[ noname.html 86K ]

From the May 2008 Idaho Observer:

Science from the ‘40s to present has demonstrated conclusively the harmful effects of microwave radiation—the platform upon which the entire wireless universe—cell phones, text messaging, WiFi, WiMax and RFID—is built. Yet the wireless network is expanding, with the approval of government "as fast as it can." With virtually zero regulatory oversight, the nation and all the people, plants and animals in it, are bathing in microwave radiation so we can talk, Internet surf, email, text message and play online games wherever and whenever we want. The biophysical effects of enveloping our world in harmful radiation are becoming apparent. What happened to us? How could our desire for wireless convenience so totally suspend our innate survival instincts that we would ignore well-established science plus common sense and finance conditions on this planet that portend our slow and painful deaths without dignity? More embarrassingly, what happened to us that we would so readily allow our children to suffer wireless addiction, sealing their fates to short, sickly, neurologically-impaired lives? The answer lies in the recurring theme in this month’s edition of The IO: Education. As a culture, we are taught to accept a foundational matrix of LIES as "facts"—for generations—since birth. Within this matrix, we grow up morally relativistic and believe that the only past and futures that matter are connected to how we feel in the present. The dishonor this mindset does to our forebearers is shameful; the disservice we are doing to future generations is unprecedented in the history of mankind.

By Amy Worthington

The obsessive-compulsive effect of cell phones on teens and tweens clearly demonstrates that wireless devices are both physically and emotionally enslaving. Capitalizing on the addictive nature of wireless technology, the communications industry is "hooking" our kids on wireless devices at a fevered pitch.

The premier advertising image implanted in the American psyche is that of grinning kids holding cell phones. Print and broadcast media are riddled with wireless promotions tailored for the very young. Kids are enticed with colored handsets, mesmerizing touch screens and customized ring tones. Wireless music downloads, TV, video streaming and games are irresistible.

By 2010 there will be 31 million young cell phone users, 10.5 million of them pre-teens.⁽¹⁾ "Parents have made teens and their younger 8-12 year old siblings the fastest growing segment of the cell phone market," says Yankee Group, a consulting firm which promotes all things wireless.⁽²⁾ In 2007, a Harris Interactive survey reported that American kids age 10-17 admit to using a cell phone an average of up to 3.75 hours per day.⁽³⁾ A teen boasting five or more hours per day is not uncommon.

As heavy users of wireless, these millions of idle, entertainment-starved kids are among the radiation industry’s most lucrative cash cows. But getting milked at an early age should garner hazard pay, according to thousands of scientific studies compiled over decades. There is ample evidence that kids who continually irradiate themselves with pulsing, ELF-embedded microwaves from wireless devices are being set up for general health degradation, severe nerve damage, mental incapacitation and life threatening tumors.

Warnings from all over the world

"I would not want to be a heavy user of a mobile phone," says Professor Bruce Armstrong, researcher at the University of Sydney School of Public Health. Heading the Australian component of the multi-nation Interphone study project, Armstrong told the media in April, 2008, that evidence of a mobile phone connection with harmful effects, including tumors, is accumulating.⁽⁴⁾

For kids, this is bad news. In 2005, the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics confirmed that children are especially sensitive to all electromagnetic fields because their developing nervous systems are fragile, their brain tissues more conductive and their smaller skeletons more easily penetrated by the waves.⁽⁵⁾

Russian scientists responsible for public health have issued an urgent warning about wireless health damage, recommending that children under 18 limit the use of cell phones to emergency calls only.⁽⁶⁾ British and Austrian health officials warn that kids may be especially susceptible to serious health problems from wireless devices.⁽⁷⁾ Canadian officials say that children should limit cell phone use until health science catches up with technology.⁽⁸⁾ The French health minister advised in January, 2008, that kids be allowed no more than 6 wireless minutes at any one time.⁽⁹⁾ (Cleanup workers at Chernobyl were limited to a few minutes in nuclear radiation areas).

