last seven years, although they have survived.

Those living in the shadow of the mast have begun a campaign for its removal, claiming that it has caused a cancer hotspot. The Health Protection Agency is investigating.

Worried parents are refusing to take their children to the playing fields where the mast is sited for fear of damaging their health.

The mast was erected in 1995 on a disused water tower on the High Acres estate in Kingswinford, near Dudley, West Midlands.
But campaigners claim health problems started among the 700 residents of the estate when more antennae and dishes were added in 2001.

It serves four mobile phone operators.

Experts from the communications watchdog Ofcom, who carried out tests on the mast, say it has the highest radiation level of any phone mast site surveyed in England this year.
However, the radiation was still within UK safety guidelines.

Wendy Baggott, 52, who leads a protest group against the mast, which is only 200 yards from her home, said: ‘It feels like a threatening presence looming all over the neighbourhood.

‘Over the last seven years there have been 14 cancer deaths in the area. Four of those happened in this road. The wellbeing of the whole community is being affected.’

The retired NHS clinical auditor, whose husband Clive has twice contracted skin cancer, said: ‘It is a massive concern to us that there is a children’s play area so near to it.

‘Parents and grandparents around here won’t let their children go there because they are terrified they could get cancer.’
One resident, Michael Morris, died from a brain tumour in 2003 aged 57.

His widow Pamela, 61, said: ‘There have been so many people in the neighbourhood who have died of these cancers.

‘Michael used to take the dogs for walks up there by the tower and I wonder if it might have been that.

When these masts came I think it was when he started to go downhill.’

The 14 deaths have included Betty Genner, who was killed by ovarian cancer in 2003 aged 68, and Dorothy Day, 69, who died two years later from cancer.

Six months ago another woman succumbed to a brain tumour. All of them lived within a mile of the mast.
he Government insists mobile phone masts pose no threat to the public.

But some campaigners believe the radiation from masts could be powerful enough to change the composition of body cells, making them more susceptible to cancer.

An Ofcom spokesman said: ‘This is the highest level of exposure that we have recorded in England this year.

‘The tower recorded levels 5,000 times below the safe exposure limit. It was not an excessive level of radiation.

‘Other results around the country have been found to be around similar levels and this is well within the safety limit.’

A spokesman for Dudley Metropolitan Council said checks carried out on the mast showed the equipment was working properly.

A spokesman for the Health Protection Agency said: ‘No concerns have been raised by general practitioners or other local health services in the area about any greater than expected numbers or unusual cases of any serious illnesses.

By Sue Kovach

Every day, we’re swimming in a sea of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) produced by electrical appliances, power lines, wiring in buildings, and a slew of other technologies that are part of modern life. From the dishwasher and microwave oven in the kitchen and the clock radio next to your bed, to the cellular phone you hold to your ear—sometimes for hours each day—exposure to EMR is growing and becoming a serious health threat.

But there’s a huge public health crisis looming from one particular threat: EMR from cellular phones—both the radiation from the handsets and from the tower-based antennas carrying the signals—which studies have linked to development of brain tumors, genetic damage, and other exposure-related conditions.1-9 Yet the government and a well-funded cell phone industry media machine continue to mislead the unwary public about the dangers of a product used by billions of people. Most recently, a Danish epidemiological study announced to great fanfare the inaccurate conclusion that cell phone use is completely safe.10

George Carlo, PhD, JD, is an epidemiologist and medical scientist who, from 1993 to 1999, headed the first telecommunications industry-backed studies into the dangers of cell phone use. That program remains the largest in the history of the issue. But he ran afoul of the very industry that hired him when his work revealed preventable health hazards associated with cell phone use.

In this article, we look at why cell phones are dangerous; Dr. Carlo’s years-long battle to bring the truth about cell phone dangers to the public; the industry’s campaign to discredit him and other scientists in the field; and what you can do to protect yourself now.
Cell Phones Reach the Market without Safety Testing

The cellular phone industry was born in the early 1980s, when communications technology that had been developed for the Department of Defense was put into commerce by companies focusing on profits. This group, with big ideas but limited resources, pressured government regulatory agencies—particularly the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—to allow cell phones to be sold without pre-market testing. The rationale, known as the “low power exclusion,” distinguished cell phones from dangerous microwave ovens based on the amount of power used to push the microwaves. At that time, the only health effect seen from microwaves involved high power strong enough to heat human tissue. The pressure worked, and cell phones were exempted from any type of regulatory oversight, an exemption that continues today. An eager public grabbed up the cell phones, but according to Dr. George Carlo, “Those phones were slowly prompting a host of health problems.”

Today there are more than two billion cell phone users being exposed every day to the dangers of electromagnetic radiation (EMR)—dangers government regulators and the cell phone industry refuse to admit exist. Included are: genetic damage, brain dysfunction, brain tumors, and other conditions such as sleep disorders and headaches.1-9 The amount of time spent on the phone is irrelevant, according to Dr. Carlo, as the danger mechanism is triggered within seconds. Researchers say if there is a safe level of exposure to EMR, it’s so low that we can’t detect it.