Yet, not a single U.S. health agency is warning about the horrific risks to kids who stew themselves in gigajuice. In America, it’s "way cool" to be "hot." Adults are browbeat to "go tech" to talk to their kids, or text message them--even from the next room—as if face-to-face is "so, like, yesterday." A kid wired from head to foot with the latest Wi-gizmos is admired as a communications super whiz. But ironically, wireless radiation guarantees major disruption in the chemical communication pathways between all the cells of his body.⁽¹⁰⁾

The dangerous disconnect between popular culture and the realities of medical science portends disaster. Because the wireless industry controls the mainstream media with $billions in advertising, there is a conspicuous media blackout of important radiation science coming from labs all over the world. While group-think insists that cell phones help make kids safer, here is what American parents are not being told:

1. Microwave phones can make kids hearing-impaired. 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.

What is safe about making a kid incrementally deaf?

2. Microwave phones can make kids vision-impaired. Microwaves cause eye lens opacity similar to cataracts. In the 1970s, researcher Milton ...

read more »

Will this ray of intelligence spread to other countries?

-------------------------------------------------

01/06/2008
Cell phone Tower Protest
Jose General 22:04:47 ¶
Sue Kedgley
Cell phone Tower Protest

Sue Kedgley MP, Green Party

Nelson, 20th May 2008

http://www.banthetower.co.nz:80/blogs/index.php?itemid=89

I want to congratulate you on the amazing work you have done in your
community to build opposition to Telecom’s decision to build a 22m
tower right next to a local playcentre and an early childhood centre.

I hope your activism will inspire other communities to take similar
action, because I am sure we are about to see a proliferation of
intrusive telecommunications masts and other equipment rolled out
around New Zealand, including right next to educational facilities and
early childhood centres, as the telecommunications industry undergoes
massive expansion and moves into new technologies such as 3G.

A few months ago a woman wrote to me in despair. She had awoken one
morning to discover that a 22m telecommunications mast base was being
built right next to her house.

There had been no community consultation about this, and so she
literally, woke up one morning and found there was a 22m mast outside
her kitchen window. ?I feel empty and powerless? she wrote. The value
of their house had plummeted and she was worried about the health
effects.

There are numerous other examples. A few months ago the local
community in Timaru was outraged when Vodafone erected a 10m pole and
equipment cabinet next to several schools, once again without any
consultation.

So what we are discussing today is the tip of the iceberg, the first
of what will no doubt be many battles.

How did this happen, people are asking? When we need to get a Resource
Consent to alter the veranda on our house, how can it be that
telecommunications companies don’t need a resource consent to build
22m cell towers wherever they want?

So, first a bit of background. In 1980 our radio frequency standard
was developed, based on guidelines developed by an international NGO
called the International Commission for Non Ionising Radiation
Protection (ICNRP). The Ministry says the ICNRP is an independent
scientific organisation responsible for providing international advice
on health hazards?but it is in fact a private organisation.

For reasons that I have yet to establish, we set our standards at
levels that are far more permissive than Russia, East European and
many other standards ?100 and in some cases thousands of times more
permissive. And having set this very permissive standard we then
declared that any activity which is within the standard is acceptable.

Then in 1991 the government devolved all decision making power for
telecommunications infrastructure to local authorities when the
Resource Management Act came into effect. This means its up to local
authorities to decide whether a 22m high cell mast is built next to
your play centre or not.

Most Councils have responded to lobbying by telecommunications
industries and agreed to allow the installation of telecommunications
facilities --- even 22m cell masts ? as a permitted activity under
their district plans ? meaning they can be built as of right, without
having to consult first with a local community.

Then last year, under pressure from Telecommunications companies who
wanted to roll out their new technologies more rapidly, without
interference from annoying community groups, the government announced
a new Telecommunications National Environmental Standard. Cabinet
papers show that the standard was drawn up by the telecommunications
companies themselves, and then rubber stamped by government.

The new so-called environmental standard will allow any antenna,
masts, or cellular and wireless phone equipment to be installed as of
right, without consultation, on virtually any telephone pole any that
is sited on road reserve all around New Zealand, even if it is right
next to someone’s house, or playcentre, or school.

There will be no need for the telecommunications companies to obtain
planning permission or Resource Consent to do this, or even bother to
let people know what new equipment they have installed on a pole near
their house.

If local residents are concerned there might be too much radiation
coming from equipment, they will have to prove it in court, at their
own expense. There will be no monitoring system to ensure that the
standard is not breached.

There are no restrictions either on how many antennae or masts can be
added to a single pole so each company could add their own equipment.
Nor is there any obligation of companies to remove outdated and
rusting equipment from power poles, even if they are no longer using
it.

There is growing international concern about the long term effects of
some new technologies coming onto the market ?such as Wi Fi technology?
but there is no requirement for telecommunications companies to take
health effects into account when they install any new technology near
to where you live or work. Actually there is no requirement to have a
new technology safety tested before it enters the market.

The Green Party launched a major campaign against this new standard,
and encouraged the community to put in submissions against it. But the
government ignored the submissions and campaign against it, railroaded
the new standard through, and the new regulations are about to be
released.

We can see the same thing happening overseas, as telecommunications
companies seek to roll out their new technologies. Mobile phone and
masts are springing up all over Europe and so are groups like
yourselves. Mast Sanity in the UK, for example, supports communities
like yours who are opposing local installation.

Parents of children at a school in Coulsdon near Croydon, recently
blockaded contractors from phone operator T mobile who were trying to
erect a mobile mast just yards from the Chipstead Valley primary
school. The parents formed the Radio Action group, and used their cars
to stop a crane reaching the proposed site. They discovered there were
already 15 masts within a single mile of their school, as well as
clear scientific evidence that mobile phone radiation can have a
damaging effect on the health of young children.

In New Zealand the Ministry of Health claims ?there are no clearly
established adverse health effects arising from the emissions of radio
waves from cell sites.’ Yet even while confidently dismissing
community health concerns, it uses careful language to qualify its
assertion. ?Some studies have been interpreted as suggesting the
possibility of health effects at levels below those sited in the
guidelines, it acknowledges.? And because of the ?residual scientific
uncertainty,? it recommends alternative low cost solutions in order to
avoid or reduce these exposures. ?If there are different options
available when siting a radio transmitter those resulting in the
lowest incidental exposure around a site should be chosen, all other
things being equal,? it says.

The Ministry of Health also has a whole section in its advice to local
government on how to deal with the concerned residents who don’t
accept the party line that all radiofrequency exposures are safe.

?Risk communication is an important element of risk management and
should form part of their strategies to address radio frequency
issues,? it says. They then go on to advise industry to nominate one
contact person who is honest, trustworthy and who will treat community
members with respect. ?While not conceding there are health effects
below international standards, the industry contact will still
recognise that it is legitimate for communities to express concern.?

What this means is that consultation with the community (should it
occur) will be a meaningless public relations exercise rather than
genuine consultation.

The Green Party will be releasing policy on these issues in the coming
months. But it is imperative, in our view, that residents have a say
over their local environment, including where intrusive
telecommunications equipments are installed. In our view, our local
environment ?the commons if you like?should not be able to be
unilaterally appropriated by corporations for corporate gain.

Corporations should be required to consult and negotiate with their
community over where they site intrusive installations like
telecommunications masts, and to minimise the impact of any
installations on the local community, and no telecommunications
facilities should be permitted within 100m of an educational facility.

We also believe it is imperative that we put the interests of children
ahead of corporate profits. We hear a lot about ?children first’
policies in election year, and political parties are eager to talk
about their child-friendly policies. Yet when it comes to protecting
our children from new and unproven communications technologies with
potentially significant risks, they are silent and refuse to take a
precautionary approach.

But this is no gambling matter. It is the health of our children that
is at risk.

Informant for this and the above: Martin Weatherall

http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Amy+Worthington