The cell phone industry is fully aware of the dangers. In fact, enough scientific evidence exists that some companies’ service contracts prohibit suing the cell phone manufacturer or service provider, or joining a class action lawsuit. Still, the public is largely ignorant of the dangers, while the media regularly trumpets new studies showing cell phones are completely safe to use. Yet, Dr. Carlo points out, “None of those studies can prove safety, no matter how well they’re conducted or who’s conducting them.” What’s going on here? While the answer in itself is simplistic, how we got to this point is complex.
Flawed Danish Study Reports Cell Phones are Safe

In December, 2006, an epidemiological study on cell phone dangers published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute sent the media into a frenzy.10 Newspaper headlines blared: “Danish Study Shows Cell Phone Use is Safe,” while TV newscasters proclaimed, “Go ahead and talk all you want—it’s safe!” The news seemed to be a holiday gift for cell phone users. But unfortunately, it’s a flawed study, funded by the cell phone industry and designed to bring a positive result. The industry’s public relations machine is working in overdrive to assure that the study get top-billing in the media worldwide.

According to Dr. George Carlo, the study, by its design, could not identify even a very large risk. Therefore, any claim that it proves there’s no risk from cell phones is a blatant misrepresentation of the data that will give consumers a very dangerous false sense of security.

“Epidemiological studies are targets for fixing the outcome because they’re observational in nature instead of experimental,” Dr. Carlo explains. “It’s possible to design studies with pre-determined outcomesthat still fall within the range of acceptable science. Thus, even highly flawed epidemiological studies can be published in peer-reviewed journals because they’re judged against a pragmatic set of standards that assume the highest integrity among the investigators.”

Key problems with the study are:

1.

There are few discernable differences between who was defined as cell phone users and who wasn’t. Thus, people defined as exposed to radiation were pretty much the same as those defined as not exposed to radiation. With few differences, it’s nearly impossible to find a risk.
2.

Users were defined as anyone who made at least one phone call per week for six months between 1982 and 1995. So any person who made 26 calls was a cell phone user and therefore considered exposed to radiation. Those with less than 26 calls were non-users. In reality, the radiation exposure between users and non-users defined in this manner is not discernable.
3.

The “exposed” people used ancient cell phone technology bearing little resemblance to cell phones used today. The results, even if reliable, have no relevance to the 2 billion cell phone users today.
4.

From 1982 to 1995, cell phone minutes cost much more than today and people used their phones much less. Thus there was very little radiation exposure.
5.

During the study’s time frame, people likely to use their cell phones the most were commercial subscribers. Yet this highest exposed group, in whom risk would most easily be identified, was specifically excluded from the study.
6.

There were no biological hypotheses tested in the study. It was therefore only a numbers game. Ignored were mechanisms of disease found in other studies of cell phone radiation effects, including genetic damage, blood-brain barrier leakage, and disrupted intercellular communication. The study did not discuss any research supporting the notion that cell phones could cause problems in users.
7.

The study itself was inconsistent with cancer statistics published worldwide addressing the Danish population. This study showed a low risk of cancer overall, when in fact Denmark has some of the highest cancer rates in the world. This inconsistency suggested that something in the data does not add up.

The cell phone industry constantly guards its financial interests, but unfortunately, an unwitting public can be harmed in the process, says Dr. Carlo. “Industry-funded studies in many cases now produce industry-desired outcomes. By tampering with the integrity of scientists, scientific systems and public information steps over the lines of propriety that are appropriate for protecting business interests—especially when the casualty of the interference is public health and safety.”

To learn more about the dangers of cell phones and to read Dr. George Carlo’s full formal analysis of the Danish cell phone study, visit the Safe Wireless Initiative website at www.safewireless.org.

Lawsuit Prompts Safety Studies

In 1993, the cell phone industry was pressured by Congress to invest $28 million into studying cell phone safety. The cause of this sudden concern was massive publicity about a lawsuit filed by Florida businessman David Reynard against cell phone manufacturer NEC. Reynard’s wife, Susan, died of a brain tumor, and he blamed cell phones for her death. Reynard revealed the suit to the public on the Larry King Live show, complete with dramatic x-rays showing the tumor close to where Susan held her cell phone to her head for hours each day.

The next day, telecommunications stocks took a big hit on Wall Street and the media had a field day. The industry trade association at the time, the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), went into crisis mode, claiming thousands of studies proved cell phones were safe and what Reynard and his attorney said was bunk. TIA reassured the public that the government had approved cell phones, so that meant they were safe. The media demanded to see the studies, but, says Dr. Carlo, “The industry had lied. The only studies in existence then were on microwave ovens. At that time, 15 million people were using cell phones, a product that had never been tested for safety.”
Source